Israel Matzav: What if Israel attacks Iran anyway?

Monday, April 15, 2013

What if Israel attacks Iran anyway?

We all know that the United States doesn't want Israel to attack Iran. But what if Israel went ahead and did it anyway? Dr. Max Singer of the Begin-Sadat Center argues that if Israel attacks, it would actually be in the United States' interest to use the attack to discourage Iran from resuming its pursuit of nuclear weapons.

Many people assume that if Israel defies the US by attacking Iran without US agreement, the US would join international condemnation of Israel, partly to convince the Iranian regime and the rest of the Muslim world that the US was not complicit in the attack, and partly in response to Israel creating major problems for the US by defying American demands.

While it is possible that this would be the US reaction, the overriding American national interest actually leads in the opposite direction. Even if an Israeli attack goes as planned, the physical damage to Iranian facilities could likely be repaired in perhaps six months to a year.

Consequently, the most important interest of the US in the wake of an Israeli strike would be to dissuade the Iranian regime from restarting its program of building nuclear weapons.

Condemnation of Israel would be counterproductive, encouraging Iran to conclude that they can get away with rebuilding their nuclear facilities. On the other hand, support for Israel would be evidence of international determination to prevent the rebuilding of an Iranian nuclear weapons program. Added to the delays and cost resulting from the Israeli attack, this evidence could shift the balance of opinion within the Iranian regime against the nuclear program.

The other way in which the aftermath of a limited Israeli attack could lead to a permanent end to the Iranian pursuit of nuclear weapons is if the attack indirectly led to a popular overthrow of the revolutionary regime that now rules Iran.

There is wide public support in Iran for the Iranian nuclear program, which claims not to be a weapons program. But as reported by Michael Ledeen, several polls conducted last year indicate that a large majority of Iranians favor giving up efforts to get nuclear weapons in order to end the economic sanctions against Iran.

If their nuclear weapons production facilities are attacked by Israel, Iranians will have conflicting impulses. On the one hand, they are patriotic and support their country’s right to have a nuclear energy program. On the other hand, many of them are bitterly disillusioned by the regime and inclined to blame it for anything that goes wrong.

Probably the most important determinant of whether there will be popular uprising that the regime cannot put down is popular perception about whether an uprising would succeed or fail. Iranians, like most people, want to make sure that they are on the winning side, and it is widely believed that an uprising could only succeed if it has international support.

If the US and other non-Muslim countries refuse to condemn Israel for attacking the Iranian nuclear weapons facilities – and instead say that the attack was precipitated by the Iranian revolutionary regime’s defiance of the UN and its threats to “wipe Israel off the map” – the Iranian public may conclude that there would be international support for a new regime in Iran.

On the other hand, international condemnation of Israel would be seen as foreign support for the revolutionary regime, and would discourage efforts to overthrow it.

Read the whole thing.

I'm not convinced by this analysis. First, the Obama administration only cares whether Iran gets nuclear weapons in the context of its bid for world disarmament. From that perspective, there's no difference between whether Iran gets nuclear weapons or whether Pakistan gets them or whether Israel has them. It is at least as likely that in the aftermath of an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear weapons program, the US would try to force Israel to give up its (undeclared) nuclear capability and tie pressure for the permanent shutdown of Iran's nuclear weapons program to Israel's agreement to disarm. Given that there are other countries that would like to destroy Israel, Israel cannot disarm.

Second, given what happened in the aftermath of the Iranian elections in 2009, I don't see how anyone can assume that the Obama administration will support a popular uprising in Iran, or do anything that would encourage one. In fact, it is far more likely that Obama will continue to try to appease the Ayatollahs.

Third, seeing papers like this one may encourage the Obama administration to dig in its heels so as not to be seen as supporting Israel - at least so long as there is no 'peace agreement' with the 'Palestinians' (which, as we all know, is unlikely to happen in our lifetimes, and will certainly not happen while Obama is still in power).

What could go wrong?

Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Iranian nuclear threat, Israeli attack on Iran