By Dov Zakheim
Press
reports this past week indicate that the Western powers' discussions with Iran
appear to have mollified the Israelis, at least to the extent that Jerusalem
has toned down jeremiad-like rhetoric regarding the Iranian nuclear program.
How long Israel will be prepared literally to hold its fire while Iran transfers
some, but by no means all, of its enriched uranium for processing in Russia,
and opens its facility in Qom for IAEA inspections, very much remains to be
seen.
Clearly,
with the West talking tough, Israel does not want to be viewed as carping on
the sidelines. But the Israelis recognize that the so-called secret facility at
Qom was not so secret at all; the United States and others were aware of its
existence for some time. The Israelis also harbor grave doubts about the IAEA's
ability to monitor Iranian activity that Tehran prefers it not monitor. And
Jerusalem knows full well that sanctions have a mixed record of successfully
obtaining whatever objective motivated their imposition.
At the same time, however, Israel recognizes that Washington is now
increasingly positioning itself to take military action against Iran if the
talks, transfers to Russia, and sanctions fail to halt the momentum of the
Iranian program. In particular, the Obama administration's announcement that it
will reposition its missile-defense forces so as better to protect Europe
against an Iranian strike has the direct effect of supplementing Israel's
missile defenses. In fact, the American military deterrent has far greater
significance than the talks, sanctions, or reprocessing deal. By
committing Aegis ships to the eastern Mediterranean, the administration is also
putting its forces in harm's way: There is no way that ships off Israel could
avoid the effects of an Iranian nuclear strike on that country.
Israelis
have long recognized -- though rarely acknowledged -- that there is an
additional factor that would give Iranians pause before they launched a nuclear
attack. Even one successful detonation would likely have devastating effects
not just on Israeli Jews, but on Palestinian Arabs (thereby offering one way,
perhaps, to conclude the peace process, namely, by wiping out both sides), and,
indeed, on neighboring Lebanese, Jordanians, Egyptians, and even Saudis. And
while a cynic might point out that Persians have as much contempt for Arabs as they
do for Jews, the fact that Jerusalem might not survive may be the greatest of
all deterrents for an Iranian leadership that views itself at the vanguard of
Islam.
On the other hand, there is no guarantee that the Obama administration's tough
talk will translate into action; tough talk has accomplished little to move
Pyongyang, for example. There is considerable uncertainty as to how exactly the
administration will deploy naval forces to the Mediterranean: the Navy's force
levels are dropping below 300, and the demand for Aegis ships in the Pacific
and Indian Oceans has not diminished. Moreover, the fact that, in a remarkable
exercise in role-switching, European leaders and intelligence analysts are more
pessimistic about the progress of the Iranian nuclear program than their
American counterparts, inspires little confidence in Washington's ultimate
intentions.
The Israelis are prepared to give their closest ally the benefit of the doubt
for the time being. And "the time being" may not be that long. In the end,
however, unless they are absolutely certain that, as several senators proposed
on Sunday, the United States commits itself to a military strike on Iran if the
negotiations fail, they will act on their own. "Sinn Fein," ourselves alone,
may be the name of an Irish movement, but it embodies the very essence of
Israeli policy in the face of what it continues to view as a threat to its very
existence.
Read More
(7)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE