The internet has been burning up with responses to Jeffrey Goldberg's Atlantic cover story on the likelihood that either Israel or the United States will preempt development of an Iranian nuclear bomb by attacking its atomic sites.
Goldberg does not flat-out endorse bombing Iran. Rather, after numerous conversations and briefings with US and Israeli officials, he concludes that there is at least a 50-50 chance that bombs will fly in a year or so.
Goldberg himself does not take a position on whether bombing is warranted or justified. But, given the way he frames the article and his personal closeness to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu -- who speaks in apocalyptic terms of the existential danger a nuclear Iran poses to Israel -- it is clear that Goldberg sees no alternative to preventing an Iranian nuke, by whatever means necessary. And that includes war.
Strangely, however, the article itself makes clear that the ramifications of a military attack could be dire. Here is the Goldberg scenario:
When the Israelis begin to bomb the uranium-enrichment facility at Natanz, the formerly secret enrichment site at Qom, the nuclear-research center Esfahan and possibly even the Bushehr reactor along with the other main sites of the Iranian nuclear program, a short while after they depart en masse from their bases across Israel - regardless of whether they succeed in destroying Iran's centrifuges and warheads and missile plants or whether they fail miserably to even make a dent in Iran's nuclear program - they stand a good chance of changing the Middle east forever; of sparking lethal reprisals and even a full-blown regional war that could lead to the deaths of thousands of Israelis and Iranians, and possibly Arabs and Americans as well; of creating a crisis for Barack Obama that will dwarf Afghanistan in significance and complexity; of rupturing relations between Jerusalem and Washington which is Israel's only meaningful ally; and inadvertently solidifying the somewhat tenuous rule of the mullahs in Tehran; of causing the price of oil to spike to cataclysm highs; launching the world economy into a period of turbulence not experienced since the autumn of 2008, or possibly since the oil shock of 1973; of placing communities across the Jewish diaspora in mortal danger by making them targets of Iranian-sponsored terror attacks, as they have been in the past, in a limited though already lethal way; of accelerating Israel's conversion from a once-admired refuge for a persecuted person into a leper among nations.
That is some worst-case scenario -- it basically concedes that Israel and Jews everywhere might pay the ultimate price -- especially given that not one of the possibilities Goldberg enumerates is improbable. Read it aloud to anyone and they will assume that it is written by someone who has ruled out the war option. Given all this, why would Israel or the United States even consider risking this set of horrors?
Simple. Because, according to the "Bomb Iran" crowd, a nuclear-armed Iran, would almost surely attack Israel thereby destroying the Jewish homeland once and for all. If one accepts this premise, the hawks have little choice but to, at the very least, consider the bombing option. The attack could be dubbed "Operation Never Again."
Except the premise itself is wrong, nonsensical even. That is because the one gigantic factor that the hawks a d neocons ignore is that Iran, even if it wants to destroy Israel, can only do so at the price of losing Iran itself. Iran does not yet have a single nuclear weapons. Israel has some 200, including sea based missiles that would give Israel the second-strike capacity that would destroy Iran even after Israel itself is gone.
But, the neocons say they believe that the Iranians are just crazy enough to give up their civilization -- and all their people -- in exchange for the joy of taking out Israel. No matter that nations don't act that way. (It is hard to imagine that even Hitler would have initiated the Final Solution if he knew that the price was losing Berlin, Frankfurt and Munich). No matter that Iran under the mullahs has not only avoided taking anything close to suicidal actions but has been a cautious and almost conservative international actor. No matter that the world manages to exist with nuclear weapons in the hands of such truly irrational actors as the North Korean regime and, to a lesser extent, Pakistan's.
No, the Mad Bombers would have one believe that Iran is unique -- given its religion and all that --and is hence crazy enough to trade its own existence to end the existence of some other nation.
This is garbage, pure and simple, and one has to be duplicitious or irrational to believe it.
So what are Israel and the neocons here really afraid of? The answer is obvious.
So long as Israel is the only nuclear armed power in the Middle East, it can do whatever it likes whenever it likes. When it decides to attack Lebanon or Syria, no other power is in any serious position to object. When it blockades Gaza, year after year, no one can tell Israel to stop. When it attacks a relief ship in international waters, no one can do anything to make it cease and desist. Should it up and annex the West Bank without providing its people any democratic rights, the world would stand helpless knowing that the United States Congress, in hock to the lobby, would back Israel 100%.
A nuclear Iran changes the equation, not because Iran would use its bomb but because Israel suddenly will have to take into account that the Arabs have a powerful ally, a very powerful ally. An ally that could not simply be ignored.
That is the reason Israel is so vehement about an Iranian bomb, not because Iran would use it but because, just like Israel, it would have the ultimate "don't f--k with us" tool.
The whole Iran nuclear issue is about Israel retaining exclusive control of that tool. Regional hegemony. Nothing more. Nothing less.
The United States should do everything it can (short of the use of force) to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons but it will not succeed unless and until it can provide Iran with something that makes Iranians feel that they are not condemned by us and the Israelis to second class status.
That means we should take the military option off the table and begin the process of full unconditional negotiations with Iran that would address all the issues between the two countries -- the nuclear issue, support for terrorism, threats against Israel and our nonstop efforts to destabilize and overthrow the Iranian regime. (It should be overthrown but by the Iranians, not us. Considering our history with Iran since overthrowing Mossadegh, we are the last people with any right to get involved in Iran's domestic affairs).
The Bomb Iran nuts won't consider negotiations (unless they end in the outcome they insist upon: Israeli hegemony) because, for them, Goldberg's worst case scenario (dead Israelis, dead Iranians, dead Americans, dead Arabs, etc) isn't that terrible. They can live with all that to preserve Israeli hegemony.
Basically, it is they who would sacrifice Israel, and thousands of Americans too, to preserve Israel's ability to do whatever it wants, wherever it wants, whenever it wants. And if Israel disappears in the process, well... Better a dead Israeli superpower than a secure, living, thriving safe haven for Jews living within its internationally recognized borders (the '67 lines) but one without the ability to dominate its neighbors.
Bottom line: the mad bomber neocons actually hold the worldview they ascribe to the Iranians. It is not the mullahs who are suicidal. It is them. It's called projection.
Follow MJ Rosenberg on Twitter: www.twitter.com/mjmediamatters
Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security
In office 2001–2005
Preceded by new position
I guess he has such a fantastic job the last time the US wanted to control Weapons of Mass Destruction that now he is working on his next project.
Sounds like you haven't either since the second coming of Muhammad has absolutely nothing to do with the Shi'i version of the "rapture" or whatever you want to call it, nor does starting a world war. Sounds like you are just making things up. Where are your sources?
The blowback we will call down upon our heads for attacking Iran for Israel will likely result in more casualities than the blowback of 911 did for previously supporting the Israeli ethnic cleansing of Palestine and propping up Arab dictatorships for Israel
We militarily support and diplomatically cover the illegal Israeli land grab/occupation of Palestine, payoff and garrision key Arab players to support our unjustifiable Israeli-centric policies, attack Arab countries like Iraq or Iran that Israel, her Lobby, and her Neocons order or deceive us to attack - and Muslims will eventually strike back.
That Muslims acted in ways that any other group of people would act – fighting back – is something Israel and her Neocons work very hard to pretend is inherently evil or terroristic about Iranians, Palestinians, or other Muslims – Israeli propaganda calls this terrorism
That’s what will happen when we attack Iran for Israel. Fighting back or blowback is a concept that links up the the original Israeli actions and her endlessly illegal Occupation and ethnic cleansing of Palestine and American propping up of Israeli-centric policy in the Middle East
Attacking Iran will be an act of Israeli state terrorism, Israeli Lobby/Neocon warmongering, manipulation and blackmailing the US into yet another disastrous war for Israel.
Before we attacked Iraq Russia had over 60% of the oil leases. Russia and other countries also said there was no weapons of mass destruction and asked us not to attack.
We went to war because of lies that cost the life's and limbs of many soldiers.
Russia asked us after the invasion to negotiate some of their oil contracts after we realized there was no weapons of mass destruction.
Cheny and Bush told Russia to take a hike and Russia made a deal with Iran to sell them
advanced nuclear reactors that can enrich uranium.
Did you notice that cheny Bush did not go nuts when Russia made the deal with Iran?
Treason because of a love for oil how sad
Enrichment is a different animal. 99.3% of natural Uranium we dig up is U238 or none radioactive. 0.7% is fissile U235. Since they are both Uranium, you can't separate them chemically. That's why we either use diffusion or centrifuges to separate them and increase the U235 % in the mix. Russians had nothing to do with that. Iran bought that technology from Pakistan that stole it from Europeans.
facts on the ground israel exists, palestine exists..they are both aspects of reality.
get over the hatred and resentments on both sides. It is in both peoples mutual interest for the ME to rise out of chaos and destruction, China is on the rise and the ME should be looking towards a globalized economy were as a region they are and important facet. Instead of competition with eachother we need to grow together or become irrellevant.
Obviously, the rest of us should drop this like a hot potato.
http://www.juancole.com/2010/07/jahanpour-iran-turkey-and-israel-new-global-realities.html#more-7932””
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Mosaddeq
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Reza_Pahlavi
They have paid a tremendous cost both economically and politicaly for their nuclear program. If they had invested in oil refineries and a conventional military they would be much stronger now. Instead they will, if they are lucky, have a handful of weapons they cannot use without insuring their own destruction. They are risking all of that on something that could be gone tomorrow if their enemies decide to, and then they are goading the US and Israel on. Makes no sense.
Why is this worth so much cost? They hardly have an air force or navy. They need to import petroleum when their land is soaked in oil. The people are restless but they are investing in guns instead of butter.
The answer cannot be defense against Israel. Their defense is weaker now. The Russians just cancelled the contract to deliver the best air defense system in the world. They cannot buy decent fighter jets etc.
Iran cannot possibly be doing this for altruistic reasons. Those who think it would prevent Israel from attacking, say, Lebanon are deluded. Imagine that Israel attacks Lebanon, Iran launches nukes against Israel. Israel destroys Iran in counterattack with is far superior weapons and delivery systems. Why - because they love the Lebanese enough to die for them? Nope they arent going to do it.
If US/Israel manages to stop gasoline imports, publicly, the regime would whine, privately, they'd be kissing Israel on both cheeks with a smile. iran has been trying to reduce domestic consumption for years. Per capita, iran uses more than double the energy used by any other middle eastern nations, even twice Turkey. That's were Iran is losing money, subsidized fuel, and Iran can't lift the subsidies because its in the constitution and people would get angry. This way, iran gets to remove subsidies and blame it on Israel :D
As for Russian jet fighters, with US and Israel as their main foe, they know $40 million jets that would also make them dependant on Russians would fall off the sky in the first week of war. That's why, they have invested their money into building a very large missile force. FYI.
For the record I dont think Israel or US should attack, at least not now, but I sure as heck would make then think I was.
I appreciate Mr. Rosenberg for keeping this on the front burner. The more this gets splashed around in the American press the less sleep the Revolutionary Guards get.
Spindok
Unfortunately a large portion of our population fall within this category
But you are so smart, lol
~WolfLady~
LOL ...oh the irony!
Problem with Iran is lack of customer. Only a milion barrels of oil are sold on the open market. Everything else is based on long term contracts. West has managed to derail a lot of these contracts. But, all the oil under the ground is still there and world has peaked.