(Banner will apear here)

Beautiful Kabbalah Jewelry Judaicawebstore.com
Font Size:

More 'Dirty Tricks' For Iran

Will Iran's Nuclear Sites Again Be Targeted By More Clandestine Attacks?

IDF Gen.(res) Amos Yadlin: "Just Over 50% Probability That President Obama Will Opt For Military Option If Re-elected...Need For Fresh Dialogue With Whoever Wins Presidential Election'"

"Israel Air Force & Intelligence Have Capabilities To Knock Out Iranian Nuclear Targets But Israel Requires U.S. Cooperation For Day After"

Iranian missiles (photo: MEHR)

 If a new round of clandestine operations are in the works for Iran's nuclear weapons facilities they will have to be more severe than they have been until now. The obvious fact is the Iranian centrifuges are still spinning out enriched uranium and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has warned the Iranians could be ready to break out for 90% weapons grade in another six or seven months. U.S. Defense Secretary estimates another year or so, unless Iran is operating more secret installations such as Fordo.

 Will dirty tricks succeed where sanctions failed...

Who blew up the electricity supply to Iran's top secret nuclear weapons facility at Fordo on August 17th? Was it Israel's Mossad, America's CIA or Britain's MI-6? Recently, reporter David Sanger of the New York Times wrote that the U.S. was considering a new campaign of clandestine operations against Iran's nuclear project. It was designed to convince Israel that President Barack Obama really meant business. News of the latest 'dirty tricks' came as Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu expressed concern that America might shy away from going for the military option. The Israeli leader estimates that Iran will 'breakout' for 90% weapons grade uranium in another six or seven months. U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta talks of a year or so, provided Iran is not operating more secret facilities. In interviews marking the Jewish New Year, Netanyahu asked rhetorically:

"I hear different voices. I hear those who say we must wait until the last moment. But what if the U.S. does not act? That question must be asked"

But one turn too many...

Amos Yadlin

Netanyahu is not alone when it comes to the question of whether Obama will decide to go for the military option if all else fails. IDF Maj.Gen. (res) Amos Yadlin is one of the six F-16 Israeli pilots who destroyed Saddam Hussein's nuclear reactor on June 7,1981; in addition he served as the former Chief of IDF Intelligence. In a recent interview with Haaretz, Yadlin assessed the current fued between Netanyahu and Obama over setting 'red lines' for Iran. Yadlin gave credit to Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak for influencing Obama to take a firmer stand and stating explicitly that he would bar Iran from getting the Bomb. However in the past year, Netanyahu and Barak 'had turned the screw one turn too many'. The result was that instead of Washington and Jerusalem shooting their arrows at Tehran they were shooting arrows at one another and this was harming their common goal of deterring Iran.

In Yadlin's view: "The zone of Iranian immunity is wider and more flexible than some have described it. Therefore there is no need for an immediate military operation. Israel had to exhaust every other option before launching a preventative war".

Just over 50%...

But the intelligence expert added that although he believed that President Obama intended to block Iran from acquiring a nuclear military capability there were others around him who thought differently. Therefore in Yadlin's estimation: "The prospect the U.S. will use force to halt Iran is just over 50%". In light of this, Israel should initiate a sincere and frank dialogue with whoever wins on November 6th. Israel should then ask the Americans these questions:

1. Will they know in time when Iran tries to breakout for the Bomb?

2. Will the U.S. then have the capability and resolve to prevent it?

The objective would be to seek a firmer American commitment than now exists and to clarify where the next administration really stands.

Keep it surgical...

The Iranian Missile Range

Yadlin also referred to a problem confronting the Americans when they plan a military operation - they always go for a massive force build-up. At the present time, the U.S. was deterred from another major operation that could mean total war with an additional Muslin state. Yadlin, the strategist, posited this course of action:

Instead of Israel and the U.S. confronting one another, Jerusalem should discuss with its allies how to combine American technological capabilities with Israel's knack of improvisation and creativity that had been gained from combat experience. The outcome could be a surgical operation that would not be launched against the Iranian people, nor include a land invasion and total war.

What of the morning after the strike? If the Iranian people awakened to see that only the nuclear weapons sites had been hit and that all their other national assets had been left unscathed, they would realize they would have far more to lose if they reacted in force. Therefore it was very probable that a strike of this type would halt Iran's nuclear project without sparking a war. Yadlin believed there was a high probability the next U.S. president would adopt such a plan.

Yes, Israel can...

Does Israel have the military capability to destroy Iran's nuclear project on its own? The former fighter pilot left no doubt - yes we can! Yadlin was well aware of Israel's intelligence capabilities and the prowess of the Israel Air Force. In his words: "I am convinced they have developed an operational capability to severely damage Iran's nuclear program. Whoever doubts Israel's capabilities would be surprised. The military option prepared by the IDF is real and credible. Israel could also cope with the scenario the day after a bombing strike. There is no comparison between the risks of an Israeli operation and that of a nuclear Iran".

However Yadlin was adamant on this point: Although Israel could execute the bombing mission on its own this would not prevent Iran from again going nuclear in the future. An Israeli strike should not be a goal in itself but to bar Tehran from acquiring A-Bombs. Therefore it was vital that America stood alongside in the aftermath. On the risk of a regional war, the Sunni Arab states were so spooked about a Shiite nuclear power such as Iran, they would think twice about mobilizing against Israel. Hezbollah, now armed with some 70,000 rockets and missiles in southern Lebanon, was a different matter. But in any case, the Iranian proxy and Israel were already on a collision course.

David Essing

Back To The Top