A New York Times report now provides the answer to a question that many people have asked: with all the talk during the election campaign about how President George W. Bush was sure to either give a thumbs-up to a U.S. attack on Iran or look the other way if the Israelis did it, why didn’t it happen?
The answer: Bush nixed an attack but said covert action against Iran’s nuclear capabilities were OK:
President George W. Bush rejected a plea from Israel last year to help it raid Iran’s main nuclear complex, opting instead to authorize a new U.S. covert action aimed at sabotaging Iran’s suspected nuclear weapons program, The New York Times reported.
Israel’s request was for specialized bunker-busting bombs that it wanted for an attack that tentatively involved flying over Iraq to reach Iran’s major nuclear complex at Natanz, where the country’s only known uranium enrichment plan is located, the Times reported Saturday in its online edition. The White House deflected requests for the bombs and flyover but said it would improve intelligence-sharing with Israel on covert U.S. efforts to sabotage Iran’s nuclear program.
The covert efforts, which began in early 2008, involved plans to penetrate Iran’s nuclear supply chain abroad and undermine electrical systems and other networks on which Iran relies, the Times said, citing interviews with current and former U.S. officials, outside experts and international nuclear inspectors who spoke on condition of anonymity. The covert program will be handed off to President-elect Barack Obama, who will deciding whether to continue it.
Nation-states have used covert action for centuries, since it isn’t as blatant as an act that can provoke formal war or lead to de-facto war. Goals are set and actions taken, but all within the framework of plausible deniability and/or to further national interests in a way that doesn’t escalate international tensions — and drama.
According to the Times, Bush decided against an overt attack based on input from top administration officials such as Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who believed that doing so would likely prove ineffective and could ignite a broader Middle East war.
Israel made the push for permission to fly over Iraq for an attack on Iran following its anger over a U.S. intelligence assessment in late 2007 that concluded Iran had effectively suspended its development of nuclear weapons four years earlier. Israel sought to rebut the report, providing evidence to U.S. intelligence officials that they said indicated the Iranians were still working on a weapon.
Gates was acting in a way that some have accused other, earlier members, of the Bush cabinet of not acting: in a traditional policy making manner where best case scenarios are weighted against worst case scenarios and balancing it all within the framework of a defined national interest. Decisions made largely on the basis of ideology often don’t take all of that into account.
This story gives another glimpse into how Gates seems to be someone more suited to the administration of Bush 41 than Bush 43. He has urged restraint on several key occasions over the years. Bush 43 clearly followed his advice on this decision.
Gates will stay on as Obama’s Defense Secretary, which led Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne, Jr. to once write that, under Obama, the U.S. will be trading the foreign policy of Bush 43 for the foreign policy of Bush 41.
OF ADDITIONAL INTEREST: This Wikipedia on covert operations.
For more blog commentary, GO HERE.
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.