POSTED RESPONSE TO A COLUMN BY GIDEON RACHMAN IN THE FINANCIAL TIMES
"Either way, Israel doesn't necessarily need Saudi airspace as it has other capabilities"
Do Israel and its apologists ever learn anything?
I think not, because it is the nature of ideologues and extremists virtually to be unable to alter their dark obsessions.
The threat to attack Iran is dangerous, destabilizing, and truly reflects unbalanced thinking.
It only confirms the world's growing view of Israel as out of control and acting outside all the laws of nations.
First, Iran is in a position to do some very unpleasant things in retaliation for an attack. This is not an impotent little country, possessing as it does some pretty sophisticated missiles and armaments, and it sits on one of the world's most important arteries of commerce.
Second, it is extremely doubtful for many reasons that Israel has the capacity to carry out its threats.
Only this morning, the Saudis characterized The Times' report on use of Saudi airspace as flatly wrong and against national policies. The deception work of Mossad?
Third, Israel, despite its twenty four hour-a-day garrison-state status, has many vulnerabilities, being a small geographical area loaded with possible targets.
Iran does not need nuclear weapons to successfully target places like the Dimona nuclear facility, Israel's illicit nuclear weapons factory. Or Israeli power plants.
Iran is perfectly able to send not puny homemade rockets with firecracker tips - the dreaded Qassams which provided Israel's shabby excuse for killing 400 children and a thousand others.
[see:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkVOzkMPj4kP8cmb9LlBGIRRZbzThpnZgeJuTymJHkjpB8LnllaE_bPbrvgg_F7devyPsOEFdihb1bzxTEFJgyHUwFGa5HwlzvRBS_IeNS6VnM31pVhCleC13ULgcxDP_fsoSr/s1600-h/ROCKET+qassam37.jpg ]
No, Iran's arsenal includes missiles like Shahab-3.
[see:
http://www.fas.org/programs/ssp/man/militarysumfolder/shahab-3.html ]
Iran also has capable anti-ship missiles, as Hezbollah demonstrated by nearly sinking an Israeli military ship during Israel's atrocity in Southern Lebanon.
Fourth, the knowledge for nuclear operations does not go away. They are classic examples of the genie and the bottle.
Fifth, even were a strike possible for Israel, the chance of destroying all of the existing protected and distributed facilities with effect is remote.
Sixth, Iran would certainly set about on its own Manhattan Project after any strike, a priority national program. Indeed, it is quite possible Iran is not working towards nuclear weapons now, but after any strike, it would set them at the highest priority, and they do have the human and material resources to do so.
Seventh, the entire world would react to Israel’s hypocrisy. Only today we have another story in The Guardian about Israel’s proliferation activities with apartheid South Africa.
[see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/03/south-africa-nuclear-trigger-israel ]
These stories and indeed South Africa’s recent publication of papers concerning its secret dealing with Israel on nuclear weapons reflect changing attitudes towards Israel, for they would previously have been suppressed as Israel tried hard to do.
Israel is an illicit nuclear power – having lied, cheated, and stolen its way to getting there - and it is no longer possible to hide that fact. In the current IAEA talks, Israel as a subject is insisted upon despite the pathetic efforts of the U.S. to suppress the subject.
You can live outside rule of law for a while, as Israel clearly demonstrates, but you cannot sustain an indefinite position of hypocrisy and threat and deception towards much of the world. Even Ghadaffi learned you eventually have to come in from the cold.
The only sensible approach to preventing proliferation in the Middle East is to make the region a nuclear-free zone, and that very much includes Israel.
