Decision ‘08

A Message To Iran

This is the third posting I’ve done on the Israeli raid on Syria, and given my reduced blogging load, that’s quite a bit, but the story has the potential to be the biggest story of the year. I use the phrase ‘has the potential’ with all deliberateness, because it’s easy to go overboard on these things, but certainly, if North Korea is supplying Syria with nuclear materials and/or know-how, that’s incredibly serious, and there is no longer any doubt that Israel meant this raid to be a lesson to Iran, as well. From the latest Newsweek:

How far will Israel go to keep Iran from getting the bomb? The question gained new urgency this month when Israeli warplanes carried out a mysterious raid deep in Syria and then threw up a nearly impenetrable wall of silence around the operation. Last week opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu chipped away at that wall, saying Israel did in fact attack targets in Syrian territory. His top adviser, Mossad veteran Uzi Arad, told NEWSWEEK: “I do know what happened, and when it comes out it will stun everyone.”

…While the Bush administration appears to have given tacit support to the Syria raid, Israel and the United States are not in lockstep on Iran. For Israel, the next three months may be decisive: either Tehran succumbs to sanctions and stops enriching uranium or it must be dealt with militarily. (Iran says its program is for peaceful purposes only.) “Two thousand seven is the year you determine whether diplomatic efforts will stop Iran,” says a well-placed Israeli source, who did not want to be named because he is not authorized to speak for the government. “If by the end of the year that’s not working, 2008 becomes the year you take action.”

That’s very blunt talk. The U.S. will not attack Iran, it is almost certain, but that hesitation is not being shown publicly by Israel:

The question may not be whether America is ready to attack, but whether Israel is. The Jewish state has cause for worry. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad vows regularly to destroy the country; former president Hashemi Rafsanjani, considered a moderate, warned in 2001 that Tehran could do away with Israel with just one nuclear bomb. In Tel Aviv last week, former deputy Defense minister Ephraim Sneh concurred. Sneh, a dovish member of Israel’s Parliament and a retired brigadier general, took a NEWSWEEK reporter to the observation deck atop the 50-story Azrieli Center. “There is Haifa just over the horizon, Ben-Gurion airport over there, the Defense Ministry down below,” he said, to show how small the country is. “You can see in this space the majority of our intellectual, economic, political assets are concentrated. One nuclear bomb is enough to wipe out Israel.”

But can the Israelis destroy Iran’s nuclear program? Gardiner, the war-gamer, says they would not only need to hit a dozen nuclear sites and scores of antiaircraft batteries; to prevent a devastating retaliation, they would have to knock out possibly hundreds of long-range missiles that can carry chemical warheads. Just getting to distant Iran will be tricky for Israel’s squadrons of American-made F-15s and F-16s. Danny Yatom, who headed Mossad in the 1990s, says the planes would have to operate over Iran for days or weeks. Giora Eiland, Israel’s former national-security adviser, now with Tel Aviv’s Institute of National Security Studies, ticked off the drawbacks: “Effectiveness, doubtful. Danger of regional war. Hizbullah will immediately attack [from Lebanon], maybe even Syria.” Yet Israelis across the political spectrum, including Eiland and Yatom, believe the risk incurred by inaction is far greater. “The military option is not the worst option,” Yatom says. “The worst option is a nuclear Iran.”

As I said before, this is a potential turning point. Some of this may be tough talk that will not be backed up by action; then again, Israel has a history of (mostly) backing up its tough talk. This is a dangerous moment when we stand perhaps on the brink of a regional war that will dwarf the Iraq War. With such weighty consequences, we can only hope that the major players consider each move with the utmost scrutiny.

That applies perhaps most especially to the ayatollahs who hold the real power in Iran. Ahmadinejad will not back down; he’s a demagogue who would probably like nothing more than to deliver on his promise to destroy Israel. Surely there are Iranians who realize that to go down such a path will mean the likely death of millions and the destruction of their own reign, if not their very country. Now, more than ever, it is crucial that the United Nations for once live up to its purpose and deliver a sharp rebuke and harsh sanctions to Iran, because this is one major crisis that can still, perhaps, be averted…

3 Responses to “A Message To Iran”

1 Andy Says:
September 23rd, 2007 at 9:06 pm
You may want to update & note that Israel reportedly captured material via commandos as proof positive for Bush before blowing the place up
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/02/20030226-11.html

H/T Captain’s Quarters

Wonder what Iran’s Ahmadiwhathizname will say about Israel tomorrow at the UN. The usual cockiness?
2 Jaded Says:
September 24th, 2007 at 8:37 am
I cannot believe that America will not take the first strike against Iran and will allow Israel to do it, that is insane. Iran is killing our soldiers….that is an act of war and we are much better suited to taking them out than leaving it to the “zionist” can you just imagine the EU or Middle East constant bleating of “killers” when that happens? We really do need to get a pair.
3 too many steves Says:
September 24th, 2007 at 10:28 am
That said, it is worth noting the silence coming from the broader Middle East on the not quite secret engagement by Israel in Syria.