Checking the Israeli agenda

Nov.3, 2007

Checking the Israeli agenda

IT could indeed be argued that Israel has the capability to destroy or seriously cripple Iran's nuclear programme, as an unnamed Israeli general has been quoted as telling a group of selected journalists of Jewish origin during a briefing in Canada last week. Israel has US-supplied equipment and technology to do that, including long-range warplanes equipped with missiles and "bunker-buster" bombs as well as mid-air refuelling aircraft. The Jewish state also has one of its three German- supplied submarines patrolling the Indian Ocean with its missiles primed at Iranian nuclear facilities. Israel also possesses the technology that would help its warplanes evade radar detection while on their way to Iran and back through the region's airspace. It is suspected that the Israeli arsenal includes "tactical nuclear weapons" that could be used to bomb Iran's underground nuclear facilities. Indeed, Israel, which has between 100 and 200 nuclear warheads and the capability to deliver them, could unleash such firepower that could destroy a big chunk of Iran. These are known facts. But the question is not whether Israel has the capability to destroy Iranian targets, but of what happens if it does indeed do so.
Iranian leaders, including military commanders, have clearly stated that they would hold the US responsible for any military strike on its territory regardless of who carries out the actual attack and that they reserve the right to retaliate the way they find fit.
Effectively, it means that US interests in the region, including its 160,000 soldiers and bases in Iraq and another 20,000 soldiers and facilities in Afghanistan, could be considered as "legitimate" targets for Iranian firepower even if Israel mounts an attack against Iran.
Israel has made no secret that it is raring to have a go at Iran's nuclear facilities. Reliable and credible reports indicate that the US is having a tough time holding it back from a repeat run of the 1981 attack that destroyed Iraq's Osirak nuclear plant. Obviously, Washington has its own considerations and plans to deal with Iran and hence it is restraining Israel until the US itself is good and ready.
At the same time, the unnamed Israeli general's comment in Canada that "we don't see anyone trying to stop Iran" from pursuing its nuclear programme and that "we have to be prepared for any eventuality" is alarming.
It is an indication that Israel is growing increasingly angry and frustrated over the slow pace of diplomatic efforts and limited effect of UN sanctions aimed at defusing the Iranian nuclear crisis. It is anyone's guess how far and how long the Jewish state's political and military establishments are willing to accept US pressure to restrain themselves.
That makes it all the more important that Washington should appreciate that any Israeli action against Iran would have equally serious consequences for the region as the case would be in the event of US military action against the Iranians.
If the Bush administration is sincere and honest when it declares that it is not planning military strikes against Iran, then it should act promptly to hold back its strategic ally Israel from launching military adventures that would only undermine all hopes of restoring regional stability after the fiasco in Iraq.