YORAM ETTINGER: THE IRANIAN NUCLEAR MAZE
The Iranian Nuclear Maze
Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought”
“Israel Hayom” Newsletter,November 11, 2011
http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=811
The assumptions that tougher sanctions could deny Iran nuclear capabilities,
could pacify Iran’s nuclear programs, and could produce a regime change in
Teheran, defy reality. These assumptions and the suppositions that
Mutually-Assured-Deterrence (MAD) would enable the Free World to co-exist
with a nuclear Iran, and that the cost of a military preemption would be
prohibitive, reflect a determination to learn from recent history by
repeating – and not by avoiding – critical errors; a victory of delusion
over realism.
US and UN sanctions against North Korea – which were initiated in 1950 –
failed to prevent the nuclearization of Pyongyang. Sanctions could not
abort the development of impressive North Korean weapons of mass destruction
capabilities and its exportation – along with terrorism – to Iran, Egypt,
Syria, Asia, Africa and the American continent. Sanctions have not toppled
the Kim Jong-il regime and haven’t ended its relentless pursuit of the
takeover of South Korea.
Sanctions against North Korea instilled a false sense of success, relieving
Western policy-makers of taking tougher action, thus facilitating Kim
Jong-Il’s attainment of nuclear power. While sanctions brought down the
comfort-driven White regime of South Africa, they generally do not deter
rogue repressive Third World regimes, such as North Korea, Saddam’s Iraq,
Cuba and Burma, which has been targeted by US sanctions since 1990.
US and UN sanctions against Iran have been ineffective for 16 years! US
sanctions were initially legislated in 1995, and UN Security Council
sanctions were initially approved in 2006. They intended to end Iran’s
nuclear program and its support of Islamic terrorism and to bolster the
Iranian opposition. Additional US legislation has tightened the sanctions
and intensified punitive policy towards violators. However, systematic
non-compliance has been demonstrated by Russia and China, as well as by
Turkey, Pakistan, Malaysia, India, Japan, South Africa, Venezuela and some
of the European countries.
Disengagement from delusions and engagement with realism constitute a
prerequisite for averting Iran’s nuclearization, which constitutes a clear
and present danger to the US, then to NATO, Saudi Arabia and Iraq, as well
as to Israel and to global sanity. Therefore, the prevention of a nuclear
Iran should constitute a top US national security priority.
In other words, Iran’s mega-goal, since the 7th century, has been the
domination of the Persian Gulf, irrespective of the Palestinian issue,
Israel’s policy or Israel’s existence. Iran’s mega-hurdle has been the US
and NATO presence in the Gulf. Therefore, the development of Iran’s
mega-(nuclear) capability is primarily designed to force the US evacuation
of the Gulf and the Indian Ocean, through deterrence and intimidation in the
Gulf region, through beachheads in Latin America and the US mainland. Iran’s
mega-capability would allow it to occupy Iraq – its arch rival since the 7th
century – and Saudi Arabia, which Iran considers an apostate regime. All
Gulf States are perceived by Iran as key prizes, required to control the
flow and the price of oil and to bankroll Teheran’s megalomaniac regional
and global aspirations.
Iran’s geo-strategic goals are energized by its current Islamic zeal,
viewing Jihad (Holy War) as the permanent state of relations between Moslems
and non-Moslems, while peace and ceasefire accords are tenuous. Iran
demonstrated its zeal to obtain the mega-goal at all cost, sacrificing some
500,000 people on the altar of the 1980-1988 War against Iraq, including
approximately 100,000 children who were dispatched to clear minefields.
Moreover, Teheran’s Mullahs are emboldened by the pending US evacuation of
Iraq, which they consider an extension of the US retreats from Lebanon (1958
and 1983), Vietnam (1973) and Somalia (1993).
An Iranian nuclear cloud, hovering above the US and Israel, would not
require the launching of nuclear warheads, in order to acquire significant
extortion capabilities and produce economic, social, moral and national
security havoc. Therefore, one cannot afford to await a smoking nuclear gun
in the hand of Teheran; one must prevent the nuclear gun from reaching
Teheran’s hand. That excludes the options of deterrence, coexistence and
retaliation. It highlights the option of a swift and a disproportional
preemptive military operation, whose cost would be dwarfed by the cost of
inaction.
The Iranian nuclear challenge constitutes the ultimate test of leadership.
Will the US and Israel be driven by long-term conviction and realism, or
will they succumb to vacillation, oversimplification and short-term
political convenience, thus facilitating the surrender of Western
democracies to rogue Islamic regimes!?
Comments are closed.
