Podcast Summary: "Is Iran Planning to Preemptively Strike Israel?"

Podcast: Call Me Back - with Dan Senor
Host: Dan Senor (B), Ark Media
Guest: Nadav (A)
Date: January 31, 2026
Episode: INSIDE Call Me Back sneak peek

Episode Overview

This episode provides an exclusive "Inside" look at post-broadcast conversations, focusing on current Israeli anxieties about an Iranian preemptive strike. Nadav, an analyst and writer, responds to urgent audience questions, exploring how Israeli intelligence is interpreting Iran’s posture, the calculations inside Tehran, the role of U.S. policy, and the lessons from previous conflicts—particularly the June 2025 "12 Day War" between Israel and Iran.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Iranian Intentions and Israeli Concerns

• Rising fears within Israel that Iran may attempt a preemptive strike, informed by intelligence and the current regional build-up of U.S. military capabilities.
  (02:08 – 04:22)

"There’s indeed, Katie, a worry with Israel that Iran will try to strike first...they fear that Iran will decide to strike first."
— Nadav (A, 02:08)

• Per Nadav, negotiations between the U.S. and Iran have stalled; Israel interprets the current Iranian leadership as too rigid to accept U.S. demands.

"The Iranians, with their entire construction of regime and this Supreme Leader specifically, are not pragmatic enough...every Iran expert that I speak with [believes] the Iranians won’t be able to just say yes to what the President is saying unless there’s going to be a change within the regime."
— Nadav (A, 03:13)

2. Calculations Inside Iran’s Leadership

• The current Supreme Leader is compared to his predecessor—seen as less pragmatic and less likely to make a ‘poison cup’ compromise for the greater good of Iran.

"Not this Supreme Leader, by the way, the previous Supreme Leader, Khomeini, was pragmatic enough and signed a ceasefire in the Iran-Iraq War, 1988. And he said, 'I drank the cup of poison.' ...But this supreme Leader is much more rigid, is less clever..."
— Nadav (A, 03:13)

• The possibility is raised that only an internal regime change (or significant shift in power) could lead to a diplomatic breakthrough.

"Unless the Supreme Leader is somewhat removed...or loses its power or becomes symbolic...This kind of development is more likely than the Supreme Leader saying, 'You know what, President Trump, I’m willing to agree to your terms.'"
— Nadav (A, 04:29)

3. Iranian First-Strike Logic

• Israeli officials worry that, as the militarily weaker and cornered party, Iran may seek to seize the initiative and restore regional prestige by striking Israel first—not the U.S.
• Such a move could reshape the international political narrative, positioning the U.S. as coming to Israel’s defense (rather than initiating hostilities itself).

"[Iran could] manage to assume the initiative, regional prestige heightened to some extent, taking some military abilities of Israel...If the Iranians do that and then the US acts...the US is acting after Israel has been attacked. It’s running to the aid of Israel, which is a different thing politically..."
— Nadav (A, 04:32–05:45)

4. Strategic Surprise and Historical Parallels

• Discussion of "strategic surprise"—how even in highly tense periods, surprise can be achieved or suffered. Reference points include the 1967 and 1973 Middle East wars, October 7, 2023 (Hamas attack), and the June 2025 war.

"Usually there’s an atmosphere of conflict. Everybody knows that something’s going to happen, but some side is surprised at the end…In 1973...Israel is surprised. October 7, 2023, less of an excellent example. Israel didn’t suspect that at all. But the June war with Iran, it was absolutely the case that you knew, your listeners knew that Israel and Iran are headed to a conflict. And Israel managed to have a surprise with strategic meaning."
— Nadav (A, 06:09)

5. Role of U.S. Administration

• The U.S. greenlighted Israel’s actions in the 12 Day War—support and coordination between Israeli and American intelligence is crucial.
• Future strategic decisions (retaliation, preemptive action, diplomacy) ultimately rest with the U.S. President. Options remain open, including renewed negotiations or more time for diplomacy.

"If President Trump would have told Prime Minister Netanyahu, don’t do it, Prime Minister Netanyahu wouldn’t have done it. So it’s actually a decision made by the White House to some extent at the time. And of course, the US joined the war and it played the critical role of destroying the most critical component of the nuclear program."
— Nadav (A, 07:52)

"I need to stress that the president can always make his mind that it’s not the right time to strike at all. And at the end of the day, this decision lies only with the president of the United States..."
— Nadav (A, 09:24)

6. Speculation: Regime Change and Internal Instability

• Open speculation about whether the U.S. has contact with factions inside Iran, paralleling attempted interventions elsewhere. Possibility of U.S. targeting the Supreme Leader or supporting internal regime change discussed without confirmation.

"So one of the things that was published is the possibility that the U.S. will try to take out Khamenei. I don’t know if that’s true. Another thing, I would suspect is do they have some sort of a contact to an armed faction within Iran or a faction within the Iranian regime? Sort of what we saw in Venezuela to some extent."
— Nadav (A, 08:31)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Iranian Intransigence:
  "Not this Supreme Leader...is much more rigid, is less clever, and it's the assessment of every Iran expert that I speak with that the Iranians won't be able to just say yes to what the President is saying unless there's going to be a change within the regime."
  — Nadav (A, 03:13)

• On Preemptive Strike Risk:
  "They fear that Iran will decide to strike first."
  — Nadav (A, 02:08)

• On U.S. Strategic Choice:
  "The president can always make his mind that it's not the right time to strike at all... this decision lies only with the president of the United States."
  — Nadav (A, 09:24)

Timestamps for Important Segments

• 00:57 – 02:08: Audience question—What would a new U.S.-Iran conflict look like? Comparison to 12 Day War
• 02:08 – 04:22: Concerns about Iranian preemptive strike, regime rigidity, necessity of internal change for diplomacy
• 04:22 – 05:45: Logic of Iranian first strike against Israel, impact on U.S.-Israel dynamics
• 06:09 – 07:44: Historical context—strategic surprises and intelligence failures
• 07:44 – 08:31: U.S. administration's crucial role, American-Israeli coordination in June 2025
• 08:31 – 09:24: Speculation on U.S. plans for regime change or internal destabilization in Iran

Final Thoughts

This sneak peek offers dense, high-level analysis of the precarious situation between Iran, Israel, and the United States. Nadav and Dan probe the psychology of the Iranian regime, the potential for miscalculation leading to war, and how strategic surprises shape Middle Eastern history. The episode emphasizes the unpredictability of the coming months, the power of U.S. decision-making, and the deep anxiety in Israel about being caught off-guard.

The episode ends on a cliffhanger, shifting to a new question about Qatari influence in the U.S.—an incentive to listen to the full version as a subscriber.