Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Is Israel Preparing an Assault Against Iran?
The IAEA report on Iran's alleged nuclear program was surrounded by a media frenzy in Israel supporting an attack.
Skimming the newspapers as I rushed to get my children ready for school, I suddenly understood that Israel might actually be preparing for a military attack against Iran. "[United States Secretary of Defense Leon] Panetta Demanded Commitment to Coordinate Action in Iran" read one headline, and "A Bomb at Arm's Length" read another.
Feeding this hype were a series of military events that had been planned months in advance yet mysteriously coincided with the publication of the International Atomic Energy Agency report on Iran's efforts to produce a nuclear bomb. For four days straight all of the major television channels repeatedly showed images of Israel preparing for war.
It began with a report on Israel's testing of a long-range ballistic missile, which emphasized the missile's capacity to carry nuclear warheads. This was followed by interviews with pilots who were part of a comprehensive Israeli Air Force drill on long-range attacks carried out at an Italian NATO air base. Archival images of a missile being launched from an Israeli submarine were also shown. Ha'aretz readers were told that the submarine was important because it would enable Israel to carry out a second strike in case of a nuclear war.
These images of offensive arrangements were followed by images of Israel's defence preparations. On November 3rd, the three major news channels dedicated several minutes of air time to covering a drill simulating an attack on central Israel; these clips showed people being carried on stretchers and soldiers treating casualties who had been hit by chemical weapons. A day later, Ha'aretz reported that the military preparations against Iran had indeed been upgraded.
Iran with nuclear capabilities has been continuously presented as an existential threat to Israel. On October 31, in the opening speech of the Knesset's winter session Prime Minister Netanyahu noted that a "nuclearized Iran will constitute a serious threat to the Middle East and to the whole world and obviously also a direct and serious threat against us," adding that Israel's security conception cannot be based on defence alone but must also include "offensive capabilities which serve as the basis for deterrence."
Analysts repeatedly mentioned that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a Holocaust denier and Reuven Barko from Yisrael Hayom even compared Iran to Nazi Germany. One cannot underestimate the impact of this analogy on the collective psyche of Jewish Israelis.
Barko went on to connect Hamlet's phrase "to be or not to be" to Israel's current situation, while posing the existing dilemma confronting the State as "to hit or not to hit". President Shimon Peres claimed that Iran is the only country in the world "that threatens the existence of another country", but neglected to mention that for generations, the Palestinians have been deprived of their right to self-determination.
On the day when the International Atomic Energy Agency report was finally published practically all Israeli media outlets described it as a "smoking gun". The report, according to the media, provides concrete evidence that Iran's nuclear program is also aimed at producing weapons. Zvi Yechezkeli from Channel Ten described it as "the end of the era of Iranian ambiguousness", but failed, of course, to remark that Israel's own ambiguity regarding its nuclear capacities continues unhindered; Roni Daniel from Channel Two declared that "we are relieved" by the report, suggesting that Israel's claims have now been corroborated and that the report can serve to justify both the imposition of harsher sanctions against Iran and even an attack.
Notwithstanding the endless war mongering, most Israeli commentators claimed that the frenzy was no more than a "nuclear spin". The majority of political analysts tended to agree that the media campaign, which presented Israel as seriously preparing to attack Iran, was orchestrated just in order to pressure the international community to impose harsher sanctions against Iran. Channel Ten's Or Heller put it succinctly when he said: "It appears that neither Iran nor the Israeli public is the target of what is going on here, but first and foremost it is the international community, the Americans, the British."
The commentators also noted that there is wall-to-wall opposition to an Israeli assault, including the US, Europe, Russia and China. Alex Fishman summed up the international sentiment when he wrote: "If someone in Israel thinks that there is a green or a yellow light coming from Washington for a military attack against Iran - this person has no inkling whatsoever of what is going on; the light remains the same, a glaring red."
The portrayal of Israel as a neighborhood bully who feigns a rage attack while calling out to his friends to hold him back is not particularly reassuring, however.
After 10 days of media frenzy, Defence Minister Ehud Barak tried to calm the public by saying that "not even 500 people would be killed" in the event of an attack - but he failed to say that there would be no attack.
Yossi Verter from Ha'aretz explained that the media hype serves Barak's interests. "A successful attack on the Iranian nuclear facilities under his ministerial leadership can rehabilitate his personal status, and help him recover the public's trust." Verter cites a leading member of the political system, who claims that "Barak is convinced that only a person of his security stature can lead perhaps the most fateful battle in Israel's history since the War of Independence."
Regardless of whether Netanyahu and Barak are already set on launching an assault, the media hype and the portrayal of Iran as constituting an existential threat to Israel surely help to produce the necessary conditions for a military campaign.
What is remarkable about this saber rattling is its abstraction. Not a single analyst noted that entering war is easy but ending it is far more difficult, particularly if on the other side stands a regional power with vast resources and a well-trained military (unlike Hamas or Hezbollah). And, of course, no one really talked about the likelihood of a gory future or what kind of life we were planning for our children. This kind of abstraction makes war palatable, providing a great service to the war machine.
39 Comments so far
Show AllThe International Atomic Energy Agency is in need of very close scrutiny.
Who are the people running the agency now?
I strongly suspect that after the agency was not compliant to the wishes of the warmongers in 2003, that there has been a reorganizing of agency standards to better promote the preferred agenda - more war.
Who has been removed and who has been installed by the owners?
Good questions.
"Ever since Nobel laureate Mohamed ElBaradei stepped down as head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in late 2009, the United States and some of its allies have pushed Baradei’s successor, Yukiya Amano, to ratify Western arguments that Iran is trying to acquire nuclear weapons."
PULLING THE IAEA INTO THE “ATTACK IRAN” DEBATE WILL BACKFIRE
http://www.raceforiran.com/pulling-the-iaea-into-the-%E2%80%9Cattack-iran%E2%80%9D-debate-will-backfire
"The commentators also noted that there is wall-to-wall opposition to an Israeli assault, including the US, Europe, Russia and China."
Those commentators are wrong, of course. Russia and China are opposed, but it remains to be seen if they'll actually do anything about it, China especially. The US is massively in favor, as long as the attack is conducted on American terms. And as for Europe, it'll fret and yammer like usual, but look forward to all kinds of lucrative resource contracts contracts in a post-obliteration Iran.
I agree. China has already proven that they are willing to take whatever steps are necessary to work with the US, and anyone else for that matter, no matter what it entails/encompasses. And yes, Europe hems/haws as if they care about the matter, but in the end, they care only about those contracts, as does China (and everybody else on the map for that matter.)
I've confirmed with others who know about such matters that the architecture of destabilizing Libya from within is the prototype going forward, across the ME, including Iran and Syria. It's already in the works, and IS saber-rattling is just the heads up to all parties across the world that it is still "a go" and "place your bets on the table."
Some analysts IE: Gareth Porter [who in addition to folks like Eric Margolis, has done a good job debunking this much hyped not-so 'new' IAEA Report] recently in a 'Real News' interview w Paul Jay, says that all this hype about Iran's still apparently non-existent nukes- is really NOT about War- but is about cornering the Russians & Chinese on agreeing to more sanctions on Iran. I, like the Author [Neve Gordon] here, am not so sure that Porter & others are right about that rather 'benign ' assessment.
First} Even if Porter view is right that this all about bluffing- sometimes even bluffing in a Very Dangerous Game can have tragic if not Catastrophic consequences due to miscalculation & blunder!
2nd} IMO Russia's Putin & the Chinese are as clear [in fact far more so] about all this hyped BS about the so-called damning 'new' 'evidence' in IAEA's report as is Porter & Margolis. In fact the Russians almost certainly knew about the ex-Russian nuke weapons expert, Danilenko, who's NOT- BeFore Porter & probably are the ultimate source of Porter's info on Danilenko. So after Iraq & more recently Libya- the Russians & Chinese put their foot down & Vetoed a recent US-NATO inspired & backed UN Res against Syria. I suspect they'll also do the same on Iran. Plus the Russians have just helped the Iranians build a nuke reactor plant, which would be an obvious target should the US, UK, NATO & IDF attack Iran, & unlike Libya, Iran shares a border w Russia- where nuclear fallout is likely to spread as well as much of the region. I could be wrong but IMO neither Russia nor China are likely to be in the mood that encourages & legitimizes the US' NeoCon AIPAC crowd, et-al hyped BS on Iran! One would think the US & Company would be smart enough to know this too, so why go thru all of this just to try to bluff the Russians & Chinese into going for the Ole Okey Doke- that they're probably in no mood to go for?!
3rd} As Mr Gordon outlines here- There are just too many war drums beating in the US, UK, France & Israel [including that joint IDF / NATO war game exercises] to be so dismissive of a real intent to go to War either w Iran &/or Syria.
4th} I keep going back to the post 9-11 [or even pre 9-11] NeoCon {s}Hit List as confirmed by ex-NATO Gen Wesley Clark that the NeoCons / NeoLiberals planned to attack / destabilize / regime-change- 7 Muslim countries including: Iraq, Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Syria & IRAN [also Lebanon]. We know for a fact that the US has attacked &/or stirred-up trouble in ALL 6 of those countries- w the IDF going in on Lebanon in 2006! If anyone thought that plan was on hold w the exit of Bush / Cheney & the advent of O-Bomb-em & Billary what the O-Bomb-em regime has done / is doing in Somalia, Sudan [split in two just this yr] & most of all LIBYA - should dis-spell that notion [Its called COG- Continuity of Gov't - Meaning its the same ole prog No Matter if a white Repug or a Black so-called 'liberal' Dim is in the White-House]!
Apparently the NeoCon AIPAC Likudniks are itching to attack Iran but they've got a problem. The IDF can attack & temporarily damage but unlikely can Destroy Iran's uranium enrichment facilities- unless they do the Duke Nukem [God forbid!]. And the IDF can't invade let alone occupy Iran on its own. But such an attack would justify that Iran just GO FOR IT [IE: no more playing coy]! So what they'd like to do is get the US & NATO to do it - w or without them. If US & NATO won't agree out-right then the gamble might be for the IDF to attack- anticipating that - that would to force the US & NATO into the fray! As I said this is a Very Dangerous Game that’s being played!
PS: All this hype over the so-called 'new' IAEA report [that's basically the SOS twice warmed over] in the US,Isreal, etc - Is quite Hypocritical to say the least! When Nobel Peace Prize Winner ElBaradei produced IAEA reports that refused to cry 'Wolf' about Iran's Still Non-Existent Nukes, the US poly-tricksters & corp-controlled MSNM Media [propaganda] Outlets- basically Ignored ElBaradei & the IAEA, even though he had far more stature than this new IAEA Guy [Yukiya Amano]! IMO: With this Amano guy heading the IAEA there's a risk of the IAEA becoming like the ICC- just a tool in the hands of US, UK, French, EU Imperialists & their allies - to Demonize those that they've targeted to be Taken-Down / Taken-Out [IE: Khadaffi]! If so, just like the ICC, the IAEA will be left w Little if Any Real Credibility as an Objective / Non-Political Body!
Food for Thought: Why is it that the US, which stead-fastly refuses to acknowledge the ICC's jurisdiction vis-a-vis itself, is allowed by the ICC to refer alleged war criminals that the US has demonized [IE: Khadaffi] to the ICC? - For the same reason that Israel, which stead-fastly refuses to sign onto the NPT- is allowed by Amano's IAEA to accuse a signatory of the NPT [Iran] of violating the NPT!..
Israel is the most dangerous country on earth with their religious fanaticism and their aggressive colonialism which is why it would be a good thing if Iran had nuclear weapons to counter keep Israel's madness in check. Iran is as religiously as nuts as Israel but they do not have a history of unprovoked aggression against other countries which has been the trademark of Israel since its founding.
For a good analysis and insight look at the article by Sasan Fayazmanesh on Mr. Amano and the "new" IAEA.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/11/15/mr-amano-and-regime-change/
Thankyou for the link.
The citizens of Israel and USA should keep in mind we are not planning to bomb Iran. We are planning to bomb nuclear refineries and nuclear reactors which happen to be in Iran. When nuclear reactors have merely leaked (Chernobyl, Fukushima), most of the radioactive materials remain in the reactor. Nevertheless, a leaking nuclear reactor is a catastrophe causing large sections of geography to be off limits to humans. We are now planning to actually bomb reactors and blow their contents into the atmosphere. That has never been done in history. It is not a good precedent to set. And the geography we are planning to put off limits to humans is the Persian Gulf from where comes half of the world's oil. For the USA to bomb nuclear reactors in Iran is economic suicide. For Israel to bomb them is an act of economic war against the USA.
I'd be curious to know the difference in probable ecological impact between fuel-grade fissile material (10-12% enriched) and weapons-grade material (min 97% enriched). Also, one has to wonder if dropping explosive ordinance on weapons-grade material could cause a detonation. Especially in light of the fact that it takes a shaped conventional charge to ignite a fission or fusion weapon.
Even if it's +90% enriched uranium or separated Pu239 it is extremely unlikely that conventional explosion could detonate a stock-pile of fissile material. It takes a hi-explosive shape charge very precisely configured & timed to cause an precise explosive shock-wave to compress the fissile care past its critical mass density for a nuclear detonation. That's why initially nukes warheads w U235 cores used the gun type trigger method because it was technically easier to achieve without so much precision - [Note: this method doesn't work w Pu239 cores].
But bombing a stock-pile of Hi or low enriched uranium or Pu239 can blast a radioactive cloud over a Wide Area [ala Chernobyl & Fukushima]!
I wrote an article which was published on globalresearch.ca when der Bush was trying to nuke Iran. It is still worth a read as these dummies push for another war.
We are talking fifteen ton "bunker busters," etc., with the provisio that these are not nuclear armed weapons. You do not need to nuke a nuclear plant to create a disaster. Hitting the control room, or the cooling ponds will give you another Fukushima or worse as the reactor will run away.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=2093
I am appalled at the course we are taking. Even if Iran cobbled together a nuclear weapon within the next ten years, does anybody think they would launch it against Israel with its steadily growing nuclear arsenal? Israel who has stated that if they ever look like they will be defeated, they will use the "Samson Option" which is to nuke every capitol in Europe and the Middle East and take the world down with them?
Iran should be left alone. They are not warlike, though they are good at defending themselves. The Israeli government on the other hand should all be locked up in a rubber room and given soft toys to play with.
"Iran with nuclear capabilities has been continuously presented as an existential threat to Israel."
Well, it seems we have nothing to worry about; this is just an existential problem.
Like all our problems.
Thanks, Neve, for the frightening but honest analysis. This is the big blindspot Kurt Vonnegut and many other sad, angry observers always talked about: OTHER people are always posing problems... WE'RE just sweet well-meaning sorts who better blow the buggers away before they get to us first!
Nothing motivates quite like hysteria...
The zio form an existential threat to humanity.
Israel attacks Iran spreading massive death and irradiation across the country and region and Israelis are worried about Iran's possible damage to Israel in retaliation! HELLO? No interest in 80 million people in Iran? Are the Israelis so narcissistic that they cannot imagine the horror that they will cause by incinerating another people? Where is the claimed 'most moral people, most more army in the world'?
Morality is like a telescope, things are a lot bigger on the end where you stand.
Are you sure you don't mean "amorality"?
No. I mean morality. Everyone has a right to what they think that is of course. I can promise you that Israelis don't think their actions are immoral.
"... Israelis don't think ...".
You are correct if you talk about:-
* Israels propaganda and official position.
* Those brainwashed by the media (sadly a majority in most countries).
But anyone who manages to shake off the conditioning CAN THINK for themselves, including many in Israel. It is quite plain:-
* who is doing the threatening.
* who has the oil.
* who is gonna get bombed, invaded and occupied.
* who has the habit of invasion and occupation, and who has never.
* who holds the puppet strings of the empire's might.
* who is bristling with modern weapons including nukes.
* who has complied with demands about nukes and who has been allowed to have whatever they want.
A few years ago, some government rabbi stated to the press that the entire Arab peoples were not worth one Israeli fingernail.
I rest my case.
This is a time honored trick by the Israelis to goad the US into doing their dirty work. If Israel wants to US to put pressure on one of their enemies they say that they're "preparing to attack" it so the US can come in and apply crippling sanctions, thus "preventing war".
SOMEBODY'S gotta point out out that this whole thing is flat-out, strait-jacket, tweetie-bird, rubber room, batshit, clinically insane. Israel claims it's preparing to bomb the hell out of one of the few countries left in the Middle East not engaged in war, because it looks like they might soon have nuclear weapons...will they use their OWN nuclear weapons, their presumably MORAL nuclear weapons, to do the job? If Iran did have nukes and they bombed Israel, wouldn't they get fallout downwind, not to mention thus inviting retaliation with the nukes everyone knows Israel has? I find it stretches plausibility that they're really afraid. What's this really about? Also want to pint out that we must not forget that even in Israel, what the maniacs in charge say and do is not necessarily representative of the people.
"SOMEBODY'S gotta point out out that this whole thing is... clinically insane."
Maybe it's time for OWS to visit the Pentagon, or the Israeli embassy (I know, same difference).
Israel is the Nazi reich of this century and I feel for the innocents but wonder why there isn't an uprising against the "leadership" of that country. They are horrible warmongers and do they actually call it a "war of independance"? More like a war of occupation. If it weren't, the Palestiniens wouldn't be having their necks crushed by Jewish boots. Besides, if they attack Iran we'll no longer have to worry about global warming but we'll have a hell of a time trying to survive a nucular winter.
Neve you're a mensch
Yup. Easy on the eyes, too. (Sorry, had to say that.)
The same Neve Gordon, who calls for a boycott on Israeli institutions, receives his paycheck directly from the Israeli government, as a professor at the Ben-Gurion university in Beer-Sheba where he also serves as head of the Department of Politics and Government. Mensch or hypocrite?
Mensch.*
* Although this feeble excuse for trenchant devil's-advocacy doesn't even merit the obvious response.
Mensch. He's not being paid by the Israeli government to push Israeli propaganda. Even in Israel, governments are complex things.
The Israeli government doesn't meddle in the views of professors in the academia (as surprising as this may be for a servant of the Ayatollah regime). Nonetheless the integrity of Prof. Gordon is questionable, since he calls for boycotting Israeli academic institutions, and at the same time works in one.
Nice Parthian volley, but I still don't see any logic behind the part of your original argument you still stand behind. One can simultaneously teach young Israelis and still maintain that other nations should temporarily renounce contact with Israeli institutions.
IsRaHeLL iSnOtReAl,
They are trying to force America's hand, they got America to invade and occupy Iraq, then bomb Libya, trying to do the same to Syria and now Iran is the last one on their list. They are America's spoiled, delinquent child. They break all the rules, America still pats them on the head and protects them at the UN. America and Israel is caught up in this dysfunctional relationship where the tail is wagging the dog. We are big and powerful enough to threaten, bomb and invade other countries, but we are scared of one little Jewish State.
Well, we can't afford to employ our people or feed our hungry children, but we can pay an annual $3 billion dollars tribute to the Israeli government and its military.
Who's the tail and who's the dog?