Israel feels US will not attack Iran
YAAKOV KATZ, HERB KEINON and NATHAN GUTTMAN, THE JERUSALEM POST Aug.
24, 2006
There is growing consensus within the defense establishment that the
United States will not attack Iran, and that Israel might be forced to
act independently to stop the Islamic republic from obtaining nuclear
weapons, a high-ranking defense official told The Jerusalem Post on
Thursday.
According to sources within the defense establishment, the Bush
administration does not have political support for launching a strike
against Iran's nuclear sites. "America is stuck in Iraq and cannot go
after Iran militarily right now," the official said.
The defense official blasted the US for "not doing enough" to stop
Teheran's race to the bomb. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, he
said, was leading the State Department in the direction of "appeasement."
"The only way, besides military action, to stop Iran is through tough
economic sanctions," the official said. "But the only way to do that is
for the US to overcome Russian opposition in the Security Council and to
pass a resolution calling for sanctions against Iran."
Israel, meanwhile, was carefully watching international reaction to
Iran's failure earlier this week to react positively to the incentives
offered to discontinue uranium enrichment. In recent days, sources in
Jerusalem have said Israel "could not abide" a nuclear Iran and might
have to act to disrupt Teheran's nuclear program if the international
community did not act.
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, on a visit to Nahariya, said Israel "must be
prepared for every scenario." It was not clear whether the reference was
to another round of fighting with Hizbullah or to some future
confrontation with Iran.
There is no consensus among policymakers on whether the US will act
militarily against Teheran, with some ruling out the possibility, and
others saying that US President George W. Bush doesn't want to leave the
world stage in 2009 with the legacy of a nuclear Iran.
According to sources in Jerusalem, among the key lessons the country
needs to learn from the war against Hizbullah was how to better prepare
the home front to deal with rocket attacks.
One senior source, asked whether he thought the IDF could take on Iran
alone, said it was not necessarily a matter of choice. A nuclear Iran
represented an existential threat, he warned, and Israel might have no
choice but to prepare for long-range missile attacks from Iran.
Another official warned of the consequences of a nuclear Iran even if
Israel was not bombed. "We would have our hands tied," the official
said. "They would constantly be threatening us with their nuclear
weapons and we would not be able to initiate military operations against
Hamas in Gaza or Hizbullah in Lebanon."
Military analysts say the US, whose military is finding it more and more
difficult to assemble the forces needed in Iraq, would prefer to avoid a
military confrontation with Iran. At the same time, a new report
suggests that the US lacks sufficient intelligence on Iran's intentions
and nuclear abilities.
This week, the US decided to call 2,500 Marines back to active service,
to fill the troop shortfall in Iraq. "It is no secret that we are very
busy," said US Gen. Michael Barbero, referring to the move.
The US has not formally ruled out military action against Iran if
negotiations fail to put an end to Teheran's nuclear program, but senior
administration officials have been stressing for months the need to
focus on diplomacy and the US is putting all its effort into building an
international coalition that would act diplomatically against Iran.
A report compiled by the US House of Representatives' Intelligence
Committee and made public Wednesday stresses that if Iran is allowed to
arm itself with nuclear weapons, Israel might decide to take on Iran
militarily. "A nuclear armed Iran would likely exacerbate regional
tensions. Israel would find it hard to live with a nuclear armed Iran
and could take military action against Iranian nuclear facilities," the
report states.
It also says that "a deliberate or miscalculated attack by one state on
the other could result in retaliation, regional unrest and an increase
in terrorist attacks."
The report pointed to "significant gaps" in the information the US has
on Iran and its nuclear ambitions and called on the American
intelligence community to improve the quality of the information about
Iran it provides to policy makers.
"The United States lacks critical information needed for analysts to
make many of their judgments with confidence about Iran and there are
many significant information gaps," the report reads. It pointed to
weapons of mass destruction and Iran's support for terrorism as issues
on which the US should have better intelligence.
"American intelligence agencies do not know nearly enough about Iran's
nuclear weapons program," the report concluded. It calls on US
intelligence agencies to acquire more information from sources in Iran
and to recruit more Farsi speakers to try and decipher Iran's intentions
and capabilities.
The scathing report draws conclusions similar to those US committees
have reached regarding the Iraq war - a lack of reliable intelligence
and over-reliance on electronic information gathering instead of human
intelligence.
Such criticism, especially in light of America's intelligence failures
in Iraq, may further dissuade US policymakers from taking military
action against Iran if the diplomatic track proves unfruitful.
.
|
