Point of No Return.

Inside the spy dossier that led Israel to war.

“Most mornings I learn more from New Items than I do from all of the traditional papers I read combined.” — Michael Blair, former presiding partner, Debevoise & Plimpton.

---

---

1. The Economist:

When Israel launched its war on Iran on June 13th it did so on the basis of intelligence that it claimed showed Iran had reached a “point of no return” in its quest for a nuclear weapon. That evidence galvanised Israel’s own security establishment to support an attack now. It has been shown to America and other Western partners, presumably playing an important role in their ongoing decision-making over whether to support or even join the war. The Economist has not seen the material directly, but has gained exclusive insights from an authoritative source, giving a view of Israel’s dossiers, as shared with its allies, and the claims they make over enriched uranium and the speeding-up of Iran’s programme. Some of the details are already known; some are new.

Israeli intelligence dossiers contain information that, if correct, is genuinely new. They suggest that roughly six years ago the scientists formed a secret “Special Progress Group”, under the auspices of the former AMAD director, Mohsen Fakhrizadeh. This group’s aim was to prepare the way for a much quicker weaponisation process, if and when a decision was made by Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, to rush for a bomb. Mr Fakhrizadeh was assassinated by Israel in November 2020. On June 13th in the first hours of the war, the Israeli government published slides describing this backstory. But we have been told that it also shared further assessments with allies that suggest the Special Progress Group stepped up its research at the end of last year. Iran had a new incentive to advance to a bomb. It was reeling from the limited impact of its missile attacks on Israel, and the depletion of its air defences by Israeli strikes in October 2024. And it was facing the collapse of its proxies, Hamas and Hizbullah, in Gaza and Lebanon.

Lastly, Israel’s intelligence states that a meeting had been scheduled between the scientists and commanders of the IRGC’s air force, who are in charge of ballistic missiles. The information shared by Israel with its allies argues this proposed meeting was a rubicon, with the missile chiefs being let in on the secret for the first time, suggesting in turn that planning for the “mating” process of a nuclear device to a missile warhead was about to begin. Iran had done some of this work in the past—in 2011 the IAEA cited claims that Iran had done computer modelling studies to see how a “spherical payload”, such as a warhead, would stand up to the stresses of being launched on a ballistic missile. Miniaturising and mating a warhead to a missile are highly complex tasks that could still take Iran a substantial time to master. (Read the whole thing. Source: economist.com)

---

2. President Trump told senior aides late Tuesday that he approved of attack plans for Iran, but was holding off to see if Tehran would abandon its nuclear program, people familiar with the deliberations said. Iran’s well-defended Fordow enrichment facility is a possible U.S. target; it is buried under a mountain and generally considered by military experts to be out of reach of all but the most powerful bombs. Asked if he had decided whether to strike at Iran’s nuclear facilities, Trump said, “I may do it, I may not do it.” And he repeated his insistence of Iran’s unconditional surrender: “The next week is going to be very big, maybe less than a week.” Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei earlier said his country wouldn’t surrender and warned any U.S. military intervention would bring irreparable consequences. (Source: wsj.com)