'MISSION DOABLE': Israeli Ministers Mull Plans for Military Strike against Iran

[Purveyor]

By Ralf Beste, Cordula Meyer and Christoph Schult

The Israeli government no longer believes that sanctions can prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons. A broad consensus in favor of a military strike against Tehran's nuclear facilities -- without the Americans, if necessary -- is beginning to take shape.

Dani Yatom, a member of the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, was invited to attend a NATO conference in Brussels last year. While reviewing the agenda, Yatom, a retired major general, was surprised to see that the meeting was titled "The Iranian Challenge" and not "The Iranian Threat."

When a speaker with a French accent mentioned that a US military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities would be the most dangerous scenario of all, Yatom said, politely but firmly: "Sir, you are wrong. The worst scenario would be if Iran acquired an atom bomb."

--
The one question over which Israel's various political groups disagree is the timing of an attack. The doves argue that diplomatic efforts by the United Nations should be allowed to continue until Iran is on the verge of completing the bomb. That way, Israel could at least argue convincingly that all non-military options had been exhausted.

The hawks, on the other hand, believe time is running out. They stress that there is now a "favorable window of opportunity" that will close with the US presidential election in November, and that Israel can only depend on American support for as long as current US President George W. Bush is still in charge in Washington. They are convinced that the country cannot truly depend on any of the candidates to succeed Bush in office. Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic candidate, has already said that he favors direct negotiations with Tehran. And even if Republican John McCain wins the race, politicians in Jerusalem do not expect him to be ordering an attack as his first official act -- despite his performance, at a campaign appearance last year, of the Beach Boys' song "Barbara Ann" with the lyrics: "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran."

--
Part 2: 'We Will See a Middle East in Flames'

Israel's main ally, the United States, is still at odds over what constitutes the right strategy on Iran. The Bush administration is divided. Vice President Dick Cheney "would still want an attack," says Flynt Leverett, a former official in the US State Department and now a Middle East expert with the New America Foundation. However he believes the secretary of state favors a different approach: "Condi Rice is buying time to get the president through his term."

Bruce Riedel, a Middle East expert who spent many years working for the CIA, says it would be "very difficult for this administration to start a war with Iran. There would be public uproar and congressional uproar." But the situation is different from Israel's perspective, says Riedel. "There is some risk that Israel thinks it has limited time to act and it has a green light from American politicians."

--
This is why Riedel sees an Israeli military strike, with the US government's consent, as the most likely attack scenario. But the consequences, according to Riedel, would not differ from those of an American attack. "An Israeli attack will be seen as a US attack. Iran will retaliate against both Israel and the US." The consequences, says Riedel, would be fatal. "We will see a Middle East in flames."

Nevertheless, in Israel it is no longer a matter of whether there will be a military strike, but when. It is clear that the attack would be exclusively an aerial strike. Jerusalem recently received approval from Washington for a purchase of F-22 stealth bombers. The centrifuges used to enrich uranium at the Natanz nuclear facility are apparently the main target. According to Israeli information, the centrifuges are kept above ground and are thus easier to destroy. The reactor in Bushehr is seen as another possible target.

And the Iranian air defenses? "We know that Iran's air defenses are not among the world's best," says former Mossad chief Yatom. "They can be overcome." Nevertheless, many Israelis still hope that the Americans will do the job for them. "It could still be the case," says Yatom, "that George W. Bush wants to guarantee himself a place in the history books with this last act."

Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan


Spiegel Online: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,559925,00.html

[ananda]

1. The Hall of Infamy

That's where George W Bush's reputation
will firmly lie.

[anonymous171]

2. I say let them, but don't expect America to bail you out or help in any way.

[DJ13]

3. I agree, but I would also immediately revoke all aid we send them

If they are tough enough to attack Iran they have no further need to receive financial aid from us.

[anonymous171]

4. I agree completely. nt

[Rick Myers]

5. I'd bet Israel has a few F-22's already...

The Pentagon has to spread the love!!!



...says Yatom, "that George W. Bush wants to guarantee himself a place in the history books with this last act."

For WHAT? The fargin' Apocalypse??? :grr:

[muriel_volestrangler]

7. They shouldn't have - there's a ban on their export

And as far as I can tell, the overturning of that ban has only been suggested so far, not actually done:

US House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Howard Berman said he was open to removing the restriction on F-22 sales to boost Israeli deterrence and indicated that aid to the Palestinians could be affected by a Hamas-Fatah deal, in an interview with The Jerusalem Post Thursday.

The defense establishment has long eyed the stealth F-22 "Raptor" as a bulwark to Israel's air capabilities, but a US law banning its sale abroad has prevented Israel from acquiring the top-of-the-line plane.
...
"I'm a strong supporter of Israel getting all the material and equipment they need," said Berman, a California Democrat who assumed the chairmanship after the death of Tom Lantos earlier this year. In terms of dropping the ban on F-22 sales, he said, "I certainly would look at it."
...
hat legislation needs to pass in the US Senate before it can be signed into law. And any effort by Berman to drop the ban on sales of the F-22 - described in the past as based on protecting the US from the transfer of technology to the wrong actors - would have to be matched in the Senate. Still, as a leading figure in the House on foreign issues, Berman would be a key player on moving such a priority forward.

Jerusalem Post, June 6th

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

6. I'm soo tired of all this shit ! I have lived most of my 66 years,

with the threat of nuclear weapons hanging over our heads, it's just not right. No country should have the the right to build or use nuclear weapons. Lets get back on track of destroying them. right now the U S is spending billions to replace most of all the nuclear warheads, it needs to be stopped. This subject is far more important than climate change for our survival.