Military strike against Iran necessary, Israeli security expert asserts
Jewish Tribune – Military strike against Iran necessary, Israeli security expert asserts.
| Written by Avraham Zuroff | |
| Tuesday, 29 November 2011
|
|
| RAMAT GAN, Israel – A former Mossad chief said that despite the steep backlash from attacking Iran, the outcome will be less painful than living with an Iranian nuclear weapons threat.
“The backlash from a strike on Iran’s nuclear sites will not be as bad for Israel as will an Iran armed with nuclear weapons,” Maj. Gen. (res.) Danny Yatom remarked at a conference at Bar-Ilan University last week discussing how the Arab Spring affects Israel’s military and political strategy. “I don’t think that those predicting apocalyptic repercussions of a strike on Tehran are correct,” Yatom said. “And even if they are, Israel can’t afford to wonder if Tehran will go crazy and bomb us.” Yatom’s position is diametrically opposed to that of former Mossad head Meir Dagan, who sparked significant controversy earlier this year by stating that an attack on Iran would be a foolish move that would lead to a war with an unknown outcome. Yatom acknowledges that “quite a few civilians would die” if the West or Israel were to attack Iran. Despite the response of a barrage of missiles from Gaza and Lebanon, he predicts that Israel’s response would be “so painful and crushing that rockets will come to an end,” adding that “civilian facilities and infrastructure in Lebanon and Gaza will have to be hit. Innocent civilians could be hurt. But we will have to deliver a crushing blow so that the barrage of rockets against us will not continue.” Yatom warned that the Iranians “have crossed the red line. They have the knowledge to make the bomb. All that is needed now is the decision to do it. “The world has a year in which to halt the Iranian nuclear weapons program, probably less.” Yatom also doubted that sanctions or covert operations could stop the Iranians. “We have only two options: to let Iran get the bomb, or to use military force against their military nuclear program. I think that force will have to be used. But I don’t think Israel should lead. This is, after all, a global problem.” Indeed, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu agrees with Yatom’s assessment about sanctions. In a meeting with Romanian Prime Minister Emil Boc, Netanyahu remarked, “While it is very important that significant economic sanctions have been imposed, it is insufficient. Effective sanctions must continue to be imposed on its petrochemical industries and on the Iranian central bank as well – and soon.” Reacting to US President Barack Obama’s assurance that the US won’t allow Iran to become a military power, Yatom said, “Should the US stand on the sidelines, Israel will be fully entitled to use its natural right to self-defence. To us, the Iranian nuclear weapons program is an existential threat.” Also addressing the conference was Maj. Gen. (res.) Uzi Dayan, former head of IDF military intelligence and national security advisor to former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. He agreed with Yatom that Iran’s nuclear weapons program must be halted. Nevertheless, he felt that sanctions, which embargoed Iranian oil and gas and which outlawed transactions with the Iranian National Bank, could dissuade the Iranians from proceeding. “While not an existential threat, Tehran’s nuclear program is an unacceptable threat,” he said. Meanwhile, Dayan advocates that Israel put on a poker face, saying, “We mustn’t explain whether we’ll use military force. “Should we prepare for a military attack? Yes. Should we immediately implement it? No,” Dayan stated. Relating to the turmoil in the Arab world, Dayan said that the upheavals in Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Syria, Bahrain and elsewhere “prove once again that the Arab-Israeli conflict is not the central problem in this region. “The implications for Israel of this unrest are manifold,” he said. “At a time of such uncertainty, Israel must preserve and secure its strategic assets. “This is not the time for Israel to be taking territorial or other risks, since we don’t know what is ahead. “Israel must maintain defensible borders, with strategic depth, the ability to defend ourselves against attack and – in the Palestinian context – full demilitarization of areas under their control. Israel must guard against the possible emergence of three hostile Palestinian states – in Jordan, the West Bank and Gaza,” he said. |
November 30, 2011 at 11:33 AM
Reblogged this on Vasile Roata.