Israel warns US that Iran may use chemical weapons, a report says — US and Gulf officials are sceptical
Israel has shared intelligence with the United States asserting that Iran is considering using chemical weapons against its adversaries, according to a New York Times report carried on Tuesday by the Times of Israel, Anadolu and the Jerusalem Post. Some American officials were alarmed; others are deeply sceptical and see the intelligence as part of a pressure campaign by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government to persuade the Trump administration to return to major combat operations against Iran, and Gulf officials are reported to view the assessment as unserious. The report also says US Central Command has a plan to strike Iran as early as Wednesday, after the midterm elections — a plan is not a decision, and no authorisation by President Trump is reported. Iran has consistently denied pursuing chemical weapons. The underlying Israeli claim is not verified on this page; the page is in Checking state.
Checking in progress
This story is still being checked. Claims below are published as claims — never dressed as facts — and each one moves only when the evidence earns it.
- Collecting reportsDone
- Grouping the versionsDone
- 3Checking claims3 of 5 claims checked
- 4Human gateStill to come
3 of 5 claims checked so far · step 3 of 4: Checking claims
Key points
- The New York Times reports Israel shared intelligence asserting Iran is considering chemical weapons use — the fact of the report is verified; the claim itself is not.
- US officials are divided: some alarmed, others deeply sceptical, seeing a pressure campaign for renewed strikes on Iran; Gulf officials are reported to view the assessment as unserious.
- The same report describes a US Central Command strike plan that could begin as early as Wednesday — a plan, not a reported decision by President Trump.
- Iran has consistently denied pursuing chemical weapons.
What happened
The warning lands while US-Iran talks over the Strait of Hormuz remain stalled and while Washington is already carrying out strikes around the strait — a running story Vozia follows on its Iran page. Israeli warnings about Iranian chemical capabilities are not new: Prime Minister Netanyahu raised the issue publicly in a July interview, and Israeli reporting in December 2025 described intelligence suggesting Iran was racing to develop chemical and biological warheads for its ballistic missiles.
What is new is the split the report exposes among the allies themselves. The sceptics' comparison — made by some US officials, per the report — is to the flawed 2002 intelligence on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, the case that preceded the Iraq war. No Iranian response to this specific report had been published in the sources read when this page went live; Iran's standing denial is carried above.
Both sides, in their own words
Both sides heard. Neither believed for free. Publishing a side's version is not endorsing it — the claim checks below are where verdicts live.
Side A · Israel's warning should be taken seriously
- Israel has passed intelligence to US agencies and Gulf officials over the past two weeks saying Iran is preparing to use chemical weapons against its enemies, and Israeli officials reportedly told their US counterparts the threat is more urgent than Iran's nuclear ambitions.
- Some US officials believe the threat warrants serious attention, given recent warnings about Iranian preparations to attack American interests.
Side B · The warning is a pressure campaign
- Some American officials see the Israeli intelligence as part of a pressure campaign by Netanyahu's government to persuade the Trump administration to resume large-scale military operations against Iran, and some compared it to the flawed 2002 intelligence on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.
- Gulf officials are reported to doubt the claim — the Times of Israel's summary says they view the assessment as 'unserious' — and to believe Israel is trying to draw them and the US back into heavier conflict.
- Iran has consistently denied pursuing chemical weapons, and points to the heavy casualties it suffered from Iraqi chemical attacks during the Iran-Iraq War.
Independently verified
The New York Times reported on Tuesday that Israel has shared intelligence with the United States asserting that Iran is considering the use of chemical weapons against its adversaries; the Jerusalem Post's version adds that Israeli intelligence officials told their American counterparts they believe Iran is rapidly advancing technology that would allow it to mount chemical weapons on missiles. American officials are divided over the warning: some were alarmed by it, while others are deeply sceptical and see it as part of a pressure campaign by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government to persuade the Trump administration to return to major combat operations against Iran; Gulf officials are also reported sceptical, viewing the assessment as unserious. Iran has consistently denied pursuing chemical weapons. Separately, the US State Department has previously determined that Iran is not complying with the Chemical Weapons Convention, which Tehran ratified in 1997, and the US intelligence community's 2024 annual threat assessment warned about an Iranian chemical weapons programme including incapacitating agents.Not yet verified
The underlying claim — that Iran is considering using chemical weapons, or is advancing technology to mount chemical weapons on missiles — rests on Israeli intelligence shared privately with US and Gulf officials over the past two weeks. No evidence for it has been published, and no government has confirmed it independently. The Times report also says US Central Command has a plan to strike Iran beginning as early as Wednesday, after the midterm elections, when three American aircraft carriers are expected to be in the region. The existence of a plan does not establish that President Trump has authorised an attack, and the report says he told officials he would not order an attack before Tuesday's elections.Claim by claim
Why this label: Verified as the fact of the Times' reporting: the same report is carried in agreement by the Times of Israel, Anadolu Agency and the Jerusalem Post, all read in this pass. This verifies that the warning was reported — it does not verify the warning itself, which is carried separately below.
On the ladder: a claim earns Verified from primary evidence, or from two independent sources that do not copy each other.
Why this label: A single intelligence chain, shared in private and reported through unnamed officials. Under the checking rules an accusation of this weight cannot be labelled verified on that basis; it stays not yet verified until primary or independently corroborated evidence appears.
On the ladder: the evidence so far sits low — early, single or social sources. We publish the claim as a claim, never as fact.
Why this label: Verified as the reported positions of the officials the Times spoke to — the division itself is the news, and it is stated identically across the Times of Israel, Anadolu and Jerusalem Post carries of the Times report.
On the ladder: a claim earns Verified from primary evidence, or from two independent sources that do not copy each other.
Show all claims (2 more)
Why this label: The strike-plan element rests on unnamed American officials in a single report chain. A contingency plan is not a decision; no authorisation, order or movement confirming an attack was reported in the sources read in this pass.
On the ladder: the evidence so far sits low — early, single or social sources. We publish the claim as a claim, never as fact.
Why this label: Iran's denial is its standing stated position, summarised in the reporting read in this pass. The State Department determination and the 2024 threat assessment are prior US government findings carried in the same reporting — they are background to the dispute, not evidence for the new Israeli claim, and are not presented as such.
On the ladder: a claim earns Verified from primary evidence, or from two independent sources that do not copy each other.
What we know / what we don't know yet
What we know
- That the Times reported the Israeli warning, and that US and Gulf officials reacted with a mix of alarm and scepticism — carried in agreement by three outlets read in this pass.
- That a Central Command strike plan is described in the same report, with no authorisation reported.
- Iran's standing position: it denies pursuing chemical weapons.
What we don't know yet
- Whether the Israeli intelligence is sound — no evidence for the chemical-weapons claim has been published or independently confirmed.
- Any Iranian response to this specific report — none was carried in the sources read in this pass.
- Whether President Trump will authorise any strike after the midterms, and what the reported Central Command plan would target.
Show more (1)
- Whether Israel or the US will publish any part of the underlying intelligence.
Why it matters
A chemical-weapons claim is the kind of intelligence that has moved the US to war before — which is exactly why the sceptics inside the US government are saying so, on the record of this report, at the moment it appears. If Washington acts on the warning, the Iran conflict escalates sharply within days; if the warning is what its critics say it is, its publication is itself part of the fight over whether that escalation happens.
Background
Iran ratifies the Chemical Weapons Convention. The US State Department has since determined Iran is not complying with it — a US finding Tehran disputes; Iran denies pursuing chemical weapons.
Prime Minister Netanyahu raises Iran's chemical capabilities publicly in a Newsmax interview, per the reporting summarised in this pass.
The New York Times reports Israel's new intelligence warning to Washington and Gulf officials; US officials are divided, Gulf officials sceptical, and a Central Command strike plan is described for as early as Wednesday, after the US midterms.
Update history
No silent edits. Every change is written here, with its time.
- Latest
Published in Checking state (queue #1345/#1366/#1374, one event clustered from Anadolu, the Times of Israel and the Jerusalem Post carries of the New York Times report): the fact of Israel's warning and the US/Gulf division over it are verified as reported positions; the chemical-weapons claim itself and the reported strike plan are labelled not yet verified. Audit: the headline states the claim as a report ('a report says') and carries the scepticism in the same line — the claim is never stated as fact anywhere on this page. No Iranian response to this specific report was found; that absence is in the don't-know list. Translations: headline, summary and take labels in all 13 languages in the same run.