Nuclear testing: An arrogant Iran suspects West will abandon Israel
Rumblings out of Iran over the past few months have produced considerable reactions from around the world. But are all of these words of concern and even condemnation anything more than pious posturing?
On the one hand, there has been a growing awareness of a looming strategic confrontation between Iran and the West over Iran’s growing demand for its right to possess nuclear weapons. On the other hand, there has been a drum beat of some of the most virulent, anti-Semitic rhetoric heard out of the mouths of world leaders since the days of Hitler.
There does indeed seem to be a genuine concern in the West to the nuclear threat posed by the radical Islamic regime in Tehran. Yet there appears to be little serious interest in translating these words into action. Leaving aside the possibility of an actual attack on possible Iranian nuclear sites, there is an increasing inability to unite behind economic sanctions or movements to isolate the Iranian regime. While some of the diplomatic maneuvers indicate a comprehension of the seriousness of the threat, most appear to be extensive posturing.
Most of the European governments as well as the United Nations have made clear their fears and concerns that a nuclear Iran poses to the Middle East as well as to the West. Yet they cannot even prevent the Russians from providing fuel reprocessing for Iranian power reactors, nor ensure anything more than verbal guarantees to prevent development of nuclear weapons.
According to many strategists, Iran may still be as much as 10 years away from becoming a nuclear power — but as little as three months away from possessing sufficient nuclear technology to be able to complete the development process. Once Iran reaches this threshold, defined as the “point of no return,” it is virtually inevitable that Iran will at some point join the nuclear club.
The critical question is whether world diplomacy alone can prevent this from happening. At the same time, a possible joint allied military air strike over several days attacking up to 300 potentially related hardened nuclear development sites would require a level of commitment that has certainly not been evident to date.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has engaged in a persistent set of anti-Israel and anti-Semitic statements and vulgarities that have shocked even the most neutral observers to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Not only has Ahmadinejad raised the need “to wipe Israel from the face of the earth,” but he also has called upon the world to transport the Jews “back to Europe.” At the same time, he has denied the Holocaust and accused the world of fabricating the destruction of the Jews of Europe.
In general the world community, led by the United States, has condemned Ahmadinejad’s diatribes. The United Nations has voiced strong indignation at Iran’s attack against a sovereign state and a UN member nation. The problem is that these messages all constitute rather proper utterances being issued by a world that does not feel seriously threatened by Ahmadinejad’s rantings.
Iran understands that the United States is the only major world power that could seriously undertake eliminating Iran’s nuclear capability. Given the deep U.S. commitment to the war in Iraq and the growing impatience of the American people to America’s failure to develop a timely exit strategy there, Iran assumes that America does not have the will to undertake another military confrontation at this time — even only an extended aerial one.
All of this leaves the Israeli government in a very difficult strategic as well as a tactical position. Most military observers suggest that Iran’s initial potential nuclear confrontation would be against Israel. It has been suggested as well that Israel’s recent purchase of German submarines is clear statement of its intent to develop a demonstrative second-strike capability, which could also presumably act as a nuclear deterrent.
For the Israelis as well as for world Jewry, the anti-Semitic rhetoric is as inflammatory as the world’s response is benign — but it does not constitute an existential threat. If indeed the point of no return has arrived, then the window for Israel to act might be imminent. If and when Israel were to act as the surrogate of the United States against Iraq, it would expect that the Bush administration would be prepared actively to shoulder at least some of the inevitable reaction.
For the time being at least, it appears that Iran believes that the world once again does not truly care about Jews. They are as dispensable today as they were 70 years ago. For the Iranians, the use of anti-Semitic attacks is a test being posed as to whether the West will or will not take any type of serious international action against its nuclear ambitions. And given the nature of the geopolitical problems facing the West as well as its persistent dependency on Middle Eastern oil, Tehran is betting it is a test the West will fail.