For years, the fight over Iran has centered on centrifuges, uranium stockpiles, and enrichment percentages. That framework may now be outdated. If the latest assessments are accurate, Tehran is not merely edging back toward nuclear capability but pairing advanced ballistic missiles with alleged chemical and biological payload potential. That is not incremental pressure. It is strategic escalation.
Israeli military adviser Amir Avivi said the Islamic Republic is “continuing preparations for war and the production of ballistic missiles, including chemical and biological ballistic missiles, which are very, very dangerous and need to be dealt with.”
Avivi, a former IDF brigadier general who now counsels the Israeli government, described active discussions within Israel’s defense establishment about these unconventional capabilities.
“There is a discussion in the Israeli defense establishment about the possibility of chemical and biological weapons. We know that they have capability to send a warhead that is chemical.”
That allegation changes the frame entirely. Nuclear weapons are instruments of deterrence and regime survival. Chemical or biological warheads fitted onto ballistic missiles introduce a different calculus. They are designed not merely to destroy infrastructure but to induce chaos, overwhelm civilian preparedness, and paralyze decision-making. If even partially accurate, this is not a marginal development. It is a movement up an entirely different escalation ladder.
Avivi also underscored the psychological dimension of such weapons.
“It’s the kind of weapon that can create mass hysteria. We know that they’re producing ballistic missiles around the clock, and the ballistic missiles they are producing now are more sophisticated than the ones they shot in the 12-Day War.”
Earlier reporting described incidents during Iran’s domestic crackdown in which “unknown chemical substances” were allegedly deployed in several cities. Eyewitnesses reported breathing difficulties and sudden weakness. Video reviewed by the outlet reportedly showed security forces in protective gear alongside trucks marked with hazardous substance warnings.
That footage matters. If chemical agents were used internally, even in limited fashion, it suggests more than theory. It suggests stockpiles, handling protocols, trained personnel, and delivery infrastructure. The leap from domestic suppression to battlefield or missile application is not automatic, but it is not imaginary either.
On the nuclear front, U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff delivered a parallel warning during an interview.
“They’re probably a week away from having industrial-grade bomb-making material. And that’s really dangerous. So they can’t have that.”
Context is important. Following joint strikes in 2025, Iran is believed to lack access to key materials, enrichment machines, and an operational weapons program at present. But senior officials are again speaking in terms of weeks when discussing enrichment potential under certain conditions. That alone narrows the margin for miscalculation.
Taken together, these warnings point to something larger than a routine diplomatic dispute. Allegations of chemical and biological warhead development combined with renewed enrichment timelines signal a regime testing boundaries on multiple fronts at once.
This is not panic territory. It is red flag territory. If Israel’s assessment is even partly correct, the Iran debate is no longer confined to uranium percentages and inspection regimes. It becomes a question of what kind of weapons Tehran is preparing to use and what kind of war it is preparing to fight. History shows that when threats evolve this quickly, they rarely remain theoretical for long.