Israel’s next army chief ‘would only strike Iran as last resort’
Israel’s next army chief ‘would only strike Iran as last resort’
By Times of Israel staff November 28, 2014, 10:14 pm
Gadi Eisenkot (second from left) raising a toast with Gantz, Barak, and Maj. Gen. Yair Naveh, whom he replaced as Deputy Chief of the General Staff on January 14, 2013 (photo credit: IDF Spokesperson’s Unit/ Flash 90)
(Are the so-called negotiations with Iran and the P5+1 stopping a unilateral attack on Iran by Israel or is it internal Israeli politics? That’s why I keep asking myself…are we, as a nation, totally to blame for allowing this threat against Israel grow?-LS)
Maj. Gen. Gadi Eisenkot, named Friday night as the next IDF chief of the General Staff, firmly opposes Israeli military intervention to thwart Iran’s nuclear program unless Iran poses an immediate existential threat to Israel, an Israeli television report said.
Eisenkot, the current deputy chief, holds to the view that Israel should not strike at Iran “unless the sword is at our throat,” Channel 10 reported. That phrase was first used in the Iranian context almost four years ago by Israel’s former Mossad chief Meir Dagan, and Dagan subsequently declared that the idea of an Israeli Air Force attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities was “the stupidest thing I have ever heard” and that anyone seriously considering any such strike needed to internalize that he would be “dragging Israel into a regional war that it would not know how to get out of. The security challenge would become unbearable.”
Eisenkot subscribes to the assessment that Israel must only act against Iran as a last resort, “as do all of Israel’s security chiefs,” the Channel 10 report said, referring to the outgoing chief of General Staff Benny Gantz, current Mossad chief Tamar Pardo, and Shin Bet domestic security chief Yoram Cohen.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has vowed that Israel will “stand alone” to stop Iran if necessary, has publicly fumed as world powers negotiated intensively with Iran in recent months, and has demanded the dismantling of Iran’s entire “military nuclear” capability.
The prime minister delayed naming Eisenkot as Gantz’s successor for the past two weeks, the TV report said, in part because he toyed with the idea of finding a candidate with an outlook less similar to that of Gantz.
Netanyahu partly blames Gantz for the sense that Israel emerged “with a tie” from the summer’s 50-day war with Gaza’s Hamas rulers, and looked around for a top officer to succeed Gantz “with more of a knife between his teeth.”
Eisenkot, the report said, is a “moderate” like Gantz, who wants to keep any wars Israel has to fight as short as possible, and aims not to enter conflicts without a clear exit strategy.
Eisenkot was the clear choice as next army chief of both Gantz and Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon, and ultimately Netanyahu decided not to antagonize Ya’alon, and to go ahead with the appointment, which will be formalized in the next few days. He is set to take up the post on February 15.
Explore posts in the same categories: Uncategorized
WarSclerotic 
December 1, 2014 at 11:23 PM
LS,
I think for the most part we need to blame our elected leaders, both in the US and Israel. Bush, Obama, Olmert, Netanyahu – any of them could’ve stopped Iran but they’ve all failed to.
Too often Israeli leaders are elected on hawkish platforms but then cave to “world opinion” once in office.
That being said, I feel that December 2014 will prove to be a critical month on the Iran issue. We all know time is incredibly short now – will the Netanyahu government finally step up to the challenge?
December 1, 2014 at 11:37 PM
Mark, agreed…and in an attempt to answer your question regarding ‘stepping up to the challenge’, at this point, I honestly feel the answer is yes, but the challenge will be redefined. How they accomplish this is anyone’s guess. Politicians are a creative lot for better or for worse, but most have a talent for dodging the proverbial bullet by turning a complete failure into a perceived success.
December 2, 2014 at 5:55 AM
I meant all out war – maybe not enough to overthrow the regime but certainly a lot more than the half measures we’ve seen already to date.
For folks who think Israel is going to try and “contain” Iran just because the US wouldn’t approve, I’d ask where that road leads to in the long run.
Will it not lead to national suicide in the end?
Israel has struck both Iraq and Syria’s nuclear reactors already without US approval. Iran will indeed be a much larger challenge but they have no choice!
December 1, 2014 at 11:41 PM
Sadly,Israel cannot pull off an attack alone on Iran alone.Netanyahu knows this all too well.An attack on Iran’s nuclear program involves multiple sites as everyone knows and will require going beyond the destruction of the nuclear sites,i.e.,Iran’s military machinery for the most part must be destroyed or neutralized.And that in itself is really a major war.The current U.S. administration is clearly not interested in striking at Iran,And much less be allowed to be dragged into a war with Iran on Israel’s initiation of said war.Bleak days lie ahead unfortunately for Israel.
December 2, 2014 at 12:04 PM
The problem is, with nuclear weapons, a well concealed secret weapon, Israel might not know when “the sword is at her throat”. And I think that’s why Iran is so intent on having a nuclear weapon. With a nuclear EMP weapon, one second everything will be fine, and the next second, everything will be gone.
Even if Iran tested a nuclear weapon, if no one stopped Iran during the forty years it obviously spent developing the bomb, who would stop them when they announced they have a whole arsenal of bombs ready to go and hidden all over, inside Iran, and maybe outside, at sea?
Waiting ’til he “sword is at her throat” would mean that a conventional war was out of the question. The threat could then only be removed with drastic action. All of Iran would have to be shut down. Not a happy thought. Better to solve the problem now.
The threat to Israel is a threat to Saudi Arabia as well, and even the US, except I think they are “feeding the crocodile, hoping it will eat them last”.
December 2, 2014 at 4:29 PM
Just one short year ago….
December 2, 2014 at 4:35 PM
Followed by the Obama administration reaction…