Dispensing Intelligence
Seems strange, doesn't it, a steadfast ally permitting one of its more knowledgeable and influential head-starters to casually dispense intelligence about the potential, very probable, quite likely, most suitable action to be taken by its partner in military stealth one-upsmanship. On the face of it, it's not at all intelligent to play fast-and-loose with that kind of data. Unless there's a very good reason for it.Is it intelligent to inform the enemy of the clear mandate for a strike, well before it's planned to occur? Thus preparing said enemy for pre-emptive action? Of course, it could also be a way of forcing that entity's hand. To make the first move, just further justifying the response geared to wipe out its putative arsenal of nuclear weaponry before it becomes viable. It's been done before, successfully. Could conceivably be done again.
Well, the nuclear weapons are, for the near presence, merely sought-after. In Iran's short-range plans for ascendancy in the region, in the country's longer-range plans for a renewal of Islamic rule, a return of the global Caliphate. Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton's blase interview with the Daily Telegraph pricked a lot of ears.
Didn't necessarily surprise a whole lot of international onlookers, confirming as his statements did, that something is most certainly in the works. Israel herself launched an equally strategic and meaningful balloon in this guessing game, when she staged her recent test-run of an attack on Esfahan and Natanz.
Certain to knock that triumvirate, Ali Larijani, Ayatollah Ali Khameni and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad slightly off kilter. Or launch them into determined action. Iran enjoys provoking its perceived enemies, it doesn't appreciate being itself provoked, put on notice. Remarkable how a little bit of serving up of bitters rattles Iran.
And what's up with the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Michael Mullen visiting Israel, twice in a few months' time? All those hints being dropped here and there, from France's foreign minister's warnings of action, to the news media speculating now and again whether President Bush was preparing a strike, whether it would be a joint strike with Israel.
Now look what they've done. Up to now Iran was only threatening to erase Israel from the map, now the country has gone all defensive-offensive and is actually stationing itself to attack. Sooner than it would ideally prefer to, since it will use ballistic missiles that aren't yet nuclear-tipped, but they're prepared to respond should they be further provoked. Simmering with resentment at that 'provocation'. The unfairness of it all.
And taking out either of the nuclear installations - Iran's nuclear conversion facility or its uranium enrichment facility - would make it mighty upset. Now The Times of London has added additional intelligence, that Iran has taken firm steps, moving its Shahab-3B ballistic missiles onto launch pads, and aiming them directly at Israel, one toward the Negev's Dimona nuclear reactor. So there.
Iran may not yet be prepared to tip those missiles with a nuclear head, but she can exercise her options to use chemical, biological, radiological dispersion in its high explosives. The arrogant swagger there pays homage to the missiles' enhanced range, giving it the threat value of reaching a number of Israeli cities.
Of course that large-scale Israeli Air Force exercise might itself have urged Iran to react, in its own rehearsal. The tit-for-tat belligerence, the lining up of supporters, the accounting of reasons for the likelihood and necessity to act, is a living theatre of international drama, fixing the attention of an already-unsettled world on that region.
Mossad's former head, Shabtai Shavit also gave The London-based Telegraph an interview, warning that his country's window of opportunity was closing in. He estimated a one-year window before Iran achieved its purpose in developing its first nuclear weapon. Emphasizing that for Israel the sooner she acts the better. For after all the diplomacy and the sanctions have been exhausted - and we're almost there, now - the only option left is attack.
Purely defensive, of course. Defensively offensive. Iran has had more than ample opportunities to surrender to the demands of the United Nations, the European Union, the United States, and much of the international community. She has, furthermore, the example of North Korea, that very venue from which her own nuclear ambitions were initiated, via Pakistan. On the surface, at least, North Korea has relented. For the time being, in any event.
Iran makes her Muslim neighbours nervous. Syria may yet abandon its partnership with Iran, and return to the Arab fold, finding more comfort there in the final analysis than among the Persians. And with Syria may eventually go Hezbollah. Israel is proceeding with overtures toward Hamas, and Hezbollah. Which may or may not provide reason to hope for the future. The possibility of being left alone, adrift and without support won't please Iran.
And then there is that great imponderable. Should Israel, with the United States cheering on from the sidelines - the Arab states somewhat more discreetly - undertake that mission to eliminate Iran's nuclear installations and fail, her still-questioned military superiority after the Israel-Hezbollah debacle will leave her in an even worse position. The tribal mindset of the Middle East celebrates success, power and victory.
Collectively, the tribal Arab states hold military might in great awe. All the more so when the country illustrating that might is a tiny one, encircled by opposition. But that same mindset turns swiftly in derision at the first sign of weakness, the abdication of superiority through defeat, even a partial one. Labelling it an abject failure. Leaving Israel, should that occur, in an even more vulnerable existential state, if such a disaster can be imagined.
Israel, in other words, cannot permit itself to shrink from that possibility, and even less than it can afford to lose that gamble. Much depends on her well trained personnel, the stringent need to protect herself, the superiority of her technical armaments. It's a formula that has won her victory and grudging respect in the past, and it's one that will have to be demonstrated successfully again.
Fact is, there are no other options. Israel can "talk" to Syria, to Lebanon, to Hamas and Hezbollah. She's been singularly unsuccessful in reaching Iran. Israel cannot afford to be under any illusions with respect to Iran's intent; clearly and succinctly stated, time and again.
Labels: Israel, Science, Technology, Terrorism
posted by Pieface @ Sunday, June 29, 2008
<< Home