Same options, same table? |
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Shimon Peres travel to White House with one goal in mind: Forging a solid U.S.-Israeli partnership to face down the Iranian nuclear threat.
Shlomo Cesana
President Barack Obama meets Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.[Archive]
|
Photo credit: AP | ||||
|
A shroud of secrecy surrounds the potential courses of action that may or may not be pursued against Iran’s nuclear armament, but one thing is clear: Israel has succeeded in making the entire world, including Iran, think that the military option is indeed on the table, while significant economic sanctions are being leveled against it.
In diplomatic terms, fostering this line of thinking is a significant achievement for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Now the only thing left to do is to see whether Ali Khamenei, the top decision-maker in the kingdom of the ayatollahs, will put a stop to his nuclear weapons program. How long should we wait? What should be done if he doesn’t stop? Who will hit Iran? And how will all this talk impact the price of gasoline, the stock markets, and our pockets? As usual, any answer on the Iranian issue would be strictly an assessment, with no right or wrong answers.
This past week, Defense Minister Ehud Barak and President Shimon Peres visited Washington as the shuttle diplomacy between Americans and Israelis intensifies. Officials from both capitals have crisscrossed the Atlantic Ocean in an effort to coordinate and discuss all of the details that none of them are able to speak about in public. Netanyahu departed Thursday for the Canadian capital Ottawa – whose government is perhaps Israel’s closest ally today. The premier will likely spend the weekend there. Netanyahu will travel to Washington on Monday for a meeting with U.S. President Barack Obama.
Peres and Netanyahu met twice last week for last-minute consultations before their meetings with Obama. This trip is a decisive one, officials in the Prime Minister’s Office said. Coordination with the U.S. is important, and time is a critical factor. But not only is coordination with the foreign superpower important, but so is coordination on the domestic front.
Last week, Haaretz printed a story that claimed Peres would tell his American counterpart that he is opposed to an attack on Iran. Peres was furious, and his aides were hard at work in persuading media outlets to refrain from quoting or citing the article. In this case, denial is perceived as a problematic course of action.
The story was not denied, but on the day that it was published, Peres delivered a speech before the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations. In his remarks, Peres said that Iran was the greatest threat to Israel today, and that Israel reserved the right to defend itself against any danger. When we say that all options are on the table, we really mean it, Peres said.
Between Iraq and Iran
Defense Minister Ehud Barak did not listen to these statements. That evening, during a televised interview, he recalled that Peres also opposed the Israeli strike on the Iraqi nuclear reactor in 1980. It was as if he wanted to say, ‘So what if Peres said?’ The decision to hit the Iraqi plant was taken by then-prime minister Menachem Begin. This week marked the 20th anniversary of Begin’s passing. Netanyahu attended the event honoring Begin’s memory at the Menachem Begin Heritage Center in Jerusalem.
For several minutes, Netanyahu sat right in front of veteran radio journalist Yaron Dekel, who is about to take up his post as the commander of Army Radio, and answered questions about Begin. Dekel would not make do with harkening back to the past and, with his questions, tried to create a link with contemporary issues. Namely, he tried to link the attack on the Iraqi nuclear reactor at Osirak with the military option against present-day Iran.
On the surface, Netanyahu did not deliver the goods. But a careful inspection of what he said makes it clear that the premier chose each word carefully in order to send the appropriate message. “The longer I serve as prime minister, the more I come to admire Begin,” he said. “I think that Begin’s grandest achievement was leading underground operations that led to the ouster of the British from the land, so that the state of Israel could arise.”
Dekel would not be so easily assuaged. “What about the peace treaty with Egypt or the bombing of the reactor in Iraq?” he asked.
Netanyahu replied: “I think that Begin acted in a historic juncture. Had he not acted, perhaps the moment in which we could’ve established the state of Israel would have evaporated. His decisiveness at that moment was the proper and difficult decision that laid the groundwork for all the rest.”
Perhaps the decision to be made today, in comparison to that which was made then, is how to bring the Americans into the picture?
The importance of the Jewish vote
Vice Prime Minister Moshe (Bogey) Ya’alon was recently quoted as saying that the Iranian threat was not just aimed at Israel. Israel has never declared war on Iran, but the Khomeinist regime has declared total war on the very existence of the state of Israel. In its view, Israel is Little Satan. The U.S. holds the honor of being the Great Satan.
“Unfortunately, many in the West are ignoring this,” Ya’alon said. “The Iranian challenge takes aim at Western culture and Western hegemony wherever it may be. This regime is actively engaged in undermining pro-Western regimes as well as conducting operations against Western targets.”
The prime minister believes the Iranians are serious. He thinks that Iran will continue to charge ahead with its nuclear program. As evidence, he cites the recent International Atomic Energy Agency report which found that Iran had accelerated the pace of its uranium enrichment in recent months. That is one of the reasons that the PMO and the White House are toiling over a joint statement to be delivered following their meeting this coming week. The statement is important because the main topic will be stopping the Iranian regime from attaining the nuclear bomb while presenting a united front.
But there is even added importance in the statement that is to be released, since it is due to come after the three protagonists – Obama, Netanyahu, and Peres – have delivered their speeches. The leaders will appear at the AIPAC conference next week in Washington. The American Jewish community is a potent voting bloc, especially because they throw their weight around in the highest of places. In an election year, this has added significance.
The issue of early warning
The Iranian issue has become a hot topic on the campaign trail in the U.S. If it isn’t being discussed because of Israel, it most certainly is being discussed due to the price of gasoline. In any election year, the economy is a make-or-break issue. Pundits believe that the Republicans are eager for an attack on Iran not just for ideological reasons, but also because they think that a change in the oil market could impact Obama’s re-election chances. Israel, for its part, has no wish to take sides in the election battle. In all public opinion polls, Israel is viewed favorably in the U.S.
At this stage, there is still no agreement on the language of the joint statement. According to PMO officials, serious discussions are ongoing. Diplomatic sources report that the major disagreement is over an Israeli demand for Obama to issue a more sharply-worded statement against Iran.
Israel wants the U.S. to make clear that it will consider military action against Tehran if the economic sanctions fail to stop its nuclear program. The Americans are unwilling to agree to this. This past Wednesday, the U.S. received a boost to its pro-sanctions position following North Korea’s announcement that it was suspending its nuclear program in exchange for massive food aid.
Pyongyang pledged not to undertake nuclear testing or long-range missile deployments and tests while it also vowed to halt its enrichment of uranium. Sanctions against North Korea have led to a massive food shortage there. Now, the U.S. and the West can offer the carrot, so to speak.
In Jerusalem, however, officials are not willing to wait indefinitely. This week, Netanyahu requested that his military secretary, Yohanan Locker, a senior officer in the air force, remain in his job for another year. A statement to the press cited “a sensitive period of time” related to the Iranian issue as the reason.
According to a diplomatic source, the two national security advisers are the ones who are charged with formulating a joint statement. Last week, the two men, Maj. Gen. Ya’akov Amidror and Tom Donilon, met face to face. Donilon also met with Barak. It is likely that an agreement on a joint statement will be reached at the last minute.
What is really going on behind closed doors? It is clear that there is great activity afoot. This week, the Associated Press quoted an American intelligence official as saying that Israel would not give advance warning if it decided to strike the Iranian nuclear reactors. According to the story, the most senior Israeli officials informed the Americans that they had decided to absolve the U.S. of responsibility for an attack on Iran. At the same time, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced that the sanctions were getting tighter, and they were having their intended effect faster than the administration had expected.
Who believes Russia?
According to Ephraim Kam, a researcher at the Institute of National Security Studies in Tel-Aviv, Iran has found itself under great pressure in recent months. Kam cites two reasons. First, Western governments have begun the process of leveling harsher sanctions against Iran in the coming months, particularly in the oil and financial sectors. The most glaring example of this is Europe’s decision to halt the import of oil from Iran. Although the sanctions have yet to be imposed, civilians are feeling the pinch as the economy has deteriorated, both due to previous sanctions as well as other factors.
Secondly, there are increasing signs that Israel is considering attacking Iranian nuclear sites in the foreseeable future. In early 2012, it appeared that the U.S. also put the military option back on the table, especially if the sanctions on Iran turn out to be ineffective.
At this stage, Iran has shown no willingness to change its approach on the nuclear issue. Its position is that it has no intention of giving up its nuclear program, and that the sanctions will not compel it to back down. Yet as the date of the European embargo draws nearer, one should not totally discount the possibility that Iran will be forced to soften its position and agree to fresh negotiations over its nuclear program, especially if it becomes clear to Iran that its maneuvering has failed to bring about an end to the sanctions.
While the Israeli media eagerly awaits the statements from Israeli and American leaders, there is a larger context here. In Russia, Vladimir Putin is calling for “solving the conflict with Iran through peaceful means.” The position of Russia and China, at least publicly, is not an encouraging one for Israel.
Still, it is unclear what one should believe. This week, it was reported that the Russians gave Israel the codes to Russian-made Iranian air defense systems, codes that would make an attack on Iran easier. In this case at least, one should hope that the truth is not somewhere in between.
http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=3341
No comments:
Post a Comment