| by Ashok K Mehta
(
September 26, 2012, New Delhi, Sri Lanka Guardian) Israeli intelligence
believes that March 2013 will be the decisive moment when Israel has to act
jointly with the US against Iran, as a de-coupled attack is unlikely to derail
Tehran's nuclear programme
The
mood at the World Summit on Counter-terrorism at Herzliya, Tel Aviv, this month
was sombre. Mixed feelings about the Arab Spring —which many called an
‘uprising’ — and what to do about Iran were dominant. While placards on the
streets in Tel Aviv read: “Don’t Bomb. Talk”, discussions on ‘deciding on the
bomb or bombing’ and ‘preparing for The Day After were plentiful’.
The
regional scene was seen as very messy with the Arab Spring having been arrested
in Bahrain. After Afghanistan and Iraq, a declining US was perceived exhausted
and ruing the strategic error of not doing a pre-emptive on Iran instead of
invading Iraq. After events in Iraq, Egypt and now Syria, Russia appeared the
big loser. Turkey was confronted by a new set of problems with all its
neighbours including Israel and especially Syria. Egypt, Libya and Yemen,
nursing the Arab Spring hangover were now stung by the fallout of the anti-Islamic film.
The
region had been hit economically too: Tourism evaporated in Egypt; Jordan was
burdened with Syrian refugees; and Lebanon, Palestine and Gaza barely managing
to survive. Syria was the new low-signature enemy. The ungoverned spaces in
Sinai where the Bedouin were calling the shots posed a new challenge to Israel
as well as Egypt. For Israel, the 1979 Treaty with Egypt was critical; and
fortunately holding. Despite political reforms, Jordan could unravel any time,
though not everyone agreed on this. The new concern and perhaps exaggerated was
the fear of a Caliphate of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Sitting
unfazed in this troubled neighbourhood was tiny Israel, coveting its strategic depth through special relations
with the US. A robust deterrence and sound intelligence had enabled Israel to
eliminate terrorism and end suicide killings at home. Hezbollah had not fired a
single rocket from its armoury of 70,000 indirect weapons since 2006. Although
Hamas in Gaza had been contained, Grad rockets continued to strike South
Israel, skirting the expensive Iron Dome anti-missile defences.
Uppermost
in Israeli minds is a nuclear Iran and the enlarged threat that an emboldened
Hezbollah and others jihadi outfits would pose to the region. Iranian leaders
have called Israel “a filthy bacteria”, “a cancerous tumour” and “a zionist black
stain that must and will be removed”. The current assessment is that Iran’s
10,000 centrifuges have yielded 20 per cent enriched uranium to fuel five to
six bombs. Apparently the decision to make the bomb which entails two more
steps — bomb grade enrichment of uranium and weaponisation — has not been made.
Once the go-ahead is given, Iran will take a year to possess the bomb. Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says that it could be only six to seven
months.
P5+1
talks and sanctions have evidently not worked; International Atomic Energy
Agency
director-general Yukiya Amano along with the 35-member Board censured Iran for
defying demands to curb uranium enrichment and halt its secret programme of
weaponisation. One of Israel’s ‘red lines’ is Iran’s acquisition of bomb-grade
uranium — Tehran’s point of entry into the ‘immunity zone’ disabling which
would be beyond Israel’s operational capability.
The
Israelis are asking whether it is wise to trust US intelligence on Iran’s
nuclear capability before it reaches immunity zone. Over the years, Mossad has
successfully penetrated Iran’s nuclear programme, delaying and disrupting it.
The Stuxnet virus which attacked the centrifuge rods altered their speed of
spinning resulting in physical collapse. The Stuxnet was injected following
1000 man years of work and has caused cost and time overruns of uranium
enrichment. While anonymity prevails over the ownership of the operation,
ambiguity reigns over Israel’s own nuclear capability which is its ultimate deterrent. No one ever talks about
it.
Israeli
intelligence estimates that the Spring of 2013 will be the decisive moment when
Israel will have to act as well as ensure that the action is a joint US-Israeli
operation, as a de-coupled attack was unlikely to decisively degrade Iran’s
nuclear programme. Both the Americans and the Israelis have wargamed the
offensive and the consequences of the operation. Israeli experts are advocating
ways and means to ensure that the US is forced to act on time though at present
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has ruled out defining ‘red lines’ or
‘deadlines’. She says there is still time for negotiations.
Later
this month, for the first time in the history of US-Israel relations, a
visiting Israeli Prime Minister will not meet the US President ostensibly due
to the latter’s pre-occupation with the election While President Obama has said
the US will not let Iran acquire a nuclear weapon, Presidential hopeful Mitt
Romney has asserted he will not permit Tehran to achieve the capability to
produce a bomb. Mr Obama does not want to make any commitment on Iran till
after the election.
Other
options are being weighed. For instance, attacking the Iranian Revolutionary
Guard Corps and its assets, instead of nuclear facilities, and further
empowering the Iranian Resistance which presumably provided intelligence about
the collapse of centrifuge rods. These force multipliers will not stop an
Iranian bomb which will prompt Egypt, Turkey and Saudi Arabia to follow suit.
Israel’s
fall-back position is the US. It is banking on Washington, DC to act and only if it were not to, Israel
would go it alone. Surprisingly, retired Generals are less vocal and vitriolic
about Iran’s bomb than politicians, especially Prime Minister Netanyahu and
Defence Minister Ehud Barak. Former Military Chief Lt Gen Gabi Ashkenzai said
that the Prime Minister and Defence Minister were more keen to wage war than
the military and that coordination of expectations between politicians and
military was critical to manage results.
Last
week, military chief Lt Gen Benny Gantz tested the armed forces’ competence and
readiness in the event of war resulting from Syria’s stockpile of chemical
weapons and Iran’s nuclear buildup. Iran’s top generals have said their
response would be immediate and unstoppable —one of them even threatening a
pre-emptive.
One
of the immediate consequences of a nuclear Iran is the likelihood of Pakistan
deploying nuclear weapons in Saudi Arabia on the latter’s request. Going beyond
extended deterrence, this would give Pakistan a second strike capability and be
hugely popular in protecting the Holy Land. There is a precedence: The US had
stationed nuclear weapons in Turkey and Germany.
My
assessment is that Israeli bluster is diminishing. As for the Iranian bomb, it
will make the North Korean bomb kid stuff.
 Israeli intelligence believes that March 2013 will be th...){kind=link}