Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has maintained that preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon is the main goal of Israels military offensive. But as the war between the two countries intensifies, Israeli defence forces have also carried out strikes on Iranian energy infrastructure and military sites, raising questions about Netanyahus real end game: Is regime change in Iran a realistic goal for Israel?

When Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu laid out hisgoalsafterlaunching strikes onIranon Friday last week, he said that the Islamic Republic's nuclear weapons and existing ballistic missiles were the primary targets of the Israeli operation. The goal was to end the existential threat Israel says it faces from Iran, which has long denied Israels right to exist. But the latest air strikes seem to tell a different story.

Israeliattacks targeted an Iranianforeignministry building and thedefenceministry in Tehran on Sunday.Police headquarters in the city centre werealso hitby Israeli jets that same day.

On Monday, Israel said it had struck the command centre of Irans Quds Force,thebranchof the elite Revolutionary Guardsthat coordinates operations outside the country and reports directly to Supreme LeaderAyatollah Ali Khamenei.

These new targets are much more closely tied to the heart of the Iranian regimes military and political decision-making fulcrum than to its nuclear programme.

Priorities

Israel on Saturday also targeted the massive South Pars gas field, which is the worlds largest reservoir of natural gas.

The logic [for the Israeli government] is incremental.There is a priority of targets, explained Clive Jones, professor of regional security at Durham University's School of Government and International Affairs.

Read moreIt's the civilians who will pay the price: Iranians prepare for the worst after Israeli strikes

The first is to significantly slow down or potentially end Irans nuclear programme. The second is to target military delivery systems and the leadership that controls them, Jonessaid.

Jonesbelieves the second priority was the reasoning behind Israels attacks on the gas field.

If you look at the strikes Israel has conducted, what theyve tried to do is hit fuel plants that supply the Iranian military those associated with their rockets programmes, for example, or refuelling tankers, Jones said.

Theyve not yet really hit civilian energy infrastructure.That may be something that comes later, depending on what happens next.

Other targets might be chosen for shock value, according to Middle East expert Filippo Dionigi of the University of Bristol.

Attacks on buildings linked to the regime or the targeted assassinations of officials can be seen as an attempt by Israel to shock the enemy and try to subvert its chain of command and create chaos, so that it slows down its capacity to react, Dionigi said.

The Octopus Doctrine

Israels multi-pronged strategy is also known as the Octopus Doctrine, which was first established by former prime minister Naftali Bennett in 2021,said Veronika Poniscjakova, an expert on conflicts in the Middle East at Portsmouth University.

Iran is the octopus with tentacles all around the Middle East, Poniscjakova said, with proxies like Hezbollah in Lebanon or Hamas in Gaza.

Its new approach means that Israel will no longer go after the tentacles of the octopus, [targeting these groups] or carrying out covert attacks on Irans nuclear facilities [as with] the Stuxnet computer virus, but go for the octopuss head directly striking at the source of the threat the regime itself.

But the scope of Israels strikes on Iran could suggest the country has broader geopolitical goals, some analysts believe.

Israel is aiming for a regime collapse in Iran. That is the only reason they would attack energy infrastructures, to increase social unrest against the Islamic Republic by the Iranian people,said Shahin Modarres, director of the Iran Desk attheInternational Team for the Study of Security Verona.

And if Israel decidesto target civilian energy infrastructure exclusively,power cutsacross the country could become more frequent,widespread, and eventually undermine the trust the population has in its leaders, Dionigi said.

The Iranian health ministry hassaidthat90 percentof casualties so far are civilians.

Strikes on political buildingsand thetargeting of the state-run TVduring a live broadcast could be seen as a way to signalto the Iranian oppositionthat [they] can exploit the opportunity to stand up against theregime,Poniscjakova explained.

Most tellingly, Netanyahu issued adirect appealto Iranians as the Israeli offensive began on Friday, sayinghe hoped the military operation will clear the path for you to achieve your freedom.

"This is your opportunity to stand up [to the regime]," he added.

Netanyahus social media post aimed at the Iranian people, in which he effectively says Israel is paving the way and targeting a regime that has kept you repressed, Jones said, adding that the post made it pretty clear the Israeli premier is hoping for regime change.

But whether an internal revolt is something that can be encouraged by a competing regional power that has long been at odds with Iran is far from certain.

An 'existential war' for Iran

Israels bombing of Iranian police headquarters in Tehran and its subsequent attacks on theministry of intelligence and securitycould degrade the regimes ability to maintain internal security and socialcontrol on a practical level, according toa reportpublished by the Institute for the Study of War on Monday.

But it remains to be seen whether Iranian leadershipcan be weakenedto the point where it is no longer capable of halting an uprising.

Thats the ultimate question that nobody can really answer, at least for now, Jones said.

Any interference from abroad could also backfire.

External interferencein the political affairs of a country rarelyhasthe effect of simply provoking a reaction against theleadership, Dionigi said.Interference could have the opposite outcome and awaken a sense of national awareness, national pride and regrouping.

In other words, in positioning himself as a supporter oftheIranian opposition, Netanyahu could actually strengthen the regime at least for the duration of the war.

The Israeli prime minister istaking a huge risk by going beyond his initial aim of dismantling Irans nuclear programme.

When countries are under attack, there is a tendency for people to rally around the flag, even if they dislike the regime, Jonessaid.

For the Iranian regime, this is an existential war, Dionigi added. They will use all of their military capacity for as long as necessary to guarantee their existence.

For Netanyahu there is also the looming threat of greater escalation that couldlead to a higher number of civilian fatalities [in Israel], which could put more political pressure on thegovernment, Modarres said.

It all depends on how [Netanyahu] ends this war.Either he dismantles the Islamic Republics nuclear programme and manages toconducta regime change, or it backfires and his political career ends, he added.

This article was translatedfrom theoriginal in FrenchbyLara Bullens.

Originally published on France24