THE TIMES OF ISRAEL
https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/as-iran-edges-toward-a-bomb-an-israeli-preemptive-strike-is-more-likely/
Efraim
Inbar 
JAN 15, 2021, 1:42 PM
 |
| Construction of Iran's Fordo nuclear facility, on December 11, 2020 |
With no appetite in the US for military confrontation, Israel may
aim for nuclear installations before Tehran achieves nuclear capacity
The Iranian government announced on January 4 that it had
resumed enriching uranium to 20 percent, in a significant move that can shorten
Iran’s time to develop a nuclear bomb. In just a few days, on January 20, Joe
Biden starts his presidency intent on negotiating a new nuclear deal with Iran.
While the American posture towards Iran is not clear yet, its chances of
achieving an agreement that could allay Israeli fears of Iran’s nuclear
potential are slim. The developments in Tehran and in Washington make an
Israeli preemptive strike on Iran’s nuclear installations more probable.
Israeli fears of Iran are the
result of the republic’s drive for Middle East hegemony and its quest for a
nuclear bomb. The religious leadership of Iran believes that the Jewish state
has no right to exist and that Israel will either wither away under military
pressure or be annihilated when it is weak and vulnerable. Iran also realizes
that Israel is the main military barrier to its hegemonic aspirations,
rendering it a strategic, as well as a religious, anathema.
Therefore, Iran’s proxies,
possessing myriad missiles that can target Israel’s population centers and
strategic installations, encircle the Jewish state with a “ring of fire” to
weaken it and neutralize its strategic superiority.
The international community has
largely ignored Iran’s aggressive regional behavior. The US undermined the
balance of power in the Gulf, destroying Saddam Hussein’s regime without
establishing a strong successor government. Moreover, President Donald Trump
signaled American intentions to leave the Middle East and improved Iran’s
chances of erecting a “Shiite corridor” from Iran, via Iraq and Syria to the
Mediterranean Sea. Biden is unlikely to reverse the direction of American
foreign policy.
Although the Iranian nuclear
project and its long-range missile program are primarily intended to deter an
invasion and to assure regime survival, they have elicited many fears in the
region. In the absence of a credible American security umbrella Middle Eastern
states, which invariably display high threat perception, are unlikely to look
nonchalantly on a nuclear-armed Iran. This would inevitably generate nuclear
proliferation.
Israel views a nuclear Middle
East with trepidation. Achieving stable deterrence with one hostile, nuclear-armed
Middle Eastern state is extremely doubtful. With more than one it is a
nightmare. The belief in the stabilizing effects of nuclear proliferation is
wishful thinking on the part of irresponsible arm-chair strategists.
Israel has covertly obstructed
Iran’s nuclear progress. The June 2020 explosion at Natanz, attributed by
foreign media reports to Israel or the US, and the elimination of the top
nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh in November 2020, attributed by Iran to
Israel, are recent indications of such
an effort. When such tools are no longer deemed effective, surgical airstrikes
are employed to destroy the nuclear installations in neighboring countries.
This was the fate of the nuclear reactors in Iraq (1981) and in Syria (2007).
Preemption of an emerging threat is integral to Israeli strategic thinking.
Israel hardly shares the widespread apprehension about the regional
repercussions of Israeli preventive actions. Preemption in Iraq and Syria ended
the nuclear projects in these states with only marginal international costs.
An Israeli preemptive strike
will also keep the Sunni states aligned with Israel. As Iran becomes more
powerful in the region and the US security umbrella becomes less reliable,
reorienting the foreign policy towards Tehran might become more attractive for
the Gulf states. Israel might strike sooner rather than later in order to
prevent additional improvements in Iran’s defensive measures around its nuclear
installations.
An Iranian nuclear arsenal
constitutes an insurance policy for regime survival and is important for
achieving regional hegemony. Thus, it is inconceivable that the mullahs will
give up the quest for the bomb, unless forced to do so. It is unlikely that the
June 2021 presidential elections, with only hardliner candidates, will produce
a reasonable Iranian negotiating position vis-à-vis the Biden administration.
Initially, Jerusalem will allow Washington a chance to renegotiate the nuclear
deal in an attempt to secure Israel’s minimum conditions for a good agreement.
Yet, such an outcome is highly unlikely. Whatever efforts at regime change were
made were unsuccessful and it remains unlikely in the near future. And
ultimately, the US has no appetite for military confrontation with Iran even if
the talks collapse.
In contrast, Israel feels
extremely vulnerable as Iran’s nuclear aspirations are seen in Israel as an
existential threat. If left alone and after realizing that covert means have
exhausted their usefulness, Jerusalem would seriously consider taking military action.
Despite the many obstacles to a successful mission, the IDF seems capable of
executing it. Prime Minister Netanyahu consistently and emphatically reiterates
that Israel will not allow Iran to become a nuclear power.
In order to reverse Iran’s
ascendance in the Middle East, prevent its nuclearization and thwart Israel’s
encirclement by Iranian proxies, preemption is now more probable.
|
|