Hawzah News Agency- According to the report, cited by Al-Mayadeen and Islamic Analysis, nearly all political and security currents within the Zionist regime now acknowledge that it has entered a new phase of security, political and economic turbulence. The ongoing confrontation with Iran and the Axis of Resistance, shifting dynamics across West Asia, mounting international pressure and deepening internal rifts have raised fresh questions about Israel's trajectory over the coming decade.
'Extremely Sensitive' Period
The assessment was presented at Israel's National Security Conference, held on July 27, 2026, and co-hosted by the Yedioth Ahronoth daily and the INSS. The gathering brought together politicians, military and security commanders, researchers and analysts.
The centerpiece of the conference was the unveiling of initial findings from the "Israel Threat Index" project—a study combining a nationwide survey with the views of over 100 experts in security, politics, economics and society. Organizers stressed the conference convened at an "extremely sensitive" juncture, pointing to three years of high-tension security conditions, a new round of direct confrontations with Iran, the northern front with Hezbollah, developments in Gaza, escalating tensions in the West Bank, threats from Yemen, and Turkey's growing role—all compounded by a fateful domestic election cycle that, in their view, makes any near-term peace prospects remote.
Four Threats Encircle the Regime
According to the study, Israel can no longer point to a single overriding threat. Instead, a network of interconnected dangers is reinforcing itself and deepening the entity's security predicament. The four leading threats identified are:
- Severe internal conflict between rival factions within Israeli society (39 percent)
- Iran attaining nuclear weapons capability (39 percent)
- A massive missile barrage against the Israeli home front (35 percent)
- The weakening of the regime's so-called democratic structure (31 percent)
Two of these threats originate externally, two domestically. Researchers cautioned that threat severity is only one metric; probability and expected damage must also be weighed.
Iran, America, and Internal Collapse
Iran's potential acquisition of a nuclear weapon remains the foremost military threat. Thirty-nine percent of participants placed it among the top three dangers, 43 percent rated its likelihood as high, and 67 percent believe its realization would inflict catastrophic damage on the regime.
Alongside this, the prospect of waning or complete loss of American support has surged as a major concern. In just a few months, the share of respondents viewing such a scenario as likely doubled from 13 to 26 percent, with nearly two-thirds warning that a cutoff of U.S. backing would carry devastating consequences.
Meanwhile, damage to the Zionist regime's so-called democratic framework has emerged as a pillar of internal insecurity. Roughly a third of respondents rank it among the gravest threats, 68 percent assess its fallout as severe, and 76 percent believe Israel is not adequately prepared to handle such a crisis.
Public Fears vs. Expert Warnings
The report also exposes a significant gap between public perception and expert assessment. While the general public fixates on immediate security threats, experts point to longer-term dangers that erode social cohesion, the governance system, and Israel's international standing as the more existential challenges.
A Threat Map, Not a Threat List
The study's authors conclude that the central question is no longer "What is Israel's biggest threat?" but rather "What happens if several threats materialize simultaneously?" The research, they argue, is not merely a threat inventory but a "threat map" illustrating how multiple crises compound one another.
Brigadier General Yuval Ilan, a senior INSS researcher, summed up the findings by warning that Israel's threat environment is too complex to be reduced to a single danger. The deepest alarm, he noted, stems from the simultaneity of internal fragmentation and the potential decline of international support—particularly from the United States.
Your Comment