‘Netanyahu forming war government’ – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Arab newspapers interpret new Netanyahu-Mofaz alliance as preamble for war

Roi Kais

Newspapers across the Arab world could not ignore Israel’s political drama and the declaration of a unity government on Tuesday. Benjamin Netanyahu and Shaul Mofaz were described as conniving war mongers and corrupt politicians as editorials declared war was looming.

“Netanyahu is forming a war government,” al-Quds al-Arabi’s headline cried. “No one knows what goes on through the mind of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on many regional issues these days. One can predict that this man is scheming and planning wars after murdering the peace process with the settlement policy in the occupied Arab territories,” the London-based paper said.

The UAE paper al-Bayan printed an editorial titled “A government challenges peace.” The headline in Saudi Arabia’s al-Madina paper read: “Israel prepares for war.”

Al-Quds al-Arabi predicts war

The paper analyzed Netanyahu as a statesman and ruled he was “concerned about his status in Israeli history and wants to be remembered as the leader who destroyed the Iranian nuclear program and solidified Israel’s nuclear monopoly in the region.”

Lebanon’s popular as-Safir newspaper chose to address the political drama from a different perspective. Titled “Israeli recklessness,” its editorial explained that the “news (of early elections) turned out to be random fraud but it captured the attention of the entire world and became the focus of analyses and estimates that war is looming.”

“The country once described as the only democracy in the Middle East is slowly emerging to be nothing more than a yard-sale, not just because some of its Arab neighbors are trying to establish true democratic models but because its current statesmen are behaving like crime bosses.”

Like Ariel Sharon, Netanyahu has been pushed to the center – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

(This article almost completely mirrors my own feelings about the new coalition; now representing over 78% of the Israeli electorate! – JW )

Finally we have a government representing the Israeli majority, a government that no niche party can extort. Finally we have a government with a clear Zionist majority.

By Ari Shavit

There’s one thing Benjamin Netanyahu doesn’t like being, and that’s a Thanksgiving stuffed turkey. On Sunday night, at the Likud convention, Netanyahu started to feel like a stuffed turkey. The disruption by the right-wing lunatic fringe at the central event of the ruling party made the prime minister realize what he should have understood long ago: Likud has lost its mind.

And since Likud has lost its mind there was a real danger that it would do poorly in an election and he would be unable to put together a strong government afterward. And since Likud has lost its mind the great plan of election-before-Obama and election-before-Iran crumbled. Suddenly Likud right-winger Moshe Feiglin is more dangerous than Obama: He, ironically, could be the one to forestall a confrontation with Iran’s nuclear program.

That is why Netanyahu, on Monday morning, instructed his former bureau chief, Natan Eshel, to close the deal with Lior Horev, an aide to Kadima head Shaul Mofaz. And within 90 minutes, Eshel and Horev were shaking hands. They brought about the biggest national unity government in Israeli history.

To a certain extent, it was a dirty trick. The deal made a mockery of many of the words uttered and promises made in these parts over the past several months. It made a mockery of many an analysis – including ones published by this writer. But this dirty trick is also an encouraging one. It means Israel has a stable government with an enormous nonreligious majority. It means Israel has a government that is explicitly committed to changing the system of government and to drafting ultra-Orthodox men into the army – this year.

Finally we have a government representing the Israeli majority, a government that no niche party can extort. Finally we have a government with a clear Zionist majority.

This week the Feiglinists unwittingly did to Bibi what the rebels did years ago to Arik: They pushed him toward the center. Yesterday, three years late, the Sharonization of Benjamin Netanyahu began.

The Likud-Netanyahu government speaks of four goals: Changing the system of government, passing a new law governing Haredi conscription, creating a new social order and initiating a responsible peace process. But its real goal is Iran. For Netanyahu, bringing Mofaz into his government is like Levi Eshkol’s bringing Menachem Begin and Moshe Dayan into his government in 1967. It creates a firm political foundation on which to conduct the strategic sparring with Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

The national unity government provides domestic and international legitimacy to the anticipated confrontation. Now the Iran decision will not be the decision of the reviled messianic duo from Caesarea and Akirov Towers. Now the Iran decision will be the joint decision of Netanyahu, Defense Minister Ehud Barak, Mofaz and Vice Prime Minister and Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya’alon. Instead of pre-Iran elections, we get pre-Iran unity, which does the same thing. Instead of a two-month window of opportunity (September-October 2012 ), we get a four-month one (July-October 2012 ).

A new and surprising political move brings Netanyahu to exactly the same place he had hoped to reach through an early election. The only difference is that our summer is a goner. The Iranian crisis could erupt any day – or night – between now and November.

The Netanyahu-Mofaz pairing also sowed the seeds of a future political blowup. There’s a good chance that in the next election, in 2013, a new center-right party of Netanyahu, Mofaz and Barak will be there, and that its main challenger will be a bigger Labor Party. Kadima in its current form will fade away, the Haredi and far-right parties will weaken, and Yair Lapid will post numerous status updates on Facebook. But the political establishment is moving to the center, and with any luck it will move closer to a two-state solution.

As always, it all comes down to Netanyahu. If this was just a way to hold on for another year as prime minister, his political career is finished. But if he ushers in genuine change, the world will be in the palm of his hand.

No more excuses. He is beholden to none, at the head of the broadest government ever. Starting today, he has all the responsibility.

	Netanyahu and Mofaz.
	Photo by: Tomer Appelbaum

Satellite imagery shows Iran may… JPost – Iranian Threat – News.

By REUTERS

05/09/2012 15:02

US-based think tank says images taken of Parchin military complex appear to show items being cleansed outside building suspected to contain explosive chamber used to carry out nuclear weapons related experiments.

Photo: REUTERS

VIENNA – A US security institute says commercial satellite imagery shows new activity at an Iranian military site which raises concern that the Islamic state may be “washing” a building the United Nations’ nuclear agency wants to inspect.

The United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) suspects nuclear weapons-related research may have taken place at the Parchin military complex southeast of Tehran.

Iran has dismissed the allegations but has yet to allow the agency to visit the facility, despite repeated requests.

IAEA chief Yukiya Amano said last week that the agency had recently noticed some “activities” there. He gave no details but Western diplomats suspect Iran may be cleaning the site before any inspection. Tehran denies this.

The Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS), a Washington-based think-tank specializing on nuclear proliferation, said it had acquired commercial satellite imagery from April 9 which back up the IAEA’s concern.

“The new activity seen in the satellite image occurred outside a building suspected to contain an explosive chamber used to carry out nuclear weapons related experiments,” it said on its website in a May 8 report including the satellite image.

Iran’s mission to the IAEA was not immediately available for comment. It has previously dismissed allegations aired about Parchin as “childish” and “ridiculous”.

The images showed items lined up outside a building and what appeared to be a stream of water, ISIS said.

“The items visible outside the building could be associated with the removal of equipment from the building or with cleansing it,” it said.

US sees Iranian obstruction

“The stream of water that appears to emanate from the building raises concerns that Iran may have been washing inside the building, or perhaps washing the items outside the building,” ISIS said.

Previous satellite images from recent months did not show any similar activity at the building, indicating it is not a regular occurrence, it added.

The IAEA has said that gaining access to Parchin is a priority when it holds a new round of talks with Iran in Vienna next week after two previous meetings in Tehran failed to make any notable progress.

Western powers suspect Iran is seeking to develop the capability to make nuclear bombs. Iran, one of the world’s largest oil producers, says its program is peaceful.

An IAEA report late last year revealed a trove of intelligence pointing to research activities in Iran of use in developing the means and technologies needed to assemble nuclear weapons, should it decide to do so.

One finding in the report was information that Iran had built a large containment chamber at Parchin in which to conduct high-explosives tests that the IAEA said are “strong indicators of possible weapon development”.

A senior US official said on Tuesday that Iran must cooperate with the IAEA’s investigation and provide access to relevant sites, personnel and documents.

“Iran continues to delay and obstruct that process,” Thomas Countryman, assistant secretary for international security and nonproliferation, told a meeting in Vienna.

via The Commentator – Of masterstrokes and apoplectic strokes.

Netanyahu has every reason to be pleased with himself

Israel’s left had an apoplectic stroke when, on Tuesday morning, it woke up to the news that Shaul Mofaz‘ Kadima faction was joining the coalition to form a national unity government – and that elections were off.

Ha’aretz’s Amir Oren hyperbolically stated that the deal “broke the record for cynical agreements, one which had held since the August 1939 Molotov-Ribberntrop agreement between Russia and Germany.”

Labour leader, Shelly Yachimovich, thundered that ‘no one will forget this trick’ – a clear reference to the worst chapter of recent Israeli political history when, in 1990, a political volte-face punished Shimon Peres for abandoning the unity government of which he was then finance minister. Yair Lapid – the rising political star-in-waiting of Israeli politics labelled the affair, ‘a disgusting alliance’.

No one can blame them for their hysteria – Netanyahu’s surprise move, in a masterstroke, cleared the entire political minefield ahead and will enable him to consolidate his party’s prominence in Israeli politics.

By bringing Mofaz into the fold Netanyahu strengthened the secular flank of his coalition, thereby defusing the time bomb of the looming battle over drafting until-now-exempted Yeshiva students. This leverage works both ways – against Avigdor Lieberman on settlements, against Shas on the draft.

He also neutralised any potential threat to his political strength from the centre – he took the spotlight off Lapid’s party, making sure that, over the next 18 months, this political amateur loses his appeal and the public loses its interest. He smashed any hopes of a left comeback – at least for another year and a half. And by extending a lifeline to Kadima’s sinking ship, he has begun a process of swallowing it back into Likud and improving his own party’s chances to triumph when elections are finally called.

True, anything can happen in 18 months – but as things look now, it can only get worse for Netanyahu’s adversaries.

This, and not foreign policy, is the driving motive for the prime minister’s brilliant outmanoeuvring of his adversaries. Last week, many left-wing pundits pontificated that Netanyahu sought early elections to exploit the run-up to the November U.S. presidential elections and launch a pre-emptive military strike against Iran between September 4 and November 6, while U.S. President Obama would be least inclined to stand in the way.

Now, while erstwhile proponents of a new October Surprise theory eat humble pie (a rare dish on the left), others are arguing that, by bringing Kadima into the coalition, Netanyahu is now ready to attack.

No doubt, Netanyahu’s new partnership with Kadima will help quell the on-going security pensioners’ revolt first launched by former Mossad chief, Meir Dagan. A Unity Government also deflates many international arguments against the hawkishness of Israel’s government and discourages any future temptations by the current U.S. Administration to prop up Kadima as a ‘Netanyahu antidote’.

The bottom line though, as hard as it may sound to those always inclined to see sinister ploys behind political manoeuvres, is that the choice of an election date never had anything to do with the timing of an attack against Iran and that remains the case.

Netanyahu has strengthened his hand significantly – whether he attacks Iran at all depends on intelligence estimates, the pace of diplomacy and Iran’s nuclear progress. But if he decides to attack, this new political constellation will enable his government to absorb the fallout much more effectively.

Emanuele Ottolenghi is a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies in Washington and the author of The Pasdaran: Inside Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards’ Corps (FDD Press: September 2011)

In 1967, a New Unity Government Foretold Israel’s Preemptive Attack. Will It Again? – Tablet Magazine.

Israel’s new coalition echoes the unity government that came together on the eve of the Six Day War

One thing’s certain: Tuesday’s sudden and dramatic expansion of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition government—he now has the support of 94 Knesset members in the 120-seat house—considerably strengthens Netanyahu’s mandate to take what commentators insist on calling “historic steps.” But it is unclear whether the cooption of Shaul Mofaz and his Kadima faction makes an Israeli preemptive strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities more likely or more remote.

We’ve been here before. Likud’s political coup carries echoes of another fateful moment: the establishment of a national unity government on June 1, 1967, the eve of the Six Day War, when Israel felt threatened by a burgeoning, militant Arab coalition headed by Egypt’s President Gamal Abdel Nasser. Back then, a left-wing government, led by Labor Prime Minister Levi Eshkol, was joined under popular pressure by right-wing parties (Menachem Begin’s Herut and Moshe Dayan’s Rafi) to present a united front mere days before Israel, on June 5, launched its devastating preemptive strike against Egypt.

Eshkol and Dayan could not have been more different. The prime minister was soft-spoken, with a wry sense of humor and European manners. Dayan, on the other hand, was brash, bold, and outspoken. One could only imagine how Eshkol felt when he had to abandon the ministry of defense—following Ben-Gurion’s precedent, the prime minister also claimed for himself what was clearly the Cabinet’s most important portfolio—forced by intense public pressure to hand it over to his polar opposite. But Eshkol made the difficult call for the sake of national security.

Today Israel faces the threat of a nuclear Iran—and the prospect of attacking Iranian nuclear facilities without a green light from Washington. But Mofaz is no Dayan.

The Iranian-born politician is known as “Mr. Zigzag”—the Israeli equivalent of flip-flopper. A former IDF paratroop commander and chief of general staff, back in the early 2000s Mofaz was a Likud stalwart (and defense minister). But he bolted the party, which he had called his “home,” in 2005 for Kadima when he realized he wouldn’t become the head of Likud. Six weeks ago, he was elected by Kadima’s rank and file as the new leader of the party, replacing Tzipi Livni, who had inherited Kadima leadership with the fall of then-Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in 2009.

Just days ago, Mofaz vowed not to join Netanyahu’s “crumbling” government and had publicly called the prime minister “a liar” in whom he had no trust. During the past months, he has been a public and staunch opponent of bombing Iran anytime soon, arguing that the nuclear problem must be resolved by the international community through sanctions and diplomacy. In any case, he argued, there was still substantial time before the military option had to be considered.

And yet now, Mofaz will join Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak in a three-man kitchen Cabinet or the fuller eight-man “Inner Cabinet,” where the call of whether or not to launch a military strike against Iran will be decided. Both Netanyahu and Barak are on record as pessimists when it comes to the possibility that sanctions or diplomacy will stop Tehran’s march toward nuclear weapons. Both have made it clear that Israel will have to rely on its armed forces to resolve the problem, whether or not Washington gives Jerusalem a green light.

Thinking in Jerusalem is currently focused on the period between July, when a further round of sanctions against Iran will kick in, and the American presidential elections in November. Netanyahu and Barak believe that President Obama will find it very difficult to punish Israel for attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities just before the elections, since Obama will need the help of Jewish donors and voters, and other supporters of Israel, to win. On the other hand, an Israeli strike after the November elections will incur Obama’s wrath—and, some fear, could translate into sanctions against Israel.

No one knows whether Netanyahu elicited from Mofaz a secret promise to support, or at least a vow not to block, a strike against Iran as the price of his entry into the government, where he will serve as a minister without portfolio. But clearly Netanyahu—recently under attack from a number of senior defense figures, including Yuval Diskin ^[1], the former head of Shin Bet and ex-Mossad head Meir Dagan, both of whom oppose attacking Iran at present; and, more mutedly, by current IDF chief of general staff Benny Gantz ^[2], who said he doesn’t believe Iran will “go the extra mile” and build a bomb—was clearly happy to have Mofaz on board. With the backing of 94 MKs, Netanyahu will present a far more solid antagonist for Obama or any other external or internal doubting Thomases in the coming months.

Mofaz was eager to join the government. The day before striking the deal, the Cabinet had voted for early general elections, to be held on Sept. 4. Opinion polls had predicted that Netanyahu would triumph and emerge as the only politician able to form a new government. Meanwhile, Kadima was predicted to win fewer than 10 seats, which would have relegated Mofaz to political oblivion. (Currently, Kadima has 28 seats, won by Livni in the 2009 elections.) The opinion polls predicted that the lost Kadima seats would have been divided between Labor, with its current leader Shelly Yachimovich replacing Mofaz as leader of the opposition, and Yair Lapid, a popular journalist and son of former center-right politician Tommy Lapid. At least in the short term, Lapid and Yachimovich are the losers in the Netanyahu-Mofaz coup.

Mofaz and Netanyahu—who was not eager to hold general elections because a recent Supreme Court ruling demanded that the government remove an illegal West Bank settlement by July, which would have embroiled the prime minister in bitter controversy with his right-wing allies—have clearly come out the winners. But the Israeli public, too, may well have gained a genuinely unified government, which is why instant opinion polls suggested that the bulk of Israelis supports the Kadima-Likud alliance.

The public opposed early elections as a waste of money that would have delivered no real change. According to the official coalition deal signed between Mofaz and Netanyahu, the new government will promote legislation that will force the ultra-Orthodox community to, at long last, send its sons to do military or other national service and join the labor market (until now, they have basically lived off state subsidies, paid for by the taxes of the largely secular middle and working classes). Getting the ultra-Orthodox to serve in the army and work has been a basic demand of most Israelis, left and right, for decades.

Netanyahu and Mofaz have also agreed to radically change the Israeli political system, which is based on proportional representation. The system has tended to give small, mainly religious parties too much power and the ability to extort political concessions and financial subsidies from the coalitions in which they almost inevitably participate. (Yet most Israeli political commentators have suggested that Netanyahu will balk at implementing such reform, fearing that next time around, the religious parties will take revenge by preferring Labor or a centrist party to the Likud as their potential coalition partners.)

Lastly, Mofaz and Netanyahu agreed to make concessions to last year’s street protesters, who demanded increased government subsidies in education, housing, and other services. Whether the new coalition will indeed deliver is yet to be seen.

Most Israelis are now thinking about their summer vacations in Europe or their unpaid bills (or both). Not Netanyahu. Last week, Netanyahu buried his 102-year-old father, Benzion Netanyahu, a historian of the Spanish Inquisition and, in the 1930s, a vociferous publicist and prophet warning against the impending Holocaust. In interviews in recent years, the elder Netanyahu loudly decried the Iranian nuclear project as a threat to Israel’s very existence. His son, who has in the past three years repeatedly compared Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Hitler, clearly sees neutralizing the Iranian threat as his historic duty and future legacy. He may well have given his father his word on this.

In 1967, the Eshkol-Dayan coalition was a prelude to war. Was adding Mofaz—and 27 other Kadima members of Knesset—part of Netanyahu’s strategy to carry out a risky mission against a similarly brutal enemy? Stay tuned

Obama helped change global opinion on Iran: Biden.

(Truly laughable… Israel had nothing to do with it.  –  JW  )

Wednesday, 09 May 2012

“We were neither fully respected by our friends nor feared by our opponents.” said, Vice President Joe Biden. (Photo illustration by Amarjit Sidhu)

By AFP 

Strenger than Fiction-Israel News – Haaretz Israeli News source..

(While not about the Iran conflict, Strenger’s analysis of the potential solution to the Palestinian conflict posed by the new coalition in Israel is very much worth reading. – JW )

Mofaz’s two-phased plan for peace with the Palestinians could force both Netanyahu and Abbas to make tough, fateful decisions.

By Carlo Strenger

Yesterday’s political bombshell, for obvious reasons, has left both citizens and commentators dumbfounded. It has been pointed out thatNetanyahu is now the undisputed king of Israeli politics: basically no single coalition party has any real power over him; each and every one of them now knows that Netanyahu can live without them.

Of course Netanyahu and Mofaz explained why they went for this move only because of the greater good, and of course most Israelis don’t believe them, because the political interests are too clear. After all this is said, and the winners and losers of this development have been named, we should have a dry look at Israel’s new situation: what can we expect, and what are the major decision points of Netanyahu’s new coalition?

	Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu talks with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas on September 2, 2010.
	Photo by: AP

Both Israel’s domestic and the international press focus on Iran. Israeli commentators tend to emphasize that the wall-to-wall coalition provides Netanyahu with more bargaining power, whereas the international press hopes that Mofaz brings a more cautious position on military intervention into the government.

To my mind the most interesting factor is one that has been mentioned only rarely: the new coalition agreement’s commitment to resuming negotiations with the Palestinians. As we know from formerShin Bet Chief Yuval Diskin (and many of us thought all along), Netanyahu rather than Abbas refused to negotiate. So far he had little room to do so, as he was at the mercy of his right-wing coalition partners – and he always indicated that this was the reason he made sure nothing happened.

I have never thought that this was the only reason for Netanyahu’s stalling any movement on the Palestinian front: he has never believed that it is in Israel’s interest to allow a viable Palestinian state to emerge. Whatever the truth may be, the excuse that his coalition prevents him from moving ahead on the Palestine front is no longer valid: with Kadima’s 28 MKs in his coalition, Netanyahu no longer depends on either Shas or Lieberman’s Yisrael Beitenu.

Netanyahu’s new coalition partner Mofaz, for quite some time, has advocated a two-phased peace plan. He proposes to immediately establish a Palestinian state on 60 percent of the West Bank, thus liberating more than 99 percent of Palestinians from Israeli rule. This would create favorable conditions for final status negotiations.

Mofaz’s plan would require dismantling a number of settlement outposts placed in the 60 percent to be ruled by Palestinians. Implementing the Mofaz plan means to put an end to the dream of the greater land of Israel; it would make a Palestinian state a fact, and the question would only be, how the final borders will look.

Hence, in the next eighteen months, Netanyahu’s moment of truth will come: So far Netanyahu’s commitment to the two-state solution in his 2009 Bar-Ilan speech has been nothing but lip-service. He has consistently avoided confrontation with the settlers and with the large faction in his party that continues to believe in the greater land of Israel.

If Mofaz puts his plan on the new government’s table, Netanyahu will either have to make a decisive step towards ending Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and the century old conflict with the Palestinians, or go down in history as the man who destroyed any option for doing so.

A lot of ink has been spilled on the question whether his father’s death will give Netanyahu more freedom to act creatively. I am afraid that this is not the only factor: Netanyahu has a characterological distaste for grand moves. As tactician supreme, he feels safe, and his latest maneuver’s success might strengthen his resolve to continue playing for time without making real decisions. His distaste for risk-taking, no less than his father’s Manichean worldview, will determine the road he will take.

If Netanyahu chooses to move ahead with something like the Mofaz plan, Mahmoud Abbas’ moment of truth for will come, because it will not be easy for him to take this road. Palestinians are afraid that if in any multi-phased process, the intermediary stage of a Palestinian state on 60 percent of the West Bank might turn into the final status. Given that the occupation has been in place for forty five years, these suspicions are more than understandable. As a result, Abbas might opt to refuse cooperation on the basis of the Mofaz plan, and demand that the final status agreement needs to be reached first.

This, I believe, would be a historical mistake. Abbas must realize that Israelis need at least a decade of peace on the Palestinian front to accept the idea that Palestine will reach the 1967 borders, and put Israel’s population centers within striking distance of Katyusha rockets. Mofaz’s plan could provide the physical and political conditions for such a decade of peace; it would make Palestinian lives immeasurably better, while safeguarding Israel’s security.

Establishing a Palestinian state with temporary borders would decisively undermine rejectionists on both sides: it would make clear to Israel’s ideological right that its dream has come to an end. If indeed a new reality on the ground would give Palestinians more freedom and dignity, this would strengthen Abbas: it would show Palestinians that there is a political horizon, and that they have only to loose from endorsing Hamas rejectionist line. This, in turn, would force Hamas within a few years to change its political program, and to accept Israel’s existence.

Abbas should therefore engage with the Mofaz plan if it is put on the table. I am completely aware that this will be very difficult for him: he will be accused by his foes to sell out his people’s interest; he will be called a collaborator with the enemy. He will have to use all his political acumen and the leadership status he achieved during the last years to convince his people that this is the only way of establishing a Palestinian state on the ground, and that, in the long run, Palestinians will only gain from this.

UK seeks delay to EU\’s Iran ship… JPost – Iranian Threat – News.

Britain tries persuade EU to postpone insurance ban on Iranian oil tankers for 6 months, arguing could cause oil prices spike.

Photo: Tim Chong/Reuters

Reversing Course, Journalist Says Israel Attack Unikely This Year | The Jewish Week.

An Israeli military strike “is not imminent,” and highly unlikely to take place in the next six months, according to Ronen Bergman, the high-profile Israeli journalist whose New York Times Magazine cover story, “Will Israel Attack Iran?” (Jan. 25), concluded otherwise.

Bergman, the polished, self-assured senior political and military analyst for Yediot Achronot, told The Jewish Week that “nothing will happen before the U.S. elections,” and only after that if Iran presents an immediate and serious threat to Israel.

He added with certainty that “the U.S. will not lead” an attack on Iran.

In an interview May 1 prior to his appearance with Rabbi Yitz Greenberg, the founder of Clal: National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership, at the Riverdale Y, Bergman said Israelis are deeply worried about Iran making good on threats to wipe Israel off the map, and people stop him on the street to ask “when will it take place, not ‘if’,” he said.

Bergman’s thorough report in The New York Times Magazine concluded, “after speaking with many senior Israeli leaders and chiefs of the military and the intelligence, I have come to believe that Israel will indeed strike Iran in 2012,” based on the conviction that the U.S. will not intervene and that Israelis feel only they “can ultimately defend themselves.”

In the interview last week, though, he implied that his Times report may have had an impact on the course of world events since it “created some commotion” among American officials and helped add pressure on the U.S. and Europe to strengthen sanctions on Tehran.

“Many things happened in the last three months” to ease the fear of a looming Israel attack on Iran’s nuclear program, Bergman said, including the Obama-Netanyahu White House meeting in March, which he said left administration officials feeling “a bit more relaxed” that the two leaders held similar positions regarding Iran. Another key factor is the upcoming presidential election in November, he added. (The interview took place before this week’s Likud-Kadima deal, which also appears Iran-related, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said to be seeking to solidify his political position prior to the American elections.)

Bergman, a prominent print journalist who also has a television show in Israel, said that as recently as two weeks ago a senior Israeli official told him that “nothing has changed” in terms of the thought process of government leaders, who believe that Israel’s decision regarding a military strike will be made strictly based on its assessment of Iran’s actions.

Regarding the tougher economic sanctions in place, Bergman said that two years ago Israeli officials would not have believed them possible and “would have been cheering” over what has been accomplished. “But is it too late” to stop Iran’s push for nuclear arms, he wondered, pointing out that Iran will not meet any of the “four or five preconditions” Israel has set regarding the upcoming negotiations between Iran and the U.S. and its Western allies.

The discussions between U.S. and Israeli officials on the Iran issue are “at the highest level ever,” Bergman said, but the two sides still appear to differ on the timing of a military strike. The U.S. speaks of preventing an attack, while Israel focuses on striking before a bomb is actually prepared.

He noted that both the U.S. and Israel employ vague language to hide their differences.

Bergman says it is “wrong” for Netanyahu to compare the Holocaust to Iran’s threat to Israel, because the Jewish state is strong militarily and “can defend itself.” A grandson of Holocaust survivors, Bergman believes the Shoah’s “memory should remain unique,” and that all Israelis, not only survivors, are “profoundly impacted” by the tragedy.

In the program that evening moderated by Yeshiva University President Richard Joel, launching The Rose Dialogue Series at the Riverdale Y, Rabbi Greenberg said “the Holocaust has to be the guiding light” to Israel’s response to the threats from Iran, and one lesson is that “you take people seriously when they threaten you.”

No Israeli prime minister who feels responsible for the Jewish people could trust its fate to another country, he asserted, adding that it is the responsibility of American Jews to prod Washington in assuring Israel’s security, based on American interests as well as the moral argument of preventing another Holocaust.

Bergman told the audience of several hundred that Israel has numerous allies in the region opposed to Iran obtaining nuclear arms. A number of Arab states, he said, have a “deep fear and hatred of Iran.”

In his initial remarks Bergman focused on the efforts of the Mossad, Israel’s national intelligence agency. (He is writing a book on the history of the agency and says he has interviewed 650 people as part of his research.)

Thanks to its efforts, he said, Israeli intelligence “has regained the upper hand” in the last several years in its clandestine war with Iran and terror groups it sponsors like Hamas and Hezbollah.

Bergman credited Israel’s leaders for a willingness to authorize the intelligence community to undertake “full-risk operations that would put James Bond to shame.”

Moving forward on Iran: Kadima joins Bibi | Jerusalem Post – Blogs.

Ed Kotch