Who Blinks First Iran or Israel?
Tension is building between Iran and Israel. One sign of the tensions is this piece in Ha’aretz in Israel:
In the sea of brainwashing, intimidation and cliches surrounding us, it’s sometimes worthwhile to listen to a voice from the outside, a voice no less proficient than the Israeli “experts” on security matters and Iran. The voice of reason. Such was the voice of the senior European diplomat who had served as an ambassador in Tehran for about five years and was visiting Israel this week.
Over dinner in his country’s ambassador’s residence, the man outlined his views about Iran, with which his country maintains extensive, complex ties. This man, now about to be appointed ambassador to Germany, continues to visit Iran, although his tenure there ended in 2004.
His message was clear and razor sharp – Israel must not attack Iran. This would only cause harm. If anything could bring Iran closer to the bomb, it would be an Israeli offensive, which seems imminent. The European diplomat is convinced that Iran does not intend to produce a nuclear bomb, only to walk on the edge and prepare for the option of developing it. This has become a matter of national honor for the Iranians.
The diplomat knows there is also another possibility, that Iran could be heading toward the bomb, and he realizes there is no guarantee this will not happen. And yet he is profoundly convinced that Iran will not do so.
An Israeli attack, on the other hand, which in his view would put off the bomb by merely two years, would only spur the Iranians to develop it. Tehran knows that the United States wouldn’t have dared to invade Iraq and Afghanistan had these countries had nuclear weapons. The Iranians are sure that this goes for them as well. So their way to maintain the regime, if it feels threatened, is to develop the bomb. The threats to attack Iran will only push them toward this.
An Israeli attack on Iran would also unite the Iranian people behind the regime, the man says. Israel’s enemy today is only the regime, not the people.
The Iranian people are busy with other problems and are not preoccupied with the Palestinian issue or whether Israel should or shouldn’t exist.
A MUST READ on this issue is Azar Azadi’s piece on Real Clear World titled “Who Blinks First: Iran or Israel?” Here’s the beginning of it:
During the Cold War serious protocols were set to protect the Americans and Soviets in case of a first strike and even more vigorous protocols were in place regarding how to respond to it. Unlike conventional weapons, nuclear weapons are countervalue weapons, which do not distinguish between civilian and military targets – they will destroy all.
There has been a great deal of discussion on the prevention and deterrence of a nuclear strike on Israel by Iran. Most assume the missile would originate from Iran. But with US airpower in Iraq and Afghanistan, multitudes of Awacs and electronics in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf nations, and with NATO ships with sophisticated electronics positioned in the Persian Gulf, it is doubtful that missiles could make their way from Iran to Israel. However, missiles could easily be launched from locations much closer to Israel. There is so much instability in the region that it would be easy for a rogue nation to entice one or more proxies to act on its behalf.
Read it in full.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
6 Responses to “Who Blinks First Iran or Israel?”
Thank all the eldritch factors that the government isn't republican right now. People like McCain, Palin or the NRO/PJM types are simply fearful, symbolic-minded and generally unfit for a situation like this.
I couldn't agree more. This is a situation that require intelligence, experience, and cool heads. A mishandling could result in longterm damage considerably more devastating than the mess we are dealing with as the result of the Iraq fiasco.
It appears to be a game of whom nukes whom first.
[But with US airpower in Iraq and Afghanistan, multitudes of Awacs and electronics in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf nations, and with NATO ships with sophisticated electronics positioned in the Persian Gulf, it is doubtful that missiles could make their way from Iran to Israel]–
Uh nope. We do not have the surefire capability to shoot down an ICBM from Iran or Israel in that region. We barely have the ability it all. We are not even concentrating on the prospect. If it happens, I am 99% certain that the U.S. won't be able to technologically prevent it. Only deterrent by threat of retaliation do we have, but that doesn’t prevent the Iranians from continued development of these weapons.
So an Israeli nuclear first strike is really all that is left for Israel to consider, because a conventional strike will not guarantee destruction of nuclear development facilities or stop continued development.
If I were Israel, I’d be looking at total annihilation because that is exactly what the Iranians are threatening the Israelis with. Cooler heads the Israelis have, but nobody can say the same about the Iranian “religion” form of government.
We can only hope for Iran meltdown ( by hook or crook )
That would be enough deterrent in itself – for any non-sociopathic entities.
The problem is Iran. The country is too unstable to allow it to “skirt” the boundaries of nuclear weapon development. We could trust an Iran governed by the Iranian people. We cannot trust the Revolutionary Guard, the mullahs, nor Ahmad-Napoleon.
It is bad enough that Pakistan is a nuclear power, but at least they have a military that we can trust.