For all practical purposes, the state of Israel and the Islamic
Republic of Iran are already at war. Consider Israeli Defense Minister
Ehud Barak’s comment after the mysterious explosion at a Revolutionary
Guard missile base near Tehran on Saturday: “There should be many more,”
he said in an interview with Israeli Defense Force Radio. In this, he
once again confirmed what has become an open secret within Israel’s
defense establishment: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former
special-forces commander, Barak, have decided that Israel must attack
Iran.
When that attack happens, most likely in the early spring, Israel’s
second Iranian war will officially begin. The first has been going on
through much of the last decade in the battles Israel has been fighting
with Iran’s local proxies—Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas and Islamic Jihad
in the Gaza Strip—and in the secret war being waged against Iran’s
nuclear program. The front lines of this war extend thousands of miles,
from Bandar-Abbas, an Iranian port on the Persian Gulf, to the eastern
Mediterranean and in the Arabian Peninsula, northeast Africa, and north
into Turkey. This secret war involves the interdiction of Iranian arms
bound for Hezbollah and Hamas and of vital components bound for Iran’s
nuclear facilities. Few of these operations, such as the commandeering
of cargo ships carrying missiles, are ever revealed as official Israeli
actions.
When senior Revolutionary Guards officers, Iranian nuclear
scientists, or key Hamas and Hezbollah operatives die or disappear under
mysterious circumstances, Israel never takes credit, but it also never
seems to dissuade the media from pushing the Israel-did-it angle. Same
goes for Stuxnet, the computer worm that plagued Iran’s nuclear
facilities at Natanz and Bushehr, which contained Jewish history clues
in its code and featured briefly in a farewell video shown last year at
an event honoring departing Israeli Army Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi
Ashkenazi. (Stuxnet is widely believed to be the work of Israel, and the
Jewish state encourages that view without actually confirming it.)
Saturday’s missile-base explosion, which killed Gen. Hassan Tehrani
Moghaddam, the founder of Iran’s missile program, was only the latest
act in this not-so-secret secret war.
The great champion of clandestine war against Iran was former Mossad
chief Meir Dagan. During his time at the helm of Israel’s spy agency,
from 2002 until early this year, Dagan argued that the only way to
counter Iran’s nuclear threat is through secret warfare, close
coordination with the Western powers, and quiet alliances with Arab
regimes threatened by Iran, such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab
Emirates. Dagan is a believer in the Ariel Sharon view of things—namely,
that the Iranian nuclear program is a problem for the whole world, not
just the Jewish state, and therefore Israel should do everything to
avoid seeming like it is facing Iran on its own. In the meantime,
clandestine warfare can slow Iran’s nuclear progress.
Netanyahu’s decision to replace Dagan—coupled with Barak’s insistence
on removing popular army chief Ashkenazi in February—was seen by many
as an intentional strategy to remove opponents of a military strike on
Iran from positions of influence. In his last week as spy chief, Dagan
infuriated Netanyahu and Barak by telling a group of journalists that
Iran would not achieve military nuclear capability until 2015—a clear
warning against a military strike in the near future, which he has since
repeated emphatically in various forums.
The changes at the top of Israel’s security establishment, along with
reports on intensive preparations for a strike, prompted U.S. Defense
Secretary Leon Panetta to visit Israel in early October. Panetta
publicly stressed during his visit that the United States is “very
concerned” about the Iranian threat but emphasized that countering that
threat “depends on the countries working together.” Panetta demanded
that Jerusalem warn Washington in advance of an attack on Iran, but he
did not receive clear assurances it would, according to American
diplomatic sources.
Meantime, Israeli preparations continue. In late October, six Israeli
Air Force squadrons sent aircraft 1,500 miles across the Mediterranean
for a joint exercise over Sardinia with the Italian and German air
forces. This is just one of over a dozen such exercises that have taken
place in the last three years, in which Israeli pilots have trained in
flying long distances over unknown terrain and facing fighter pilots and
anti-aircraft batteries of foreign forces. Fighter pilots aren’t the
only component in these maneuvers: Aerial refueling planes and
search-and-rescue helicopter teams also take part. The object of these
exercises is clear: to prepare an air force that primarily operates in
the nearby theaters of Gaza and Lebanon to undertake long-range
missions.
The lieutenant colonel who commanded the most recent exercise said
cryptically after returning to Israel that “there was no mention of the
third circle in the exercise, but we are training over distances and
preparing ourselves for all terrains so you could say that it
contributes to our long-range preparedness.” The “third circle” is the
current air-force euphemism for Iran. (The first circle is the West
Bank, Gaza, and Israel’s immediate borders; the second circle is
countries around Israel.)
***
Ever since Saddam Hussein launched 39 Iraqi Scud missiles against
Israel during the Gulf War in 1991, the Israeli Air Force has been
preparing for one primary mission, a long-range attack against weapons
of mass destruction aimed at the Jewish state. The lion’s share of
Israel’s defense budget has been devoted to this. Five new squadrons of
the most advanced versions of the F-15 and F-16, specifically modified
for the long-range strike roles, have been acquired since 1998. And the
numbers of spy satellites, aerial tankers, unmanned reconnaissance
drones, and search-and-rescue helicopters have all tripled in the past
two decades.
“Ninety-percent of our equipment and training is for a much larger
war. The fighter jets weren’t built for attacking Gaza or even Lebanon;
the real war is where we will have to prove ourselves,” one squadron
commander recently admitted to me. The air force is eager to do just
that. As one brigadier general told me last year, “Come the hour, I will
have pilots breaking down my office door demanding to go on the
mission.” And come that hour, when at least some of Israel’s defense
chiefs are expected to counsel against a strike, it will be the Air
Force commander, Maj. Gen. Ido Nehushtan, the son of members of the
Irgun, who will give Netanyahu the necessary backing, promising the
decision-makers that an air-strike on Iran will succeed.
Yet even the most self-confident fighter jockeys cannot ignore the scores of Israeli and American analysts claiming that Israel lacks sufficient planes and its bases are too far away to totally eliminate
Iran’s nuclear program. “We have no illusions,” one air force general
told me. “We will attack Iran successfully but that won’t be the end of
it. Two, or three, or five years later, we will have to go back there
again.”
***
The decision to go to war with Iran is not a political one. It is one
of the few issues that transcends Israel’s left-right divide. Benny
Begin and Moshe Yaalon, two of the most hardline right-wing ministers in
the “Octet Forum,” the Israeli Cabinet’s main decision-making body, are
currently opposed to an attack because they believe a military strike
will cause a massive backlash from Iran and its proxies and should only
be a very last resort. The motives of Netanyahu and Barak are more
personal and historical than ideological. The prime minister, the son of
a historian, views the Iranian issue through the prism of Jewish
survival. In his view, safeguarding Israel against a nuclear threat is
the generation’s duty, which has fallen to him. As leader of the
opposition, from 2006 to 2009, Netanyahu constantly compared Iran to
Germany circa 1938 and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Hitler.
As prime minister, he has refrained from this terminology but his
perspective remains unchanged.
Barak also sees the challenge in generational terms. Two months shy
of 70, he looks around and sees no one who, in his opinion, can be
entrusted with Israel’s security. Israel’s great founders are gone, save
for President Shimon Peres, whom Barak never rated highly (and who is
against an attack on Iran). Barak is now the nation’s wise old man, the
only responsible grown-up left standing. But his arrogant manner has
alienated much of the public and the politicians. Divorced from the
Labor party of which he was never an integral part, he leads a splinter
faction that does not guarantee him re-election to the Knesset.
Convinced that no one else can lead the nation in this challenge, in
what could be his last year in government, he won’t let go without
ensuring Israel’s security for another generation.
If there are any politics involved in the final decision to attack
Iran, they won’t be Israeli. President Barack Obama is the one man who
can prevent Israel from going to war. He will have two ways of doing
this, if he so chooses. Come this spring, when weather conditions over
Iran ensure better bombing results, if the polls indicate him winning a
second term, he may have sufficient political and diplomatic clout to
order Israel to desist. But in a close presidential race, with a GOP
contender accusing him of going soft on Iran, Obama’s only way to block
an Israeli attack on Iran would be sending the U.S. Air Force to do the
job instead.

No comments:
Post a Comment