Iran strike – go or no go?
Rhetoric and preparations continue to escalate in Israel’s ‘will-they won’t-they’ undertake a pre-emptive strike on Iran saga . There were several developments overnight that show both sides are taking the issue very seriously. The Indian Express reported that the US intercepted a shipment of missile parts enroute from North Korea to Iran. The flight carrying vital components was denied permission to fly over Indian air space at the last minute. The details so far are sketchy, but some of the story about the interception of the flight in August has just emerged. On August 4, an aircraft operated by Pyongyang’s state-controlled airline was given permission by India to fly from Burma to Tehran, traversing Indian airspace. At the last minute, the office of India’s prime minister “hurriedly” asked authorities to withdraw the clearance. The source of the report claims that the clearance was annulled following a request from Washington. Another source says that the flight was carrying gyroscopic guidance components necessary for a nuclear war head guidance system. If the report is true, it seems to prove that Iran is close to completion of a war head, which is what Israel’s intelligence services claim but that other analysts think unlikely.
Iran certainly seems to think an attack is a real possibility. Iran has been running attack simulations and is drilling its populace for emergency preparations. They are running large scale exercises designed to test their emergency response procedures. According to the Israeli paper Haaretz, ”Iranian state television showed pictures of ambulances with sirens wailing rushing to the scene of a simulated attack and people lying on the ground with bloodied faces. Officials also reiterated that Iran was ready to close down the Strait of Hormuz, a sea route at the mouth of the Gulf through which 40 percent of the world’s traded oil passes, if the United States attacked. Navy Commander Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayari said foreign forces in the region were being closely watched and Iran would not allow any foreign ship to enter its waters. “We are capable of closing the Strait of Hormuz.” It seems that Iran recognizes it could not withstand a combined US-Israeli attack in a conventional form. Iran is therefore preparing asymmetrical war plans which se it running insurgent disruption to Gulf shipping traffic as a response. Military experts in the region say Iran’s armed forces could cause havoc on shipping routes, particularly using small craft for hit-and-run attacks. Iran’s Basijis paramilitary forces have been training in preparation for this strategy.
To make sure that Iran is clear that Israel is serious in considering such an attack, a high security report due to be delivered to the Israeli cabinet “leaked” last night. Given the political sensitivity of the report, it seems highly unlikely the leak was accidental. It is a way for Israel to put Iran on notice by use of leak mechanism that gives them plausible deniability. The report is dual edged citing the attack strategy but at the same time outlining diplomatic measures to ensure Syria does not enter the fray to support Iran. This defense establishment paper recommends making contingency plans to attack Iran, reaching an agreement with Syria that includes leaving the Golan Heights and preventing new elections in the Palestinian Authority, even if this means a confrontation with the United States. The document warns that in 2009, Israel may find itself facing a nuclear Iran virtually alone, following a rapprochement between the U.S., Iran and the Arab world that would also undermine Israel’s military superiority. “Iran’s threat to Israel’s survival” is at the top of the paper’s list of threats, followed by the “strategic threat” of long-range missiles and rockets owned by various countries in the region. “Israel faces these threats almost alone,” the paper says. “It is imperative to mobilize the international community and obtain regional cooperation. The new American administration is an opportunity to do this.”
The paper says Israel has a limited “window” in which to act before Iran obtains nuclear arms and regional hegemony. Israel must therefore establish a military option against Iran, in case other countries abandon the struggle. The defense establishment advises the cabinet to “work discreetly on contingency plans to deal with a nuclear Iran.” It also recommends close cooperation with the U.S. to prevent a deal between Washington and Tehran that would undermine Israel’s interests. Regarding Syria, the paper says “an agreement with Syria must be advanced, despite the heavy price Israel would have to pay.” The defense establishment believes that removing Syria from the conflict would lead to an agreement with Lebanon as well, thus significantly weakening the radical Iran-Syria-Hezbollah-Hamas axis. The paper continues to discuss regional alliances and tensions. The paper proposes various steps to strengthen Israel’s ties with moderate Sunni Arab countries, and especially Saudi Arabia. “Israel must examine ways to expand its dialogue with Saudi Arabia on various shared interests,” the document says. It must also act to neutralize potential risks in Saudi Arabia, such as its development of nuclear capability, its purchase of long-range missiles or its closing of the military gap with Israel. Jordan, the paper says, is experiencing an acute political and economic crisis. “Jordan feels abandoned in the regional face-off and continues to see Israel and the West as strategic supports,” it says. “Strengthening and stabilizing our ties with Jordan is crucial to Israel’s security. Economic cooperation with Jordan must be strengthened.”
It also appears that Israel is concerned about the position of US incoming President-elect Obama. With regard to the new administration in Washington, the document warns that “the U.S. is interested in setting up a regional and international alignment against Iran, and Israel is the one that might pay the price.” It predicts that Iran and the U.S. will begin talks and warns that Israel must work to prevent any agreement that would be “problematic” from its point of view. The paper recommends persuading the new administration to support the talks with Syria, to which the Bush administration objected. The U.S., for its part, is expected to demand that Israel bolster the moderates in Lebanon by making concessions in Shaba Farms and Ghajarand ending its objection to America’s arming of the Lebanese Army.
The heat does seem to be increasing in the Iran-Israel conflict. Both sides are preparing scenarios in terms of attack, counter attack and defense. Iran also has its post-attack insurgency strategy developed. This Gulf shipping attack strategy could also be used as tool in an Iranian game of brinkmanship. Iran could attack some shipping as a way to demonstrate its capabilities, and to dissuade Israel and /or the US from undertaking the pre-emptive strike in the first place. Both Tehran and Tel-Aviv are pressure cookers, and the world needs to do all it can to keep the lid on the situation. One can be sure that the phone line between Washington and Tel-Aviv is running hot. Iran is awaiting the response from President-elect Obama in terms of diplomacy and compromise. Will the strike happen? Analysts are split on the decision – some say no, some say yes, and some say it is just a matter of when. This is an avoidable conflict and the diplomatic efforts of all parties need to go into overdrive. The world does not need another conflict, and where the matter is well reported and documented, diplomactic not miltary strategies should triumph.
