Officials from one Middle Eastern country advised another regional state to pursue an agreement with Israel in order to "lull it to sleep" while preparing for a larger confrontation, according to a Monday report cleared for publication by the IDF military censor. First reported by KAN News, the intelligence reveals a calculated strategy of deception: demonstrate tactical flexibility toward Israel, reach an agreement, then violate it while simultaneously preparing for military confrontation.
The proposal wasn't meant as a path toward lasting reconciliation. Instead, the officials advised their counterparts during talks in recent months to use the period created by an agreement to prepare for future war against Israel, according to sources cited in the report. The identities of the two countries involved weren't identified.
The Pattern of Deception
National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir responded sharply to the report. "Anyone who thought we could entrust the security of our sons to agreements and guarantees from those around us received a painful slap in the face this morning," he said. He added: "Behind all these agreements rooted in the failed conception lie lies and deception. These are agreements whose purpose is to lull us to sleep ahead of the next blow."
The report recalled internal Hamas documents published in June that described a deliberate effort by the terrorist organization to convince Israel that it sought stability while secretly preparing for a surprise attack. Those documents described a multidimensional deception strategy designed to foster Israeli complacency. Hamas sought to project restraint and an interest in economic and diplomatic arrangements, including by remaining on the sidelines during some previous rounds of fighting between Israel and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
The pattern is consistent: adversaries signal moderation while preparing violence. It's a playbook that worked on October 7, 2023, and the intelligence community is now documenting similar strategies elsewhere in the region.
Active Diplomatic Fronts
Israel has concluded its latest round of peace talks with Lebanon in Rome, where the two countries have worked on a shortlist of countries that could send troops to verify the disarmament of Hezbollah. The talks center on the implementation of the June deal that links Israel's progressive withdrawal of troops from Lebanon to the disarmament of the terrorist organization.
Syria's Ahmed al-Sharaa recently told Al Jazeera that Syria and Israel are working to reach a security agreement with the aid of several countries, and he said he hoped for an agreement that could serve as a gateway to comprehensive peace without undermining Syria's claim to the Golan Heights.
The report didn't say whether the country that allegedly received the proposal accepted the advice or acted on it, and it didn't establish that any agreement currently under discussion with Israel is part of such a strategy. But the intelligence raises fundamental questions about the reliability of diplomatic processes in a region where agreements are seen as tactical pauses rather than binding commitments.
Iran's Internal Crisis
Separately, fears of a wider conflict are growing in Iran, even though negotiations are ongoing. Although US President Donald Trump has called off the most recent threat of a renewed operation, civilians still brace for possible damage to vital infrastructure. Labor unrest, economic hardship and protests over executions continue to test the authorities' ability to contain domestic discontent.
Last week, President Trump canceled a planned strike while diplomatic efforts continue, and it remains unclear whether Israel would take part in any further operation. At the same time, civil protests in different cities, including demonstrations by pensioners, have intensified, and the government, having lost its principal leaders, is preparing itself for a scenario of urban warfare against armed opponents.
Minoo, a left-wing student at a university in Tehran whose full name was withheld for security reasons, told The Media Line: "The Islamic Republic has no option but to engage in warmongering in order to survive, because under conditions of peace it would have no justification for keeping its armed forces in the streets under the pretext of war."
She said the presence of Iranian armed forces isn't intended as a display of power or as propaganda, but stems from fear of a popular uprising, referring to the January 8 and 9, 2026 uprising as "a revolt of the underprivileged classes." She said: "Although it lacked unified leadership on the ground, it demonstrated how millions of people, if equipped with a clear program and objective, as well as revolutionary and progressive leadership, could overthrow the regime."
Regime Weakness and Popular Courage
There are many signs of confusion and disorder within the structure of government following the January uprising and the deaths of its principal leaders. The most important of these is the apparent absence of effective leadership by Mojtaba Khamenei, who hasn't been seen in public, although President Masoud Pezeshkian recently said he had spoken with him for more than an hour.
Claims circulating online about Mojtaba Khamenei's health and possible serious injuries couldn't be independently verified by The Media Line. What is certain, the report said, is that the absence of the Islamic Republic's presumed leader is causing division and demoralization among the small percentage of the population who remain attached to the regime because of their economic interests, their involvement in the crimes of recent decades, and their rigid Shiite religious dogmatism.
Meanwhile, strikes and protests over living conditions are intensifying by the day and could once again repeat the process that led to the January uprising. Many political activists inside the country believe that, had an exclusivist current based outside the country not intervened in that uprising with false promises and unleashed a bloodbath, the movement, with its legitimate demands, could have crushed the regime.
Parishad Kavyani, a human rights and women's rights activist, told The Media Line that the courage of the Iranian people amid war and bloody repression is admirable. She said: "At a time when bombs are falling, repression is intensifying, and the future is shrouded in uncertainty, people are still taking to the streets to demand freedom, justice and an end to executions. Their message is clear: this struggle didn't begin with the war, and it will not end when the war ends."
She said the main challenge now is over who has the right to speak on behalf of the Iranian people. Different sectors of society have united against the wave of executions of regime opponents and are protesting. Referring to public fear of a war that some Iranians abroad have welcomed, she said: "We must not overlook the suffering caused by the war itself. Once again, it is ordinary Iranian citizens who are paying the price. Families are grieving, local communities are living with fear and uncertainty, and civilians are trapped between forces over which they have no control."
She added: "The Iranian people deserve neither war nor repression. They deserve safety, dignity, freedom and the right to determine their own future."
Economic Collapse Under War Pressure
While the regime has erected gallows for public executions in Isfahan and other parts of the country, the courage of those sentenced to death and of the people who gather in protest shows that, despite the Islamic regime's unprecedented massacre and brutality last January, the people are no longer afraid and are taking to the streets.
At the same time, the Islamic Republic's war-ravaged economy can't withstand another war, and the government has lost control of affairs. Economists inside the country are already warning, even in heavily censored media outlets, that the foundations of the economy are being destroyed.
Even without economists' warnings that Iran's economic situation is becoming more critical, many ordinary people are experiencing rampant inflation in their daily lives. Most factories and major manufacturing workshops in Tehran and other large cities have either closed or are operating at reduced capacity because of the wartime economy, raw material shortages and repeated power cuts, whether scheduled or unscheduled. Many workers and employees have joined the growing ranks of the unemployed.
Shahin, a skilled industrial worker in one of Iran's cities, said that over the two weeks of US attacks in the south of the country, inflation increased day by day even in other Iranian cities and, for some food products, hour by hour. He told The Media Line that the price of bread, a staple food, rose by more than 20% during the attacks compared with several weeks earlier, fueling further discontent.
A mid-ranking manager in Iran who is familiar with military affairs told The Media Line that the regime has entered survival mode and is attempting, through certain military maneuvers, to secure greater concessions from the United States in exchange for ending the military confrontation. He said: "During this period, it is also silencing protests and prominent opposition figures inside the country, while seeking to extricate itself from the crisis through an accommodation with the West, so that sanctions can be lifted, foreign investment can reduce hyperinflation and, through easing economic problems, the danger of growing public discontent can be diminished."
Despite a framework agreement that provided for the government's gradual access to frozen assets, followed by the possibility of oil sales and the lifting of sanctions in subsequent negotiations, the Islamic Republic has instead sought greater concessions from the United States through waging war.
What could disrupt these calculations, the report said, is the escalation of protests by pensioners, teachers, students and workers across the country, who have once again demonstrated their presence despite severe repression and the widespread arrest of leaders of trade unions and professional associations. Some people inside the country call this process a situation of No Return.
Why This Matters:
The revelation that a Middle Eastern state was advised to fake normalization with Israel while preparing for war confirms what Israeli security officials have warned for years: diplomatic agreements in this region are often tactical deceptions, not strategic commitments. The Hamas documents published in June showed the same pattern — project moderation, secure Israeli complacency, then strike. This intelligence suggests the strategy extends beyond Palestinian terrorist groups to state actors. For Israel, the implication is stark: withdrawal from territory or reduction of military readiness based on diplomatic assurances carries existential risk. The Lebanese disarmament talks and Syrian security discussions now proceed under the shadow of this intelligence. Meanwhile, Iran's internal instability presents a different strategic picture. The regime's economic collapse, popular protests, and leadership vacuum suggest a government clinging to power through repression and external conflict. The courage of Iranian dissidents — students, workers, women's rights activists — reveals a society ready for change. But the regime's survival strategy involves escalating regional tensions to justify domestic crackdown and extract Western concessions. The intersection of these two dynamics — adversaries using diplomacy as cover for military preparation, and Iran's regime using external conflict to suppress internal revolt — defines the current Middle Eastern security environment. Israel's margin for error in this landscape is zero.