Israel's Defence Minister Israel Katz has answered the man trying to form Israel's next government with a flat assertion of power: the caretaker government in Jerusalem needs nobody's permission to order the military into action, on Iran or anywhere else. In a statement posted on his X account on Thursday, Katz wrote: "We do not need approval from the opposition or any legal authority to instruct the IDF to carry out targeted operations." On Iran specifically, he wrote: "We have also demonstrated determination and sound judgment in dealing with Iran, in full coordination with the IDF, and we will continue to do so now, as circumstances require."
Katz's post listed the operations he says stand as proof — targeted killings in Gaza, defensive and offensive operations in Lebanon, holding the security zone in Syria, the evacuation of a terrorist neighbourhood in Hebron, and continued offensive activity in Judea and Samaria. His conclusion was about authority itself: "Israel's security is not in transition and does not wait for the political processes taking place in parallel." And: "There is one prime minister, one defense minister who directs the IDF, and one government responsible for making all decisions concerning Israel's security and the protection of its citizens, naturally subject to the existing and necessary oversight."
The post answers a letter sent on Wednesday by Gadi Eisenkot, the former IDF chief of staff whom President Herzog has tasked with forming the next government after 67 Knesset members recommended him against Prime Minister Netanyahu's 46. Eisenkot — whose letter did not name Iran — demanded the caretaker prime minister "act with national responsibility during this sensitive period" and "exercise restraint and caution against dangerous moves that can wait until a new government, which enjoys the confidence of the Knesset, is sworn in." He warned: "Deploying security forces without a direct and immediate threat that cannot be postponed could have devastating consequences for Israeli democracy and public trust in state institutions." He has also appealed to Attorney-General Gali Baharav-Miara to ensure he receives regular security briefings from the prime minister during the transition.
Netanyahu's office called the letter "an irresponsible move to publicly discuss sensitive security matters," adding: "All decisions made by the government were based solely on security considerations and in full coordination with the defense establishment." Eisenkot shot back: "If so, why did you refuse my request to receive an operational briefing through official channels, as is customary? Why are you trying to delay the convening of the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee? I will not allow a vacuum in the oversight of a government that has lost the Knesset's confidence."
Behind the public exchange sits a reported military step-up. Israel's public broadcaster KAN reported on Wednesday evening that the security cabinet has instructed the IDF to increase its readiness and preparations for a possible strike on Iran, and warned the steps could risk triggering a broader war. Senior security officials told KAN the military "continues to prepare for a possible renewal of military operations, in line with directives from the political leadership." Two limits on that reporting matter: neither the prime minister's office nor the IDF has confirmed any imminent strike, and no source reports an attack order, a date, or a target — what is documented is preparation, not a decision to fire. The cabinet itself has not met since October 5 and is scheduled to convene on Sunday for the first time since then. Under Israel's Basic Law, war or operations likely to lead to war require a government or security-cabinet decision, and the law makes no exception for caretaker governments — which is precisely the ground Katz is standing on.
Washington's position, stated in the same days, cuts the other way. President Trump has signalled he sees no immediate need for additional strikes against Iran and said this week the war was unlikely to resume; Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on November 10 there is "no need for major combat operations" because the economic pressure campaign is working. Iran's security chief Mohsen Rezaei, for his part, warned on Wednesday that every U.S. base involved in any aggression "from West Asia to Europe" would be a legitimate target.
For American readers, this is not somebody else's constitutional argument. A renewed Israel–Iran war would put U.S. forces across the region in the line of fire and would land on American families the way the last round did — in fuel prices. Whether Israel's caretaker government can order that war on its own authority, while the man forming its replacement demands restraint and Washington says pressure is working, is a question Jerusalem will start answering when its cabinet finally sits down on Sunday.
📰 ProfiloPolitics Member News — choose your news, share it, earn credit:
https://white-curlew-963569.hostingersite.com
Never miss a story — Join our Telegram channel
Breaking U.S. political news, live as it happens — plus the stories the big outlets sit on.
Join ProfiloPolitics on Telegram