WarSclerotic

Professor Edward Luttwak is a military historian and strategist. Born in Romania, this 71-year-old Jewish academic is world-renowned. Known for his sharp tongue, he pulls no punches in discussing any individual or country. His impressive career includes a stint as a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C. He has also served as an adviser to the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the National Security Council, the State Department, the Navy, the Air Force, the Army, allied governments, and international corporations and financial institutions.

Just prior to his arrival in Israel to take part in the Presidential Conference in Jerusalem, Professor Luttwak spent some time sharing his blunt opinions with Israel Hayom via telephone. The first topic of discussion was democracy in the Middle East.

“When the historians of the future begin analyzing what happened in the world after the attacks on the Twin Towers, they will have to reach the conclusion that the Muslims attacked America on September 11, 2001, and the American response was to create a schism in the Arab world by handing Baghdad over to the Shiites, a move that set off a 100-years war between them and the Sunnis,” he says.

“George W. Bush will be remembered as a statesman and strategist in the same breath as Bismarck because nobody will really believe that the Americans invaded Iraq in 2003 to bring them democracy. Nobody will believe that all of the senior members of the Bush administration, including Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, and Richard Perle, were certain that if they removed Saddam Hussein from power, Iraq would become democratic.”

“Perle said that ‘the Iraqis are very talented,’ and that they were only waiting for someone to remove Saddam. That was the explanation! Elections could be held very quickly, but in order to become a democracy, it will take Iraq another 200 years.”

Israel Hayom: If those historians don’t believe what really happened, what will they say?

Professor Edward Luttwak: “They will look for a more rational explanation. Nobody is willing to accept irrationality, not to mention the stupidity of government decisions. When the British risked their entire fleet in the Falkland Islands intervention, everyone said that the reason they embarked on conflict with Argentina was [that] there was oil on those islands. Nobody can accept the fact that this was done for illogical reasons. That’s rationalization.”

Israel Hayom: What do you think is the alternative to dictatorships in the Middle East?

Professor Edward Luttwak: “The truth is that the alternative to dictatorships, which were acceptable to the Americans in the past — in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Egypt — is not democracy, but anarchy. The previous policy, which agreed with the fact that there was no democracy in the Middle East, was altered. Just like the Byzantines before them, those who set out to conquer Iraq did not read one book about it before they attacked the Middle East with democracy.”

Israel Hayom: And the results could be seen on the ground?

Professor Edward Luttwak: “Certainly. Look at the results of the Arab Spring. In Tunisia, there’s a weak government. In Libya, there’s tribalism. In Egypt, there’s no governance. Given the socio-economic condition of these countries, even if we take out the Islamic element from the equation, the alternative to dictatorship is anarchy.”

Paralysis in Syria and Turkey

Luttwak prefers to speak specifically about a country that is currently in the stages of self-destruction. That country is Syria, which is knee-deep in blood spilt as a result of the rebellion against the regime of Bashar Assad. The professor analyzes the situation from our perspective.

“Israel needs to do nothing in Syria, and it needs to say nothing about the topic . A policy of doing nothing is usually a successful policy. Assad maintained quiet on the Golan while ratcheting up the tension in Lebanon, so he was bad for Israel’s day-to-day security, but he was good in terms of allowing Israel to build up the IDF’s strength because he didn’t launch all-out, comprehensive war. Assad is a man with one bullet in the chamber, and he won’t shoot it because he has no alternatives.”

Israel Hayom: What does the future look like in Syria?

Professor Edward Luttwak: “The unlikeliest scenario is the return of a stable government in Syria. Most likely, such a government won’t return quickly, so it would be best to try to predict what will happen in a post-Assad Syria. It is reasonable to think there will be a split, but I don’t think it will happen quietly. Instead, it will take place in stages. I assume that a ‘mini-Kurdistan’ will be formed, and that an Alawite state will be created in the Latakia district close to the border with Turkey, and that country will link up with Alawites in Turkey. The Sunni areas of Syria will link up with the Sunni enclaves of Iraq. The reason for this is that the contiguity that will be created by the Iraqi Shiites with Iran will require the Sunnis to link up with the Sunnis in Turkey, and that is not a good development from Israel’s standpoint.”

Israel Hayom: The critical issue for Israel is it fits in with regard to the conflict between Sunnis and Shiites?

Professor Edward Luttwak: “Today, Israel is acting as if it were the ally of the Sunnis, even though it is not declaring it publicly. It has good reasons for doing this. It has a peace agreement with Egypt and Jordan. In the long term, however, it is likely to find itself as the ally of the Shiites, part of an alliance of regional minorities. It’s worth examining this closer.”

Israel Hayom: What other changes are expected in the Middle East?

Professor Edward Luttwak: “I think the Middle East is ripe for a change in borders, something that hasn’t happened since 1945. Sudan, which was split into north and south, is the first example of this change of boundaries. This was accepted by the Arab world, so I assume that it will happen again.”

Luttwak also has a strong – perhaps unequivocal – opinion about the country bordering Syria, Turkey.

Professor Edward Luttwak: “Until recently, Turkey was looked upon as an important power, or at the very least a regional power,” he says. “The foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, said that Turkey was almost an empire, the successor to the Ottoman Empire. In the last year, however, we discovered something surprising. This isn’t a superpower. It isn’t even a small power. It’s a fantasy.”

Israel Hayom: How would you characterize Turkey?

Professor Edward Luttwak: “It is a paralyzed country. When the Syrians downed a Turkish Phantom jet, there was no response. When the villages along the border with Syria absorb fire, there was no response from the Turkish side. They’re not even capable of effectively running the Sunni refugee camps. They are not a power. Under the current regime, they are a total zero. If they were a real force, the civil war in Syria would’ve been over by now. I believe that they have greater influence in Syria, but only slightly less than Congo’s influence there.”

Israel Hayom: How did Turkey get to such a situation?

Professor Edward Luttwak: “The situation is what it is due to foreign and domestic reasons. They are devoid of any ability to make an impact with their foreign policy. They have managed to get into conflicts with the Iranians, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Greece, and, of course, Israel. From a domestic standpoint, they stupidly declared war on the army, so essentially they are paralyzed and incapable of doing anything.

“The sizable Alawite minority — who are in fact Nuseiris that were never considered Muslims and who are looked at by Sunnis and Shiites as worse than infidels, the Jews and the Christians — compel Turkey to oppose any operation against Syria. In short, this is a balloon filled with hot air. By the way, the Americans know that the Turks are not delivering the goods, even though they don’t admit this. They see that the Turks are incapable of taking advantage of the billions that the Qataris and the Saudis are pouring in over there.”

Iran’s clumsy nuclear program

Despite its geographic proximity to Syria and the great interest generated by events in Turkey, there is one country that still poses the greatest threat to Israel, and thus preoccupies most of the security establishment’s attention: Iran. Or, to be more precise, a nuclearized Iran. This is the same Iran whose citizens went to the ballot boxes this past week to choose the man who would succeed the eight-year presidency of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, one of the great champions of his country’s nuclear program.

“All of the known information about Iran’s nuclear program, including the centrifuges in Natanz, the gas in Isfahan, everything, including the lapses in Fordo, were first revealed to the world in a press conference staged by the Mujihadeen Halk (the Iranian opposition movement) and organized, according to foreign sources, by the Mossad in 2002. That was 11 years ago. The Americans doubted the credibility of the information, and they wasted 11 years on useless diplomatic activity. They did this despite the fact that the Israelis presented them with facts over and over again.”

Israel Hayom: What is the extent of the damage that has been done in the last 11 years?

Professor Edward Luttwak: “Fortunately for the world, the Iranian nuclear program has been mismanaged. I would say that this is the slowest nuclear program in the world. It’s clumsily handled, it’s corrupt, and it’s wasteful. It began in 1985, 28 years ago, and it has thus far cost $8 billion. When Israel wanted the nuclear weapon, according to foreign sources, of course, it took 10 years and $40 million. That’s all it cost, and in 1973 it was already operational.

“In Israel, there were only about 2-3 million people. It was a tiny agricultural state that started from nothing. The nuclear program had Professor [David] Bergman and one secretary. The Iranians, on the other hand, didn’t start from scratch. They began their project with an impressive technological package, with centrifuges. They had a huge advantage, yet they still don’t have one kilogram of enriched uranium at an operational level.”

Israel Hayom: Nonetheless, they will still get the bomb at some point?

“If you ask me, I don’t see the Iranians getting the nuclear bomb. Their program is so chaotic and clumsy that there is a pretty good chance that if it is bombed, it might just improve it.”

Israel Hayom: Could you provide details about a possible Israeli attack in Iran?

Professor Edward Luttwak: “I think there’s a tremendous gap between the public rhetoric between Iran and Israel — the Holocaust denial, calls for Israel’s destruction, and so forth — and the reality on the ground. Because they’re not Arab, they declare that they hate the Jews more than the Arabs hate them. But Iran is also the only Muslim country in the world with a large, even flourishing Jewish community. They have Jewish schools, kosher slaughter, functioning Jewish communities in Isfahan and Hamdan and, of course, Tehran. I suspect that they are not really honest when it comes to their supposed hatred of Jews.”

The Palestinians — A life in conflict

Luttwak also addresses the never-ending conflict between Israel and the Palestinians.

“If all the Palestinians were Hamas members, Israel wouldn’t be so unpopular . Hamas makes life easy for Israeli foreign policy and hasbara, but the truth is that the Palestinian public’s attitude toward Israel could be divided as follows: 50 percent are neutral, 40 percent cooperate, and 10 percent are in conflict with Israel. If this last number could be reduced to one percent that would be excellent. Then it would be possible to make peace.”

Israel Hayom: Could you point to the major Achilles heel on the Palestinian side?

Professor Edward Luttwak: “The Palestinians understand that for them national independence means living in an Arab country. The Palestinians who live in Israel have experience living in a non-Arab country, and they understand the difference between, say, being arrested by an Israeli policeman as opposed to being arrested by an Arab policeman. They’re torn. They want real independence, yet their fear of living in an Arab country is very real. Perhaps Israel, which is such an innovative country, could introduce a new wrinkle, and force independence on them and force them to become an independent state.”

Israel Hayom: What would happen then?

Professor Edward Luttwak: “What will happen? That’s impossible to say. Anything is possible. I correctly predicted the fall of the Soviet Union, but I can’t predict the future of the state of Israel. All of the predictions, even those that are serious and based on data, like those in the Economist magazine, were always wrong when it came to Israel. The analysts were always wrong, and those who were consistently correct were the dreamers.”