Will Israel commit suicide? More rumors of a strike at Iran

America has made many geopolitical mistakes, some very serious.  Nothing critical for a superpower, so long as we do not make too many.

Israel operates far closer to the edge.   Small, geographically and economically vulnerable, surrounded by enemies, and heir to millennia of western antisemitism (Passages from Luther’s On the Jews and Their Lies could be read with applause at some American universities).  This insecurity makes them more likely to take bold gambles — and increases the odds of mistakes having horrible consequences.

In the 20 December issue of Newsweek Michael Hirsch describes Israel as about to gamble, again:

I came back from a trip to Israel in November convinced that Israel would attack Iran,” Bruce Riedel, a former career CIA official and senior adviser to three U.S. presidents–including Bush — on Middle East and South Asian issues, told me Thursday, citing conversations he had with Mossad and defense officials.  “And that was before the NIE.  This makes it even more likely.  Israel is not going to allow its nuclear monopoly to be threatened.”

The mechanics of such a strike are beyond the scope of this blog.  Here are a few key points  (see the links below for more):

• Israel has not fought against a serious conventional military force since 1973.
• Air strikes have become much more difficult since they blew off the Egyptians in 1967.   To mention just one aspect of this:  quality air defense have become cheaper and widely available.
• Sadham’s Osirak reactor was almost undefended, nor was it hardened.
• Many experts consider that Israel’s forces are not capable of inflicting serious damage on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Long distance, many sites, hardened and well-defended targets — plus they must over fly nations with excellent air defenses (or Iraq).
• It would mean putting most of Israel’s air assets at risk.  A failure might even put Israel itself at risk, inciting neighbors (worse case:  Egypt) to invade while Israel has greatly reduced ability to defend.

These mechanics might be the least risky aspect of a strike at Iran.  What might happen afterwards could be worse, whether successful or not.  It would make Israel an outlaw state in several senses:

• An act of war against another State,
• without justification as either an immanent threat (like 1967) or in response to attacks on their land (e.g., Lebanon in 1982 and 2006),
• without clear evidence of an active nuclear program (as in their 1981 strike at Iraq), esp. after the November 2007 National Intelligence Estimate on Iran’s nuclear program (see Wikipedia for a history of Iran’s nuclear program),
• without authorization by either the United Nations Security Council or the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).   Mohamed ElBaradei, Director General of the IARA said on 28 October “(H)ave we seen Iran having the nuclear material that can readily be used into a weapon?  No.  Have we seen an active weaponization program?  No.”

This could give Israel’s many enemies the necessary excuse and motivation to act, emotional hatred and international law combining just as fuel and air do in a fire.  Many of the world’s governments are already hostile to Israel for various reasons.

• Sympathy with the Palestinians for ethnic or religious reasons.
• Currying favor with the increasingly powerful Arab oil exports.
• Antisemitism.

Becoming an outlaw has consequences.  The most dangerous weapon would be sanctions on trade and capital.  Boycotts can be powerful, whether informal by companies and consumers — or formal trade sanctions by nations, regional trade groups, or the UN.  Disinvestment campaigns can also strongly pressure a nation so tightly bound into the global financial system as Israel.  It hurt even so rich and autarkic a nation as South Africa.  The effect of some combination of these on Israel could be catastrophic.

The US can only help so much.  And a Democratic Party Administration in 2009 might be much less supportive than has the Bush Administration.  Worse, Israel has no effective response.  They could not unbomb Iraq.  An apology might not be considered sufficient.  Other remedies might be quite painful.

For all these reasons I doubt Israel will attack Iran.  But that is just a guess.  Any experts reading this are welcome to comment!

Update:  Martin van Creveld notes two recent articles in Yediot that contradict Riedel’s opinion

Dichter:  US report on Iran could bring about another Yom Kippur War, 15 December 2007 — Excerpt:

“US misconceptions regarding Iran could bring about another Yom Kippur War in our region,” said Internal Security Minister Avi Dichter. … Would Israel take the initiative and strike at Iran?  To that Dichter answers with an empathic no:  “Israel may be fourth in the world when it comes to exporting arms, but it is unequivocally not a superpower.  Israel is merely one small country, and it is a true superpower (such as the US) that must address the Iranian nuclear threat.”

Olmert: US will continue to spearhead campaign against Iran (11 December 2007)

“Israel has not and does not lead the battle against the capricious government of Tehran. It is not only Israel’s problem but that of the entire international community,” {Israel Prime Minister} Olmert said.  “Israel will work together with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to expose the Iranian military’s plan to develop a nuclear weapon,” he said.

Please share your comments by posting below (brief and relevant, please), or email me at fabmaximus at hotmail dot com (note the spam-protected spelling).

Background information

1. A Nuclear Iran: What Does it Mean, and What Can be Done, Ephraim Kam, Institute for National Security Studies (in Tel Aviv, not the US DoD INSS), February 2007 — esp. pages 32 – 41.  Perhaps the best analysis I have found on this subject.
2. Focus: Mission Iran  (The Times, 7 January 2007) — Excerpt:  Nonetheless, Professor Martin Van Creveld, an Israeli military expert, said last week that tactical nuclear weapons were “the only way, if there is a way at all, to destroy Iran’s nuclear sites”.
3. Three Gulf states agree to IAF overflights en route to Iran (Haaretz, 25 February 2007)
4. The World Can Live with a Nuclear Iran, Martin van Creveld (24 September 2007)
5. Arms Control Wonk (9 April 2006) — a brief discussion of the requirements for a successful strike at Iran.

Other posts about a strike at Iran by Israel

Esp. note #2!

1. Is Iran dangerous, or a paper tiger?   (13 November 2007)
2. Does reading Debkafile make us smarter, or dumber?  (15 June 2008)
3. A new story about a possible war with Iran  (21 May 2008) — About the 20 May Jerusalem Post story, originally reported by Army Radio.
4. “As things look, Israel may well attack Iran soon”  (3 June 2008) — About the Fischer story in the 30 May Daily Star.
5. “Attacking Iran, in order to stop its nuclear plans, will be unavoidable”   (8 June 2008)  — War-talk by a former Defense Minster of Israel.
6. Der Spiegel: “Israeli Ministers Mull Plans for Military Strike against Iran”  (17 June 2008) — Rumors in Der Spiegel of a strike by Israel on Iran.
7. More rumors of a strike at Iran by Israel  (1 July 2008)
8. Leaks about a possible strike at Iran (are there any hotter issues today?)  (7 July 2008)
9. The most expensive psy-war campaign – ever!  (13 July 2008)

Here is the full archive of posts about a possible strike at Iran by Israel or the US.