Syria’s Chemical Weapons: A Motivation for an Israeli Strike on Iran
The Obama administration, as former UN ambassador John Bolton observed yesterday, is taking extreme measures to forestall a prospective Israeli strike on Iran. Since when does one ally tip off an enemy about another ally’s possible route of attack, in this case, via Azerbaijan? The utter fecklessness of the administration’s foreign policy, though, is forcing the Israelis to act, whatever the administration’s concerns about the price of gas.
Insufficient attention has been given to the prospective collapse of Syria as a motivation for an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear program. In the past several days, Israel has sounded public warnings regarding Syria’s chemical weapons stockpile, estimated to be the world’s largest. As the Financial Times wrote on March 22nd, Israel has “profound concern that parts of Syria’s vast stockpile of arms, including long-range missiles as well as chemical and biological weapons, will end up in the hands of militant groups in Lebanon or elsewhere. Speaking to the Israeli parliament this week, Ehud Barak, the defense minister, emphasized the short-term dangers posed by turmoil in Syria. ‘We are monitoring events in Syria, with an eye on any efforts to transfer weapons that would alter the balance . . . Events in Syria increase the uncertainty and the need to prepare for any scenario,’ he warned.”
Israeli officials warn that an even graver risk would emerge if Iran were to intervene in Syria with regular forces to support the Assad regime, perhaps in response to actual or perceived Western backing for the Syrian opposition. In that case Iranian regular forces might have control over Syria’s chemical weapons, and with it the capacity to retaliate against any Israeli strike against Iran’s nuclear capacity.
One of the real failures of the NATO involvement in Libya was their failure to secure the regime’s stock of weapons, particularly portable anti-aircraft missiles, some of which have already made their way to Gaza.
Syria holds far more dangerous stuff. While outsiders debate military intervention in Syria, they’re again failing to consider just “who” they would be helping, and again failing to consider who might ultimately get hold of those weapons. The right course, it seems to me, is to simply destroy them. *That* should be the West’s top priority. In that way, no matter who emerges triumphant, they won’t have access to them, thus making a future Syria less threatening to its neighbors.
The Olympian is always two steps ahead.
I understand now why the Administration is happy to see continuing turmoil in Syria.
The night the Iraq war began, New York’s John Batchelor show described a forty-five mile long ‘Russian ambassador’s convoy’ into Syria. It was mostly tanker trucks and armored limosines. A week later, thousands of Syrian army troops were guarding a ‘garbage dump’ in the Bekaa valley.
Sometime later, John Loftus explained that Saddam had paid $50 million to an Egyptian trucking firm to organize night tanker convoys moving much of the chemical stockpiles to Bekaa over a 3 month period. Iraq had routine oil convoys to neighboring countries. He said it takes nuclear heat- temperatures of over 4000 degrees- to destroy chemical weaponry. He also mentioned we have always had detailed satellite photos of Bekaa and have always known about it.
Hizbollah was the most likely candidate to use it; now Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood is arming Gaza, and probably working with Hizb and Iranian officers with an eye on said stockpiles. Spengler is spot on with this one.
Too bad we didn’t have an independent media who might have wanted to investigate that. Although to be fair, it’s not exactly Pulitzer Prize material.
Hey look! Is that a squirrel?
He’s wrong about what it takes to destroy them. The Wikipedia article agrees with what I’ve read elsewhere and my knowledge of chemistry. 2000F or mix with hot water or hot water and lye, depending on the agent. If it’s part of a munition with an explosive, rocket fuel or the like, carefully disassemble first.
So WMD in Iraq, were not a myth. Very interesting!
Bush kept his mouth shut and quietly moved 500,000 tons of the nonexistant African yellowcake in Iraq to Canada for reprocessing. It took seven years.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1601210/posts
WMD’s were no myth in Iraq.
Just ask Gen. Georges Sada,Sadaams air force general. He was in charge of making dozens of flights to damascus in two planes, one a 747 with seats removed and the other a 727 with seats removed.
He made the rounds of talk shows in the US. some years ago and even wrote a book about it but memories are short.
Along with tractor trailer loads of chem weapons,barrels after barrel of poisonous gas, syria does indeed have a huge arsenal of slowly decaying WMDs. The question is who has the guts to go there and blow them up? As usual Israel will ultimately have to do the dirty work.
Too bad WMD’s don’t have UPC’s. I’d still bet money a fair portion originated in Iraq and were spirited out before Saddam’s downfall. Not that that makes them any more or less lethal. But vindication, even at this late date, would carry a certain sweetness, I would think particularly among those American families who’ve paid in blood.
You might win that bet.
http://www.nysun.com/foreign/iraqs-wmd-secreted-in-syria-sada-says/26514/
Many thanks for the link, gordo! I had read this back in ’06 but hadn’t saved a copy. About time I read Sada’s book, too, and wonder of wonders, the library has it!
I wonder how different our political landscape would be if the government announced that beginning in March all citizens of St. Loius, San Francisco, Boston, and New Orleans will be issued instructions on establishing a safe room or bomb shelter and are required to pick up government issued gas masks and nerve gas antidote (special instructions for infants and seniors). Other cities and locations to be announced.
This is daily life in Israel.
http://blog.standforisrael.org/articles/waiting-for-gas-masks
I am just as worried about the Syrian rebels, whomever they are, getting them as Hezbolla. Could well turn into another Lybian fire sale.
Hezbolla can be deterred to some extent. Hamas and related groups cannot.
What worries me is that Obama’s Democrats sent ‘antiwar’ groups to Egypt to ‘organize’ electoral uprisings as soon as he was in office. These are the same Democrats from Palo Alto who organized the Gaza Flotilla.
Good people, Democrats were working with communists in Asia, South America, and Europe. They have had no reason to change. Ted Kennedy was pledging his support to Andropov while Ron Dellums was writing love letters to Castro on the Arms Committee.
Remember the Democrat leadership flying to Damascus when they gained Congress in 2007? Why? The US didn’t have an embassy there.
I’m thinking the noise from Iran is a feint.
The Administration is buying time for an attack from the west, north, and south of Israel.
.
LOL
David, in case you don’t know, people of Shirvan & Arran, what you call “Azerbaijan”, are Iranians, brothers and sisters of Iranian (real) Azarbaijan of 20 million people .. right now, so many Iranian Azari are in Shirvan & Arran , indistinguishable from locals
Iranian Azari will bring back their brothers and sisters home, to Iran.
Looks to me, this American stunt to get rid of BiBi & Alieve
.
LOL
David, in case you don’t know, people of Shirvan & Arran, what you call “Azerbaijan”, are Iranians, brothers and sisters of Iranian (real) Azarbaijan of 20 million people .. right now, so many Iranian Azari are in Shirvan & Arran , indistinguishable from locals
Iranian Azari will bring back their brothers and sisters home, to Iran.
Looks to me, this American stunt to get rid of BiBi & Alieve
ARK
Thanks Spengler for this new twist to the unfolding mysteries going on in the ever unstable MidEast. More reasons to bomb Iran, who could be against that?
I predict, however, that the real knockout blow to Iran is not going to come from an Israeli airforce attack from Azerbaijan or anywhere else (Turkmenistan, anyone? How about Armenia?).
The first move will be internal sabotage carried out through cooperative arrangements between Israeli special forces, Kurdish fighters, and Mujaheddin e Khalq opponents of the Iranian regime. This will shut down the electricity grids and phone lines of Iran. When they pick up their secure phone lines they will be as dead as a door nail. Incommunicado. Then, the bombing will start, and the Islamists will scurry for cover, rather than retaliate.
The Israelis are too clever to do the stupid things being proposed by the armchair strategists, who as usual claim that nothing can be done but throw up the hands and capitulate.
If Israel would offer recognition to Kurdistan, would they go for it?
Interesting take on the softening-up phase. Doable!
Now you’ve got me wondering how many other small, harassed minorities would like to be recognized. There are dozens; Islam is not nearly as monolithic nor universal as many think. Most of these ethnics were there long before the Islamic myth was.
Finally somebody has mentioned Obama’s sellout of Israel in PJM. The scope of this betrayal is mind boggling. I hope that some of the “liberal” Jews get this information and digest it for what its worth. As Obama sells out the Israelis, he sells out the American Jews. When he runs out of excuses for his failures, he will do as all other anti-Semites have in the past and point to the Jews. Should he be re-elected anti-Semitism will grow exponentially.
Andy: Don’t hold your breath on secular American Jews understanding just how bad Obama is. Religiosity is the key in voting patterns: Jews who actually practice Judaism vote Republican. Cultural Jews who know nothing of the Torah tend towards liberalism.
Unfortunately you’re right that anti-Semitism will increase if Obama is elected. The class and race warfare that Obama and his team specializes in goes against the very foundation of Judaism that each individual is responsible for his or her own actions. Those who hate Judaism will of course hate the Jews. I’m praying that we send Obama out to pasture, even though you just know he will spend the rest of his life making anti-Israel speeches.
Yes: “Syrian” WMD. Got it.
Anyone suggesting the actual origins of much of that stockpile might as well have been talking about alien cadavers at Area 51.
Don’t you just want to take a baseball bat to a whole lot of talking heads?
How is it that Syria has any chemical weapons? Isn’t that against some treaty that the leftstream media hasn’t bothered to mention? And the sell-out of Israel is absolutely stunning. This on top of the open mic insult of Netanyahu, the rudeness to Netanyahu at the White House, the unilateral declaration that Israel should not build in certain areas within their own country, the 1967 border stupidity, the Jerusalem not the capitol of Israel baloney, and Obama hiding (with complicity from the LA Times) the extent of his friendship with PLO mouthpiece Rashid Khalidi. Obama says, with a straight face, that his commitment to Israel is unwavering!? I hope the American Jewish community sits up and takes notice.
Hot-cold-hot-cold … I really don’t know what to think. One day I’m certain that Israel attack is imminent and next morning you get information that all of this is just Israel/USA game to scare Iran into submission.
It’s becoming increasingly frustrating to follow .
What I do know is
1)that Barack doesn’t like Israel and cannot be trusted
2) Iran is going deeper underground with nuke program and time is against Israel if it wants to attack
If Israel attacks, will Obama follow? I doubt it. Attack, even if unsuccessful could help Mitt/Rick and if one of them wins it doesn’t even have to be successful. USA will finish the job.
But it just might be that I’m dead wrong. Hot-cold-hot-cold…
Seems to me that Israel had best pull its finger out and start knocking off its enemies wholesale before it wakes up one morning quite soon and discovers that it has ceased to exist.
Damascus will cease to be a city and will became a heap of ruins; these are the words of Isaiah.
D. Goldman is a realist, but I’ve to say we are in a very speculative field in the Middle East muddle, too many interests are meddling. The story about refueling in Azerbaijan has been circualted and is mot. Correctly this evening in the Israeli TV Chan.2, the M.East analyst pointed to geography: all around Azerbaijan there are Russian radar stations, then which route should Israel’s plane fly? Over Turkey? or Iran itself? or first fly half away to Europe and turn right via Romenia or Bulagaria to reach Azerbaijan? There are better and shorter routes, if ever Israel will attack Iran. The Israeli decisionmakers, and only the inner circle will know and Hussein Obama will know after the attack occured. No leader in the world will entrust Hussein O. with vital info of this kind. Further, most probably Israel won’t attack Iran directly, for the time being sabotage and covert operations are underway. Syria and Hezbollah, won’t move against Israel, because this time the response will be too hard to contemplate and to bear. At the end Syria and Iran could well be surprised by by an Old Lady raffling itself together in the illusion of her former glory…and one more time starting a mess.
Damascus will cease to be a city and will became a heap of ruins; these are the words of Isaiah.
D. Goldman is a realist, but I’ve to say we are in a very speculative field in the Middle East muddle, too many interests are meddling. The story about refueling in Azerbaijan has been circualted and is mot. Correctly this evening in the Israeli TV Chan.2, the M.East analyst pointed to geography: all around Azerbaijan there are Russian radar stations, then which route should Israel’s plane fly? Over Turkey? or Iran itself? or first fly half away to Europe and turn right via Romenia or Bulagaria to reach Azerbaijan? There are better and shorter routes, if ever Israel will attack Iran. The Israeli decisionmakers, and only the inner circle will know and Hussein Obama will know after the attack occured. No leader in the world will entrust Hussein O. with vital info of this kind. Further, most probably Israel won’t attack Iran directly, for the time being sabotage and covert operations are underway. Syria and Hezbollah, won’t move against Israel, because this time the response will be too hard to contemplate and to bear. In the end Syria and Iran could well be surprised by by an Old Lady raffling herself together in the illusion of her former glory…and one more time starting a mess.
Hunting SSMs w/possible chemical warheads is a quite a battle-problem. It would be interesting to read an expert analysis of what it would take Israel to counter the possible threat from Syria, especially in the context of simultaneous operations over Iran.
The common wisdom was that this was a tremendous problem during the Gulf War w/respect to Saddam’s Scuds, but this FAS analysis suggests the problem was overblown in the popular media: http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/program/counter.htm.
“D. Goldman is a realist, but I’ve to say we are in a very speculative field in the Middle East muddle, too many interests are meddling. The story about refueling in Azerbaijan has been circualted and is mot. Correctly this evening in the Israeli TV Chan.2, the M.East analyst pointed to geography: all around Azerbaijan there are Russian radar stations, then which route should Israel’s plane fly? Over Turkey? or Iran itself? or first fly half away to Europe and turn right via Romenia or Bulagaria to reach Azerbaijan?”
The Russian radar stations like Gabala which would see the Israelis coming in will stand down (Gabala was offered to Dubya as a missile defense base right on the flight track for any Iranian launch toward EU, but was rejected, fueling Russian suspicions).
The fix is in. As I keep telling David, Russia and its news orgs will denounce the Iran strike planned for next year all the way to the bank. Obama does not object to an Israeli attack so much as he does to it happening before November 2012 and pushing gas to $6 a gallon — then his built in advantages of incumbency which currently have him beating PJM’s preferred GOP presidential contender Mittens in Florida and Pennsylvania will be not so great.
You’re optimistic. An attack on Iran would also cause other oil exporters to react, wiping out most of the world’s export market. China would dump all its dollars and gobble up the rest. Drink that milkshake up!
Gas would be 15-20 dollars a gallon on the black market. America would be DEAD if Israel starts WWIII.
Your math doesn’t work.
Prices won’t explode: crude will be rationed, a la WWII.
BTW, WWIII = Cold War; we’re already on WWIV… Do keep up.
============
As for warfare, it would seem that Iran and Syria are already at various levels of hot war.
============
The very curious deployment of the USN — up close and personal to the Iranian coast — is against doctrine — and so must be due the the White House.
============
Perhaps 0bama fears exposure of his statecraft with the mullahs.
At this point just about anything seems possible.
There are already protest movements in the country! The Tea Party and Occupy crowds would riot if not for oil’s lubricating intoxication. The economy simply couldn’t handle rationing. Ordinary Americans outside of New York or Chicago drive 100-150 miles a day to avoid dangerous minorities. Elites forget this so easily.
Oil amd many good were rationed .. in 1973.You can check reading ” the age of turbulence”. Also on Breyer´s Regulation and reform
So the other motivations didn’t work. Now they are pulling out the old ‘THEY HAVE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION!’ talking point. How original.
The claim by David that if chemical weapons would be used against Israel, Damascus would be glass does not ring true. One reason that there has been semi-peace with Syria for 30 years is that the Golan looks down on Damascus. Any use of atomic weapons this close to Israel would affect Israel as well. The best approach would be to bomb the Syrian stockpiles and let the residue of the bombing do to them what they would have preferred doing to the Israelis. Holding weapons of mass destruction is a two-edge sword.
Blert wrote, “The very curious deployment of the USN — up close and personal to the Iranian coast — is against doctrine — and so must be due the the White House.”
This is the best comment so far among many good ones. In case of military confrontation with the Mullahs, the oil on the Iranian storage tankers will be set ablaze causing certain casualties among American servicemen. This loss will be blamed upon Israel, but it will be Obama’s fault for playing with toys he did not know how to handle. Our servicemen deserve a better fate than as cannon fodder.
Unfortunately, the question of WMD in Saddam’s Iraq became political, not military or historic. Some of those who supported the invasion/liberation of Iraq claim that they indeed existed, while all who do not – deny it vehemently, that is, Bush lied to justify the invasion. Let’s look at the facts we all know. Saddam has used chemical weapons, many times, mostly against Iranians and, on several occasions, against Kurds. We even know what weapons he used – artillery shells and aircraft-born canisters. The agents were tabun (nerve agent), but mostly mustard gas. The number of chemical munitions used in Iran-Iraq war was in the thousands, that is, there should have been an industrial-scale manufacturing of such munitions in Iraq.
Nothing was found upon invasion, except two-three rusted (probably, lost) shells. Did Saddam mafia-cleaned the place and smuggled the materiel out off the country, perhaps, with Primakov’s help? (E. Primakov was the USSR Foreign Minister, Chairman of the KGB, Secretary of Politburo and personal recipient of Saddam’s largesse).
Let us ask ourselves another question that, perhaps, will be easier to answer. What happened with Saddam’s conventional weapons, such as tanks and airplanes? It is well known that the number of main battle tanks in the pre-invasion Iraq was about 2000, very many quite modern T-72. The number of Soviet-made jet fighters was about 400. Where are they? All what we know for sure is that some of the planes were flown to Iran. But where the hell are the tanks, the artillery pieces (also in the thousands) and the short/medium range tactical missiles? Nothing really significant was found upon invasion.
Do you all have the eerie feeling (as I do) that at least some of the T-72s we are now watching on TV shelling Syrian towns have been roaming “the rivers of Babylon” in not so distant past?
USN ships deployed closer to Iranian coast is called Dangling the bait.
Dangerous as all hell it invites an attack for what ever reasons, martial law, excuse to counter attack, stop global warming, arresting Zimmerman what ever the administration wants to do. It’s saying to the Iranian’s is The Democrats will never let a crisis go to waste. So shoot Mullah’s, shoot.
“Remember the Enterprise!” September 2012
So “Spengler” found a new reason for Israel to expeditiously strike at Iran’s nuclear program…
We’re all waiting impatiently for “Brazil’s Submarines: A Motivation for an Israeli Strike on Iran”, and “France’s Eiffel Tower: A Motivation for an Israeli Strike on Iran” also “Madonna’s Underwear: A Motivation for an Israeli Strike on Iran”… I’ve been assured Spengler is working on them !
During that time, (http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/NC31Ak01.html) more serious people are remarking that Israeli government is hiding to the Israeli population the risks of damaging Iranian counter-attacks by ballistic missile against high-value military or civilian targets in Israel.
“”"
the message that Iran is too weak to threaten an effective counter-attack is contradicted by one of Israel’s leading experts on Iranian missiles and the head of its missile defense program for nearly a decade, who says Iranian missiles are capable of doing significant damage to Israeli targets
(…)
The “bad news” for Israel, Rubin told IPS in an interview, is that the primary factor affecting Iran’s capability to retaliate is the rapidly declining cost of increased precision in ballistic missiles. Within a very short time, Iran has already improved the accuracy of its missiles from a few kilometers from the target to just a few meters, according to Rubin.
(…)
Those reports suggest that Iran now has roughly 450 missiles that could reach Israel, half of which were improved models with much greater precision.
“”"
Even a very optimistic view that the Israeli antimissile system can have in a real war the same 80% success rate it displayed in tests, the 3rd battery of that system being operational 2012 will result in 150 – 300 interceptors total, meaning that 210 to 330 Iranian missiles would still get through…
And that’s assuming Iranians are not smart enough to launch a coordinated massive attack able to saturate the antimissile batteries before reserve interceptors can be reloaded!
The bottom line is that if attacked by Israeli bombing raids, Iranians could retaliate very harshly on Israel proper, even without assuming any (for Iran suicidal) chemical or biological WMD use.
“”"
“I’m asking my military friends [color=#FF0000]how they feel about waging war without electricity[/color],” said Rubin.
(…)
Rubin is even worried that, if the accuracy of Iranian missiles improves further, which he believes is “bound to happen”, Iran will be able to carry out pinpoint attacks on Israel’s air bases, which are concentrated in just a few places.
“”"
I do not believe Israel has a realistic ability to independently attack Iranian nuclear sites: this much less because of Israeli Air Force abilities (very ambitious and risky raids, but probably still possible) than because of the potential for very painful Iranian counter-attacks.
Tha sunni arabs will help Israel like they did in 1981. The enemy of your enemy, the persian shiite, is your friend
.
dreimal hoch Günter (Grass), dreimal hoch
http://www.sueddeutsche.de/kultur/2.220/gedicht-zum-konflikt-zwischen-israel-und-iran-was-gesagt-werden-muss-1.1325809
.
.
Henry A. Kissinger – A new doctrine of intervention
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-new-doctrine-of-intervention/2012/03/30/gIQAcZL6lS_print.html
For more than half a century, U.S. policy in the Middle East has been guided by several core security objectives :
preventing any power in the region from emerging as a hegemon; ensuring the free flow of energy resources, still vital to the operation of the world economy; and attempting to broker a durable peace between Israel and its neighbors, including a settlement with the Palestinian Arabs.
In the past decade, Iran has emerged as the principal challenge to all three.
A process that ends with regional governments either too weak or too anti-Western in their orientation to lend support to these outcomes, and in which U.S. partnerships are no longer welcomed, must evoke U.S. strategic concerns — regardless of the electoral mechanisms by which these governments come to power. Within the framework of these general limits, U.S. policy has significant scope for creativity in promoting humanitarian and democratic values.
LOL
.
.
Jackpot
Spiegel says “Günter Grass” is right
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,826180,00.html
Spiegel : Günter Grass has kicked off an important — and long overdue — debate. And, he’s right.
the brief lines that Günter Grass has published under the title “What Must Be Said” will one day be seen as some of his most influential words. They mark a rupture. It is this one sentence that we will not be able to ignore in the future: “The nuclear power Israel is endangering a world peace that is already fragile.”
It is a sentence that has triggered an outcry. Because it is true. Because it is a German, an author, a Nobel laureate who said it. Because it is Günter Grass who said it. And therein lies the breach. And, for that, one should thank Grass. He has taken it upon himself to utter this sentence for all of us. A much-delayed dialogue has begun.
It is a discussion about Israel and whether Israel is preparing a war against Iran, a country whose leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has threatened Israel, referring to it as a “cancer” that must be “wiped off the map.” Israel, a country that has been surrounded by enemies for decades, many of whom believe that Israel has no right to exist — even independent of its policies.
It is a war that could plunge the entire world into the abyss. When a German speaks about such things, Germany must be part of the discussion — and Germany’s historical responsibility.
Such debates follow a pre-established pattern. Grass knew that he would be chided as an anti-Semite — a risk taken by any German critic of Israel. Indeed, Mathias Döpfner — the head of the publishing house Axel Springer, the parent company of the country’s largest daily, Bild — accused Grass of “politically correct anti-Semitism” in a Thursday editorial. Döpfner, a man who fancies himself the guardian of German-Israeli relations, also suggested that Grass should be committed to a historical rehabilitation center and inserts a few jabs about Grass’ long-secret World War II membership in the Waffen-SS. Yes, Grass has to deal with such charges, as well.
Grass Is a Realist
But Grass is neither an anti-Semite nor a zombie of German history. Grass is a realist. He decries the fact that Israel’s nuclear capabilities are “accessible to no inspections.” He objects to Germany’s weapons-export policies, which supports the shipment of an additional submarine capable of launching nuclear missiles to Israel. And he wearily rejects the “hypocrisy of the West,” which — he leaves unsaid — has long been the guiding principle of our Middle East policies, from Algeria to Afghanistan.
Grass also writes nonsense. He goes on about how he kept quiet for a long time and how he is now no longer going to keep quiet — “aged and with my last bit of ink” — and that he wants to free others from feeling the need to remain silent. That part isn’t very well-formulated. He also warns against the annihilation of the Iranian people, which is certainly not part of the Israeli agenda. The text could have been better shielded against attacks. But it still hits its mark.
Someone, after all, has to finally pull us out of the shadow of the words that Chancellor Angela Merkel spoke in 2008 during a visit to Jerusalem. At the time, she said that Israel’s security belonged to Germany’s raison d’état. To avoid misunderstandings, she added: “Given that truth, it cannot remain empty words in times of trouble.”
Helmut Schmidt, Germany’s chancellor between 1974 and 1982, once said that feeling responsible for Israel’s security is “emotionally understandable, but a foolhardy notion that could have serious consequences.” Should war erupt between Israel and Iran, he went on, “then, according to this notion, German soldiers would have to fight, as well.” Since then, Israel has considered Germany to be the only other country it can count on besides the US.
The World Holding Its Breath
Now, backed by a US in which presidents must secure the support of Jewish lobby groups in the run-up to elections as well as by a Germany in which historical penance has assumed a military component, the Netanyahu administration has the entire world holding its breath: “Netanyahu’s Israel has dictated the global agenda as no small state has ever done before,” writes the Israeli daily Haaretz. From oil prices to terrorism, there are plenty of reasons for the world to fear a war between Israel and Iran.
No one’s claiming that Iran already has an atomic bomb. No one knows whether Iran is even really working on such a bomb. On the contrary, American intelligence officials believe that Iran halted its program to develop nuclear weapons back in 2003.
That, though, is of no interest to the Israelis. For them, it’s no longer about stopping the Iranians from getting a nuclear bomb. Instead, it’s about preventing — and no longer merely being in a position to prevent — the Iranians from being able to build such a bomb. They don’t want to have to wrestle with the issue that the US had to with Iraq. The Americans still thought that they had to provide proof that their opponent had weapons of mass destruction. But such proof wasn’t to be found in Iraq — nor such weapons. So the Americans simply fabricated the needed proof.
Israel has thrust an ultimatum on the world. It doesn’t want to supply evidence that Iran has a bomb. Nor does it want to provide proof that Iran is even building a bomb. Israel’s stance is simple: It doesn’t want Iran to reach the “zone of immunity.” Accordingly, Israel is threatening to launch an attack before the Iranians can bury their atomic facilities so deep in the granite that even the largest bunker-busting American bombs can no longer reach them.
Time to Pressure Israel
Israel and Iran are playing a game of poker that both can win as long as there is no war. The tabloid press calls Ahmadinejad the “nut from Tehran.” But he isn’t crazy. He wants to remain in office and has oppressed his countries opposition in order to do so: Blood was spilled three years ago when he crushed demonstrations against his rule, locking up many opposition leaders in the process.
Ahmadinejad is intentionally keeping the world in a cloud of uncertainty regarding his nuclear intentions. He benefits from his strategic ambiguity just as much as the Israelis benefit from their threats of war. Both countries are helping each other expand their influence far beyond what their sizes actually merit.
In a perverse way, they find themselves in a state of mutual dependence. And that could have remained their own issue, if only they hadn’t taken the entire world hostage. As Grass writes, it has come time to demand “an unhindered and permanent monitoring of Israel’s nuclear potential and Iran’s nuclear facilities by an international entity that the government of both countries would approve” (ed’s note: Please note that this is an unofficial, temporary translation; the poem is currently being translated by Grass’ official English-language translator).
At the moment, Iran is feeling the pressure of sanctions. But the time has finally come to put some pressure on Israel, as well. Mind you, whoever says such a thing is not trying “to relativize the guilt of the Germans by making the Jews into perpetrators,” as Mathias Döpfner says. In this case, we’re not talking about German history. We’re talking about the world. And we’re talking about the present.
.