The
Jerusalem Post
You don't have to be a nuclear scientist to realize that
Kochavi’s “briefing” was in complete harmony with Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu’s worldview and policies.
By RUTHIE BLUM
IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Aviv Kochavi’s speech at
the annual Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) conference on Tuesday
aroused the kind of debate among Israeli pundits and politicians that is
particularly relevant in the wake of US President Joe Biden’s inauguration this
month, and in the lead-up to the March 23 Knesset elections.
In his address, Kochavi conveyed a two-pronged message: that
the administration in Washington should not return to the Joint Comprehensive
Plan of Action (JCPOA) in its current form or any updated version of it; and
that the Israeli military is preparing for the possibility of an attack on
the Islamic Republic’s nuclear
facilities.
The way he did this, in part, was to underscore the
difference between friend and foe.
“The world power with which we have the strongest ties is
the United States,” he stated. “The cooperation [between us] is outstanding,
both strategically and operationally. With each passing year, we increase the
scope of coordination and achieve the highest level of intimacy. We also have
understandings and even operational coordination with Russia – something that
can’t be taken for granted – and our coordination and military ties with Egypt
and Jordan are only strengthening.”
He then pointed to the Abraham Accords. “The normalization
[with Arab countries in the region] creates a counter-wave against our enemies,
many of whom... were already quite isolated, and now are even more so,”
he said, adding, that “for the most part, we have considerably minimized
[those] enemies’ ability to transfer weapons via air, land and sea, and...
funds earmarked for terrorism.”
Here he issued a warning to the regime in Tehran and its
proxy groups in Gaza, Lebanon and Syria.
“On the day [that our enemies] declare war, many, many
missiles will fall [on Israel]. We’re doing everything we can to prevent
that... But it’s precisely against this threat that we intend to launch a massive
attack – on open and urban enemy areas, and on buildings housing missiles and
other weapons,” he announced. “Iran... feeds terrorism around the world
[and]... there’s no doubt in anybody’s mind that [it] has striven to achieve,
marked as a target, desired and built the capability of a nuclear military
state...”
HE WAS even more specific about his utter opposition to any
iteration of the JCPOA, which he insisted would have enabled Iran to obtain a
nuclear bomb “in a matter of months or even weeks.”
“A return to the nuclear deal of 2015, or even a similar
agreement with a number of improvements, is bad and wrong, both operationally
and strategically,” he asserted, claiming that any such agreement would enable
Iran to forge, full speed ahead, with its uranium enrichment and centrifuge
development – and spark the nuclearization of the entire Middle East.
Without mentioning it by name, he praised the previous US
administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign on Iran, which contributed to the
country’s dire economic straits and disgruntled population. All such measures,
he said, must be maintained, though Iran could still decide to step up its
nuclear efforts.
Meanwhile, he concluded, “I have directed the IDF to prepare
a number of operational plans, in addition to existing ones,” so that in the
event that the political echelon decides to implement them, they will be “on
the table, ready and practiced.”
YOU DON’T have to be a nuclear scientist, Iranian or
otherwise, to realize that Kochavi’s “briefing” was in complete harmony with
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s worldview and policies. Naturally, then,
opponents of Netanyahu’s continued leadership promptly pounced on the IDF
chief.
The most tired criticism, such as that leveled by Channel 12
anchor Oded Ben Ami, was that Kochavi was creating unnecessary friction with
Washington before Biden even had a chance to settle into the White House.
The most amusing was that Israel’s top military man should
have taken a slightly more pacifist approach, like that of his predecessor,
Gadi Eisenkot, who – at the INSS conference in 2016 – lauded the JCPOA as a
“historic turning point,” and last month penned an article in the Hebrew daily
Yediot Aharonot, arguing that Israel’s current security challenges “do not
constitute an existential threat.”
By far the most ridiculous, however, came from former deputy
IDF chief of staff Yair Golan – a rabid leftist and Meretz MK – who accused
Kochavi, among other things, of highlighting threats as a way of vying for a
larger defense budget.
Iran probably isn’t taking Kochavi’s detractors any more
seriously than the bulk of the Israeli public does. In any case, the
powers-that-be in Tehran are more focused at the moment on Biden and the team
he is assembling.
So far, it’s an encouraging lineup for anyone hoping for,
and literally banking on, a US return to the JCPOA. But none is as blatant an
appeaser as Robert Malley, who – according to a source cited in Politico on
Wednesday – accepted Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s offer to replace
Elliott Abrams as US special representative for Iran, “but also asked for a
team that would represent a broad diversity of viewpoints on how best to
renegotiate the Iran deal.”
Malley, who heads the International Crisis Group NGO, led
the Middle East desk of the National Security Council under former US president
Barack Obama. The “conflict resolution” expert, an advocate of engagement with
Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, was a key negotiator of the JCPOA.
NO WONDER radical leftist organizations, such as Code Pink
and J Street, are rooting for his appointment. Nor should it come as a surprise
that noted Israel-basher Peter Beinart, author of The Crisis of Zionism, is
also in Malley’s corner.
In a lengthy blog screed on Tuesday, Beinart wrote that
“like Obama, Malley’s background enables him to see America – and the West more
generally – from the outside-in and the bottom-up. In 1996, Malley published
‘The Call From Algeria,’ a careful study of what he called Third Worldism –
‘the belief in the revolutionary aspirations of the Third World masses’ – an
ideology, he notes, to which his parents ‘dedicated their lives.’”
The mullahs and their puppets must be happy at the prospect
of having Malley as their point man to push America back to the JCPOA. After
four years of former president Donald Trump – who not only withdrew from the
nuclear deal, but brokered peace accords between Israel and anti-Iranian
Sunni-Arab states – they’re hungry to regain the upper hand in talks with US
officials. They also yearn to rid themselves of the crippling sanctions that
make their hegemonic aims more difficult and time-consuming to achieve.
THIS BRINGS us back to Israel, which reaped many benefits
from the Trump administration, among them the freedom to act against Iran and
other enemies without being chastised for it. Though Netanyahu has been
consistent throughout his career in viewing Iran as the world’s greatest threat
– and acted accordingly, including during Obama’s two terms in office – he was
given full legitimacy by and backing from Trump.
So, while he and Kochavi realize that the honeymoon with
Washington is about to turn into a mere marriage of convenience, if not a
hostile union, they can’t afford to succumb to despair. Nor can they let Iran
sense any weakness on their part.
It is undoubtedly for this reason that he offered the
following description of “what our enemies think of us.”
Israel, he said, “is perceived as a country that takes
high-level action all over the Middle East... that succeeds in defending itself
and... in safeguarding its borders and assets. [It’s] perceived as enterprising
and high-functioning.”
The Israelis who berated Kochavi for that speech have been
too busy viewing Netanyahu as an enemy to grasp what the United Arab Emirates,
Bahrain, Sudan and Morocco understand very well: Iran is the villain; Israel is
the hero.
