An Israeli military attack meant to thwart Iran's clandestine nuclear weaponization program, could, paradoxically, end up hastening it, according to a former army intelligence chief.

Shlomo Gazit, now a senior researcher at Tel Aviv University's National Institute of Security Studies, contends that such a strike would not only spur on Tehran to build a nuclear bomb, but also provide them with diplomatic "cover" and greater legitimacy, in posing as the victim and not the offender.

Gazit said that the United States was better suited to carry out, or lead other nations in, capping Iran's nuclear aims, which Tehran says is only mean to produce power and medical isotopes, according to The Jerusalem Post on Wednesday.

His words echo those of former Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet) head Yuval Diskin, who sparked a public firestorm over remarks he made at a town-hall meeting last week, charging that, "After an Israeli attack on Iran, there may well be a dramatic acceleration of the Iranian nuclear program."

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak both have warned that a nuclear-armed Iran would pose a far greater danger to not only Israel, but also neighboring Arab states, and the West.

Speaking at Independence Day events last week, Barak said that "now was the time" to act towards a "swift and decisive end" to Iran's nuclear drive.

But while Diskin believes that Netanyahu and Barak "create a sense that if the State of Israel does not act there will be a nuclear Iran," Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff, Lt.-Gen. Benny Gantz argued that if Iran goes nuclear it will have negative dimensions for the world, for the region, for the freedom of action Iran will permit itself.

Gantz said that a nuclear-armed Iran posed "the potential for an existential threat. If they have a bomb, we are the only country in the world that someone calls for its destruction and also builds devices with which to bomb us."