Showing posts with label israel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label israel. Show all posts

Sunday, January 8, 2012

The future of... an attack on Iran

If Israel has nuclear weapons, why shouldn't Iran?
Most of the world assumes that Israel has a substantial amount of nuclear weapons (some estimates go as high as 400 warheads), and therefore this question is being asked. The answer is quite simple: Israel has never threatened to annihilate any other sovereign nation, not even its worst enemies. According to some sources, the only time Israel was close to using its nuclear arsenal was in late 1973, when both the Syrian and Egyptian armies invaded it and there was a real threat to the nation's existence.

There is an opinion that like it happened with China, Iran will also become more moderate and rational when they get nuclear power. I am not sure if this is a similar case, because back in the 1960s, China was mostly isolated after it severed its ties with USSR. Iran on the other hand, gets support from Russia, China, North Korea and some south American nations. As flimsy as this support is, it does reduce Iran's incentive to become more tolerant towards the West.

Should Iran be attacked?
I hope not. Wars are never a good idea and may cause instability, however the difference here is the fact that Iran already causes instability by itself as a part of their foreign policy, either by themselves or by proxies like the Hezbollah. If there will be a military attack it will to be large, in order to completely stop the Iranian nuclear weapons program: the enrichment and production facilities are scattered all over this large country, many of them fortified and underground which makes aerial bombings very difficult and mostly ineffective. The main reason for an attack is that diplomacy has failed abd sanctions have mostly failed as well, and we're close to the point when we will have to use what Clausewitz called "the other means".

If an attack happens, who should conduct it?
The country that has most to gain from an attack on Iran is obviously Israel, even if it will suffer from consequences like international protests, Iran-sponsored terror attacks and direct retaliation in the form of missiles attacks. Unfortunately Israel simply doesn't have the means: its fleet of F-16I and F-15I attack airplanes, ballistic missiles and submarines, won't be able to go through such a large-scale, long-range attack. Ideally, it should be a coalition of those who Iran threatens, meaning US, EU, Arab and Israeli forces. This obviously cannot happen, and we will need to remove Israel from this coalition. An American-European-Arab coalition was formed in 1991 against Iraq, which was a far weaker enemy, which received far less international support than Iran. My best bet will be just a coalition of the US and the EU, without official Turkish or Arab involvement.

And what if the Iranians are telling the truth, and do not develop nuclear weapons?
Ironically, that reminds me of how Israel objected to international supervision over its nuclear facility in the 1960s. If Iran has nothing to hide, why would it object so much to international supervision? The UN made it clear that nuclear research, energy production and weapon development are not internal affairs. Israel was at least honest about it and refused to sign the nonproliferation treaty. Iran did sign it but refuses to cooperate and remove suspicion. Let's face it, this behavior does not induce confidence.

Wednesday, December 7, 2011

Opinion Nanny State

Back in 1948, Israel declared itself as a "Jewish and democratic state". Let's not be naive, it is almost impossible to make it work smoothly in a way that everyone is satisfied. In fact for a long time (1948 to 1966), the democratic part of this declaration was relevant to non-Arabs only (Jews, Druze, other minorities). The Arabs were still allowed to vote and had some degree of freedom of speech, but that was about it. They were governed by the military in their towns and villages and were greatly limited in their movements and activities.

Strangely though, the idea of "Jewish and democratic" sort of worked for a long time. Not without frictions, not perfectly and the Jewish and Arabs community are mostly separated, but much of it is by choice. Israel is by far not the "apartheid state" which human rights organizations claim it is: Arabs and other minorities vote, have complete freedom of speech, receive social welfare, can study universities and are protected by laws against discrimination.

Something else is worrying and might undermine the idea of "Jewish and democratic" state, and it's not the way the Jewish majority treats minorities, or the LGBT community or even illegal immigrants. It's the right-wing insecurity that makes me concerned. Yes, there is a small group of people inside Israel that can be described as anti-Zionists and object to its existence. It's natural: political opinions, like any other natural phenomenon, behave according to a Normal Distribution curve and you can find a few extremists on both sides. But the majority - the vast majority - are somewhere in the center. Patriotic, loyal and willing to serve their country to one degree or another.

Making such a legislative effort in order to curb these few extremists (which can literally be numbered in dozens) does not make any sort of sense to me. Is this right-wing government that insecure about its own policy, that it's willing to sacrifice basic human rights for even its most loyal citizens, just in order to stop people from talking against it? Is it willing to throw away one of the few and strongest arguments we have left, which is the fact we are the only democracy in the Middle East?

Unlike capitalism, Democracy is equal for everyone, especially in this day and age. Everyone should be able to speak his or her mind. Some of those who support the laws say that these laws only limit certain, extreme and damaging opinions. But the fact is, no one can tell what is a damaging opinion and what isn't. Furthermore, by doing so, you DO limit the freedom of speech and conscience, however you look at it.

I honestly believe that the Israelis are self-assured enough and can form their own opinions by themselves. We do not need a government that tells us what to think and prevents us from speaking our minds. I belong to the center-left, I whole heatedly agree with the idea of Israel as a national home for Jews, but I will not accept it being turned into yet another dictatorship in the middle east. If it will, it won't be my country anymore. Literally.