|
|
|
Jewish World Review July 27, 2007 / 12 Menachem-Av, 5766 Iran, 2; Israel 0 By Caroline B. Glick
Iran has built webs of alliances with other nations, alliances that have significantly deepened since last summer's war. Time for America, Israel to wake up
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com |
Jafar Kiani was an anonymous Iranian prisoner until earlier in the month he
became the first Iranian to be stoned to death since 2002.
Iran's decision to revert to domestic barbarism is just one aspect of the
regime's strategy for terrorizing its people sufficiently to quell all
pockets of resistance to its rule.
The regime's determination to prevent an internal rebellion is an integral
part of its larger plan to cast aside all obstacles to its acquisition of
nuclear weapons.
Iran already possesses what it needs to make nuclear bombs. What it needs is
time. Last summer's war against Israel was timed to provide Iran with a
respite from international pressure. Hizbullah's abduction of IDF reservists
Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser took place the day before the leaders of the
G-8 were scheduled to discuss Iran's nuclear program. By ordering the
assault on Israel, Iran diverted their attention away from its nuclear
program.
Ever since the war, the Olmert government has declared that the war split
the Muslim world into two camps -- the moderates and the extremists.
Operating on the basis of this perceived split, Israel has sought to build a
coalition with the moderates in the hopes that such a coalition will block
Iran from acquiring the bomb.
A year after the war, the time has come to make a renewed assessment of the
situation. Are moderates blocking Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons? If
not, what has transpired?
A good place to start the analysis is with an item that appeared on both
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's
to-do list this week. Both leaders telephoned Turkish Prime Minister Recip
Erdogan to congratulate him on his Islamist AKP party's electoral victory on
Sunday.
Turkey is perceived as the paragon of Muslim moderation. Olmert, Foreign
Minister Tzipi Livni and President Shimon Peres have all stated that
Israeldoes not have a problem with AKP's Islamist character. Indeed,
in a bow towards Turkish friendship, Olmert revealed last week that Turkey has been
facilitating talks between Israel and Syria towards an Israeli surrender of
the Golan Heights.
Yet Ankara's readiness to encourage Israel to hand the Golan Heights over to
Iran's client state does not necessarily indicate that Turkey is Israel's
friend. Indeed, since the AKP rose to power in 2002, it has distanced
Turkeyfrom both Israel and the US while warming Turkish relations with Iran and Syria.
Starting with Turkey's refusal to participate or support the US-led
overthrow of Saddam Hussein's regime, recent years have been marked by
steadily increasing Turkish hostility. Two weeks ago, to Washington's
dismay, Turkey signed a $3.5 billion gas deal with Iran.
As to Israel, Erdogan was the first leader to host Hamas terror masters
after the jihadist movement won the Palestinian elections in January 2006.
During last summer's war, Iran shipped arms to Hizbullah through Turkey.
Turkey's leaders have repeatedly declared their support for Iran's right to
develop its nuclear program.
Iran's courtship of Turkey is but one aspect of its foreign policy. Over the
past several years, Iran has built webs of alliances with other states,
alliances that have significantly deepened since last summer's war.
In the first circle, Iran has its clients -- Syria, Hizbullah, the Shiite,
(and increasingly the Sunni), militias in Iraq, and the Palestinians. Just
as these forces fought together last summer, so they will fight together in
the future. Ahmadinejad's visit to Damascus last weekend was strikingly
similar to meetings he held with his terror underlings before last summer's
war.
In its second circle, Iran has cultivated strategic ties with countries in
Latin America, which led by Venezuela, share its hatred for America. These
ties serve three purposes. First, they provide Iran with a global deterrent
against the US. Second, they provide Iran with ready support in diplomatic
forums. Third, they build support for Iran among the "progressive" set in
the US and Europe.
In Iran's third circle of alliances are countries like Russia, China and
Egypt. While all these states publicly oppose Iran's acquisition of nuclear
weapons, they effectively block the international community from taking
effective action against Iran's nuclear program.
In the meantime, Israel's coalition of moderates has failed to materialize.
The leaders of the sought for coalition, Saudi Arabia and Egypt refuse to
take any action against Iran. Indeed, they effectively support Teheran. In
February, Saudi King Abdullah feted Ahmadinejad during a state visit. The
next month, by mediating the formation of the Hamas-Fatah government,
Abdullah enabled Iran's Palestinian proxy to gain control of the Palestinian
Authority. As for Egypt, it is using Iran's nuclear program as cover to
advance its own nuclear weapons program.
Then there are the great powers and foremost among them Russia, France and
the US. Any UN action against Iran must be agreed upon by all three. And
there is little chance of that ever happening.
Russia is Iran's ally. Russia supplied Hizbullah and Syria with arms and
intelligence during last summer's war. In the intervening year, Russia has
sold advanced weapons systems to both Iran and Syria. Last weekend's report
in the Arab media regarding Iranian financing of Syrian purchases of Russian
jet fighters, tanks and missiles is part of this overall picture.
Israeli analysts scoffed at the report noting that the billion dollars
Ahmadinejad pledged is insufficient to purchase the weapons he outlined. But
those weapons will not all be going to Syria. Last April Iran and
Syriasigned an agreement essentially merging their militaries.
Syria's Defense Minister Mustafa Muhammad Najjar told reporters in Damascus,
"We consider the capability of the Syrian defensive forces as our own." He
added that Iran, "offers all of its defense capabilities to Syria."
While Russia is selling the weapons to Syria, a Russian military official
said of the aircraft, "The Syrians will be getting the top line of Russian
aircraft through financing by Iran and [will] share some or most of the
platforms with the Iranian air force." Jane's Defense Monthly reported
that at least ten of the artillery-missile systems will also be transferred
to Iran.
Russia also acts as Teheran's diplomatic shill. During a summit in Teheran
last month Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said, "We do not see any
kind of threat from Iran." In a subsequent visit to Israel, Lavrov insisted
that Russia's arms sales pose no threat to the Jewish state, and anyway, the
only way for Israel to ensure its security is to surrender the Golan Heights
to Syria.
But the Olmert government refuses to acknowledge that Russia has reinstated
its Cold War hostility towards Israel. It vapidly praises President Vladimir
Putin for his "positive role" in the region and continues to adhere to the
line that Russia will agree to UN Security Council action against Iran.
Then there is France. Last summer France displayed open hostility towards
Israel in its representation of the Lebanese government in which Hizbullah
was then a member at the UN ceasefire talks. On the other hand, in 2005
France joined forces with the US to expel the Syrian military from
Lebanonafter the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik
Hariri.
Israel hoped that with Nicholas Sarkozy's victory in the presidential race,
France would take a more pro-Israel stance. Unfortunately, the opposite
occurred. Sarkozy has warmed French ties with the Iranian-Syrian-Hizbullah
axis. Sarkozy legitimized all three when he invited Hizbullah
representatives to participate in talks he held with Lebanese factions
outside of Paris this month.
Additionally, early this month France led ten EU member states in meddling
in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The foreign ministers of these largely
Mediterranean EU member states sent a letter to Quartet envoy Tony Blair,
demanding, among other things, that Israel agree to the deployment of
international forces in Judea and Samaria, and that Hamas be invited to
participate in an international conference on the issue.
As France treats with Iran on Lebanon, the US follows a similar course of
engaging the mullah on Iraq. After his meeting with his Iranian counterpart
in Baghdad this week, US Ambassador Ryan Crocker announced the formation of
a joint US-Iranian security committee which will discuss Sunni terrorism in
Iraq.
Apparently in the interest of advancing America's "security cooperation"
with Iran, the State Department refused to raise the issue of the five
American citizens being held hostage in Iran at the meeting. And with the
prospect of diplomatic "progress" with Iran on Iraq in the air, the
UScertainly doesn't want to rock the boat by pursuing the issue of
Iran's nuclear weapons program.
Indeed, Iran's carrot and stick approach to powers like the US and
Franceform a fourth circle of ties. Iran has worked to neutralize threats from these countries by attacking their interests in other spheres: Lebanon, in the case of France, and Iraq, in the case of the US. Given both countries enthusiasm for "engagement," it seems that the mullahs have hit on the right approach.
Israel has experienced some achievements regarding Iran over the past year.
The UN Security Council did pass two sanctions resolutions against Iran.
With the active lobbying of opposition leader Binyamin Netanyahu, many
US public employee pension funds are moving to divest from companies
that do business with Iran. And this week, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown
announced that like his predecessor Tony Blair, he will not rule out the
option of using military force to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear
weapons.
Yet despite these achievements, Iran has made steady progress with its
nuclear program. Wednesday Ahmadinejad announced, "Iran will never abandon
its peaceful [nuclear] work." Sunday, a senior Iranian official told The
Independent that with almost 3,000 centrifuges operating at its nuclear
facility at Natanz, "We have at the moment enough centrifuges to go to a
bomb."
Back in Israel, this week Olmert made clear that he wishes to advance
contacts with the Palestinians towards an Israeli withdrawal from Judea and
Samaria. His advisors told reporters that Olmert is moved by his desire to
get beyond his failure in last year's war and the criminal investigations
into his shady business dealings. He wishes to be perceived as a statesman.
Of course if Olmert truly wishes to be seen as a statesman, then he
shouldn't be concerning himself with Israeli withdrawals that will only
strengthen Iran. He should change his strategic focus to Iran which
threatens to wipe Israel off the map.
Despite his government's protestations to the contrary, there is no
coalition of moderates to work with against Iran. There is no coalition at
all. And time is not in Israel's favor.
If Olmert wishes to gain the public's support, and even admiration, he must
quickly build and deploy a military option for destroying Iran's burgeoning
ability to destroy the State of Israel.
JWR contributor Caroline B. Glick is the senior Middle East Fellow at the Center for Security Policy in Washington, DC and the deputy managing editor of The Jerusalem Post. Comment by clicking here.
| ||||||||||
