Thursday, January 12, 2012 - 3:31 PM

Facing an unprecedented array of sanctions imposed by the United States and Europe, Iran's leaders opened 2012 by announcing that a new uranium enrichment site in the mountains near Qom would soon become operational. The recent assassination of an Iranian nuclear scientist -- believed by many to be another strike by Israel in a covert campaign to slow Iran's nuclear program -- has only further raised tensions between Iran, the West, and Israel. The assassination and related sabotage efforts may not ultimately halt Iran's program, and may in fact provoke an Iranian response that would increase the odds of escalation leading to a conventional conflict. Thus begins the latest round in the perennial international guessing game: will this be the year that Israel uses military force to try to thwart Iran's nuclear ambitions?
To hear it from U.S. politicians, the Iranian nuclear program is a threat to Israel's very existence. Some urge the Obama administration to publicly support Israel's position by leaving "all options on the table" -- diplomatic speak for a military strike. But before heading down the road of military action, those concerned for Israeli security should understand not only the risks of using force against Iran. They should also take heed of the complexity of Israeli views toward Iran.
The Israeli security establishment and public see Iran as one of Israel's gravest strategic challenges today. This was not always the case. For decades Israel and Iran perceived common threats, such as Iraq, pan-Arab nationalism, and communism, leading to extensive if tacit cooperation during the Shah's rule and even after the 1979 Iranian revolution. These common fears no longer exist. Instead, what Israelis see, through Iran's financial and military links to groups like Hezbollah and Hamas, is an aggressive, bellicose Iran on its borders, making the continued expansion of its missile and nuclear programs all the more threatening.
Israeli leaders also take seriously Iran's vitriolic rhetoric and anti-Zionist ideology, even if many Israeli analysts question the likelihood of Iran committing suicide in the future by using nuclear weapons against what is widely believed to be an extensive Israeli nuclear capability. Yet even Israelis who believe Iran is ultimately a rational actor most interested in survival still worry about the leverage and cover nuclear weapons would give Iran, limiting Israeli flexibility and leading to an unstable and dangerous relationship that would not resemble the relative stability of Cold War deterrence.
Nonetheless, important divisions are emerging within the Israeli strategic community over how to deal with the Iranian nuclear challenge. U.S. politicians may feel comfortable with framing Iran as an existential threat to Israel, but not all Israeli leaders do. An increasing number are concerned that overplaying the "existential threat" card may erode Israel's own ability to deter a future Iranian bomb, suggesting that Israel could not protect itself from a nuclear Iran. Many have stopped using this term in public. Other leaders prefer to talk about Iran as a global problem rather than focus on Iran as Israel's problem in order to enhance the international coalition that has emerged to pressure and isolate the Islamic Republic.
Perhaps the most interesting debate in Israel today is over the question of a military strike. Last year, former Mossad head Meir Dagan publicly argued that a military attack would be a "dumb idea," that would trigger region-wide conflict. But well before Dagan's statements, Israeli leaders and analysts had been quietly debating the merits and feasibility of a military strike. For some, a military strike would be worth the costs even if the nuclear program were only delayed (very few believe it could be destroyed); they think that the risks of Iranian retaliation against Israeli and U.S. targets may be exaggerated. Others believe that a delay in the program could be more effectively achieved through other measures, including sabotage and continued diplomatic and economic isolation, with far fewer costs and risks of wider regional military escalation.
It is difficult to know who has the upper hand in Israel at the moment. Reports suggest that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is sympathetic to striking Iran if the alternative is an Iranian breakout capability under his watch. But it is not clear that the Israeli military and certainly Israeli intelligence analysts share this view; many may in fact hold positions closer to U.S. assessments that are less alarmist about the timeline of the Iranian program and more cautious about the utility of a military option. Much has been made over differences between the U.S. and Israeli threat perceptions of Iran, but in fact these internal Israeli divisions suggest that the gap may not be as great as some suggest.
U.S. policymakers have every reason to be concerned about the threat Iran poses to Israeli security, not to mention U.S. and international security. Private assurances to Israeli leaders make sense at a time of escalating regional tensions. But public statements focusing on Iran as a threat to Israel's existence and openly discussing military options that neither U.S. nor Israeli leaders may believe are prudent may only weaken Israel's position.
Dalia Dassa Kaye is a senior political scientist at the RAND Corporation and a visiting fellow at UCLA's Burkle Center. She is co-author of a recently released RAND report, "Israel and Iran: A Dangerous Rivalry."
Uriel Sinai/Getty Images
EXPLORE:MIDDLE EAST, MIDDLE EAST POSTER 4, MIDDLE EAST, NORTH AFRICA, SOUTHEAST ASIA, INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, IRAN, ISRAEL/PALESTINE, MILITARY, OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, POLITICS, U.S. FOREIGN POLICY
Do Iranians really want to be bombed?
Last time, I was asking this question to Saddam Hussein. By all probability, Saddam was not so deranged to fantasize a victory over USA in 2003. In the same way, Iran can't stand for more than a month depending on quantum of force US/ Israel use.
Would iran be difficult than saddam's iraq?
Even though Saddam knew that thinking of a victory over the US was next to impossible, Iran however are a much larger nation who have been dabbling in Nukes and are already threatening to the strait of Hormuz, which is a very important oil trade route, if they are slapped with even more sanctions. This could turn out to be uglier than anyone thinks.
Israel has this tendency to make its actions and the things it is thinking about doing 180 degrees out of phase. When Israel wants to influence a bad actor through other means than force they will openly talk about using force. When they want to use force they just go and do it, little to no discussion involved. They've never really been into telegraphing their next move. Given the current state of rhetoric on Iranian nukes you can draw your own conclusions as to which course Israel is leaning towards.
To all posters that really have little knowledge of what is going on in Iran, and are not just Zionists pumping for a THIRD and even more catastrophic war, a few comments.
My wife is Iranian and an American citizen. I have had two extended trips to Iran in recent years, and have been all around the country. As an obvious American, I was received everywhere with courtesy, respect, and civility. Iran is changing very fast. It has a large and growing, educated and westernized economic class, more women than men have advanced university degrees as architects, educators, attorneys, and they drive and vote. Iran has a major underground of artists, intellectuals and literati (what we would call liberals), young people clued into all the latest western fashions and music. ALL are sick and tired of the present theocratic Mullah dominated state.
It is true that they can easily close the Straights of Hormuz via small ship actions, mining, and missile strikes. They do not need to defeat or sink the American navy to do this. Insurance rates on tanker traffic would do the job very nicely. 30% of all the world's petroleum transits this narrow passage. A new war with petroleum price spikes to who knows what, would collapse the fragile American economy, not to mention the whole world economy, like a house of cards. China would NOT be pleased.
Regarding the most recent IAEA report, I have taken reasonable efforts to look at it. It does NOT maintain that Iran has diverted any enriched uranium from its constant 24/7 inspection, NOR does it maintain that any material has been enriched beyond the 20% level necessary for medical imaging isotopes. Most posters may know that enrichment to over 95% is necessary for weaponization purposes. The radiological signature of such enrichment is actually quite easy to detect, if it occurs. The IAEA report DOES mount political attacks that Iran may have the capability to do something in the future that to date, they have not done. "Might" "could" and "maybe" are not reasons for another disastrous preventive war.
Recently, we have seen the splitting of the conservative factions that to date have formed the backbone of the IRI. The current elected president (Ahmadinejad) is in increasing and active conflict with the Guardian Council, being the core of the Mullah leadership of the state. Even elements of the Revolutionary Guards have grown greatly disillusioned with the thuggish clampdown on protesters. My father in law says, leave them alone. Do not provoke a new war that would result in vast chaos worldwide, geopolitical, economic, and military.
I hope no one takes this as an apology for the regime. If we had not overthrown the Iranian democracy in 1953 via the CIA’s Operation Ajax, which put the hated Shah back on the throne for several decades (he had been expelled at that time), none of this would have happened.
Let us not compound historic mistakes by making a far greater one now.
Why should the US fight Israel's war? The next war may be the last, it could spiral way out of control. Iran is going nuclear, we may just have to deal with it. War puts us at the mercy of the bankers, they profit from blood spilled in battle, while we fight, they sit back and reap the riches. This being said, it will not matter. If its not this winter, it will be the next. It looks unaviodable. Any Israeli attack will lead to attacks on US interests. In for a penny, in for a pound. The Jew lobby in the US pulls the strings. Yes, the truth does hurt.
The planet knows this.
Sophomoric Article ... Nothing New Here
This article should never have been published by FP. It hurts FP's brand equity of delivering timely, insider, thoughtful analyses with beneficial tactical/strategic pathways. It reads like a high school current events essay ...
Looking at what the US did to Iraq and comparing that to the way it treats North Korea, it would seem eminently sensible of the Iranian regime to want to get its own nuclear weapons.
The real "existential" threat to Israel is to get into a war with Iran where the Iranians start lobbing long range missiles at Israeli cities and all those Israelis with dual nationality start clogging up the exits. Given the differences in population and surface area between the two countries almost the only answer for Israel would be to threaten a nuclear strike. An Iranian bomb would obviously put that off the table.
The psychological effect vs. the Military one
Everyone, including 80% of the Iranians are convinced this regime must go, and let the people of Iran to elect their secular and democratic government. After which, Iran will join the rest of the democratic world.
In regards to their nuclear program, the Mullahs are fully aware of Israel's capabilities to retaliate (or preemptive) strike. Iran's nuclear program and its military option is not as concern to Israel, as the psychological one. Once the Mullahs have it, they will use it to run fear into the Israeli public to induce many to live the country. This is what the Mullahs are trying to do. Win the fight without a fight.
The outcome most likely will be. US will taunt the IRG into a lose-lose situation on the Straights of Hormuz. Damn if they block it, damn if they don't.
If they block, US and other Nato navies will not only destroy Iran's navy, also will extend the attacks on IRG's entire installation - render it unable to protect the regime - result of which, an extension of the domino affect, and the start of revolution in Iran, and regime change, on the same model as others before them..
If Iran does not block, they will lose face and credibility with their own people and the Arabs in the region as loud mouth and a paper tiger.
Anti-Israeli tactics used against Israel
Palestinian & their supporters like the Mullahs in Iran, (mis)lead others to believe that, their objective is only “an end to Israeli occupation of the West Bank, Gaza & E. Jerusalem”.
In reality, these are the stages used by these groups & organizations to eliminate Israel.
PHASE I: THE DENIAL & DE-LEGITIMIZATION.
1) Label Israelis, “Zionists” (means “Jews”), intended to render them as “outsiders”, or “foreign colonialists”.
2) Deny the Holocaust,
3) Question, or deny Jews history & their continued presence in region. (Arafat: in 2000 Camp David).
4) Repeat the same lies on every public stage. (Abu Mazen speech in UNGA. “Jerusalem is to Christians and Muslims” - omits the Jews)
PHASE II – “ZIONISM” & THE “APARTHEID” EFFECT.
1) Knowing that, Zionism was a mere political movement, created in 1899 to empower Jews to live in their own homeland, safe from further persecutions. Israel's enemies emphasis only the role of the European Jews, to depict Israel as yet another European colony - while never mention the 1.2M Jewish refugees, who fled persecution in the Arab & Islamic countries.
2) Attempt to wrap the “South Africa” noose and its “Apartheid” around the Israelis neck.
3) Continue try to convince the world community (through UN Resolutions) that Zionism is a system of Apartheid – which they did succeed of doing for a period of time.
4) Adapt a well known propaganda tool. A lie, if repeated loud, and repeated often enough, soon people will believe it as the absolute truth.
5) In English to the world community, speak of “peace” (Dar al-salam). In Arabic to their own people, speak or war (Dar Al-Harb) and annihilation of Jews.
PHASE III: THE PROVOCATION & THE VICTIMIZED.
1) Coupled with Phase II, keep low intensity provocations (through homicide bombing from WB & rockets from Gaza). Then hope for IDF to respond (which most certainly does follow). Then,
2) Show the gory pictures of dead children to TV, to generate sympathy, and anger against the Israelis.
3) Repeat it often enough such that, the picture of “the ugly Israeli solder shooting innocent civilians” is vivid in people's mind and heart. Render Israel as “racist”, “brutal”, and “ugly” element living among the “peaceful” Arabs.
PHASE IV: THE PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE & INCITEMENT
1) Utilizing the power of words. When speaking for the Palestinians, they use words like, “Justice”, “fairness”, “Indigenous people”, “occupied territories”, “victims”, “legal owners”, and “Right of Return” , “International law”- all to conjure up positive imagery of the Pals in people's minds.
2)When however, it comes to Israel, they use words like “Stolen land”, “Zionists”, “Colonial occupier”, “discriminations”, “Apartheid”, “massacre”, “criminal”, “war Crimes”, and even “Genocide” is brought up.
3) Intentionally & deliberately, keep their people in those refugees camps, throughout the Arab & Islamic states since 1948 to:
a) Continue to play on peoples emotions and sympathy – keep the flame of anti-Israeli alive.
b) Use them as “reserve solders” to flood Israel – all under the pretense of “Right of Return”. Then through its demographic majority, use its democracy to destroy, not only its democracy, but itself as the homeland for Jews.
4) Refer to the land of Israel in religious & theological terms, “Dar al Harb” (House of War), to incite the larger Muslim crowd.
5) Play “The good Guy / Bad Guy” scenario. While PLO in WB, depicts the image of the “civilized” “peace loving Palestinians”. Hamas in Gaza, plays the opposite role. To force the Israelis for more and more concessions, until nothing is left for them to concede.
6) Use homicide bombing to create psychological fear among the Israelis, with hope they will flee. (“Jews love life, we love death”).
7) Through continued propaganda, render Israel as the source of the problem, and its elimination as the only solution to all the unrest throughout the Islamic countries.
PHASE V: USE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW & UN.
When all else have failed. Now the Palestinians are attempting to employee the sinister use civility of international law to cripple Israel from defending itself.
1) Gain recognition as a state over the entire West Bank, Gaza & E. Jerusalem. Thus, force Israel to surrender Jews religious & heritage center. As well the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. Israel's academic crown Jewel, to Palestinians control
2) Refuse to grant citizenship to their own refugees living outside the new Palestine, to force Israel to absorb them.
3) Refuse to accept any Jew living in the newly created state Palestine (Apartheid?)
4) Plan to indict Israeli solders and member of cabinets, for alleged war crimes in International court, for defending their woman & children from heinous Palestinian homicide bombers.
5) refuse to follow the western countries demand of negotiated settlement.

The Middle East Channel offers unique analysis and insights on this diverse and vital region of more than 400 million.
Read More
(10)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE