NY Times Magazine cover, Jan. 29, 2012
The New York Times Magazine’s Jan. 29 cover story, “Will Israel Attack Iran?” frighteningly argues that Israel is nearing a decision to make an all-out military effort against Iran’s nuclear program. What may prompt an imminent go-ahead is the calculation that Iran’s facilities will soon be hardened and dispersed beyond Israel’s capacity to cripple its program.
I’m very much against an Israeli attack on Iran and I agree with Prof. Shibley Telhami that moving toward regional nuclear disarmament may facilitate a solution. But I take Iran’s nuclear program seriously as a security threat to the region.
The crisis would likely end once Iran reverses course: quickly opening its facilities to international inspection and stopping its constant “death to Israel” rhetoric and other overt expressions of hostility toward Jews (Holocaust denial being one); Iranian officials usually do not even mention Israel by name, referring instead to the “Zionist regime” or some such. When coupled with its ongoing support for Hezbollah and Hamas, it’s no wonder that many Israelis and Jews believe they face an existential threat from Iran. (It would not be enough for Iran to invite renewed negotiations, such as Pres. Ahmadinejad claims to have just done in a rather belligerent way; negotiations can be used as a delaying tactic, and Iran has backed away from solutions proposed in previous discussions.)
Yet, aside from inviting a catastrophic war, an Israeli attack would not deter Iran’s nuclear ambitions (quite the opposite). Part of the problem is the already hardened and dispersed nature of Iran’s nuclear facilities; another is Israel’s limited military capability. Over five years ago, I blogged about the widespread myth that Israel is a military superpower (with the supposed implication that it’s invulnerable) beginning as follows:
An ongoing tragedy of Israel is that so small a country… must remain a major military power in order to survive. It pays a high price to do so, with most Israeli men spending three years of their youth as regular conscripts and then one month of each year until the age of 50 in active reserve units and subject to unlimited emergency call-up.
Anti-Israel critics like to minimize Israel’s urgent security needs by referring to it, rather abstractly and without real analysis, as the ‘fourth’ greatest military power in the world. …
According to Wikipedia, Israel’s armed forces rank 34th in the world in relative size. Still, Israel is surely more powerful than many countries with larger forces; this is especially true because its air force is strong–less due to its (modest) size than its quality. It’s hard to say how to rank Israel as a military power over all; rather than either 4th or 34th, it is probably somewhere in the range of 10th to 15th. But its very small area and population are tremendous disadvantages against potential enemies in the Middle East, which are far larger, and could (as in the past) attack Israel in a coalition. There’s no question that Israel is vulnerable to attack, and unlike Iranians, Israeli Jews have a living memory of being subject to genocide.
Also according to Wikipedia, Israel is 97th in population in the world (about 7.8 million) and 151st in area; as compared with Iran, which is 17th in population and 18th in area. In other words, Israel has about 1/10 the population of Iran and a little over one percent of Iran’s land mass.
Ten years ago, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, a former president of Iran and still a leading figure now associated with reformist elements in the Islamic Republic, chillingly speculated that since “the Islamic World” is so much larger than Israel, it could destroy the Jewish state in a nuclear war and survive (“the use of even one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy everything“). This reinforced Israeli concerns that some Shi’ite religious fanatics in the Iranian leadership may believe in a theological doomsday scenario, which would invite a horribly destructive war with “infidels.” The threat that Israelis sense from Iran is logical–augmented further by Iranian allies inhabiting three of Israel’s borders (Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza and Assad in Syria), together concentrating over 50,000 rockets and missiles on Israel’s cities and towns.
This is what I’ve gleaned from Wikipedia on the size of the Israel Defense Force (IDF): “Active personnel 187,000 (ranked 34th); Reserve personnel 565,000.” By comparison, this is an estimate of Iran’s armed forces: Active Military: 545,000 [2011]; Active Reserve: 650,000 [2011].”
Reminds me of Mussolini attacking Ethiopia, The Israeli 1000 nukes, 3 boomer subs, and the latest weaponry of America, against a country because of it’s religion, still in the dark ages! They may finally make one nuke, They may even have a few later Russian jets, but poorly trained pilots, Their military is conscriped, from the lower classes, poorly educated and motivated, The Iranian soldiers will act as did Sadams’ regular army, surrender after a few shots. Israel’s soldiers on the other hand are more highly trained, motivated by possibly losing their whole country! Only a fool would attack Israel……But the Muslims are certainly that!
I am always saddened when I think and read of the strident, excessive militarism in Israel [or any other nation]. A huge part of the need for a large military is the Occupation of Palestine. How terrible it is for any nation to focus so much energy of their youth in being soldiers who are willing to kill if they think necessary. And we know now that youth before 26 do not have a fully developed brain so are deeply affected by what happens to them before they are fully able to make good healthy decisions. They are affected for the rest of their lives. [I worry about what will happen to the U.S. Navy Seals who have killed “courageously” many people two times. How do they sleep at night?} What happens to the soul of a nation when this is a “norm.” The history could have been different and the future can be different too.
I wonder if Chuck and Martha actually read my last three or four paragraphs, especially my comparative statistics: “There’s no question that Israel is vulnerable to attack, and unlike Iranians, Israeli Jews have a living memory of being subject to genocide. … Israel has about 1/10 the population of Iran and a little over one percent of Iran’s land mass.”
I don’t know why Chuck thinks that Israel has “1000 nukes” or what makes him an expert on the caliber of Iran’s air force, but Iran has numerous ballistic missiles that can reach Israel’s population centers, not to mention the tens of thousands of rockets and missiles of its allies that can strike from Lebanon, Gaza and Syria.
It is a tragedy that Israel’s survival has been dependent upon its development of military power, And this will not avail Israelis forever. A peaceful resolution with the Palestinians is absolutely necessary for the security and well-being of both peoples, and should help regarding the Iranians as well. But the size of its armed forces (far smaller than Iran’s but very large for such a small country) is due more to ongoing external threats than the occupation. Hopefully, these external threats will go away after the occupation ends, but sadly, recent Israeli withdrawals (from Lebanon, Gaza and parts of the West Bank) have too often generated more attacks on Israel than the opposite. This unfortunate and counter-intuitive fact is why the electoral left has virtually collapsed in Israel within the last decade.
What the bloody heck!!! Such stupidity…….the International Community of nuclear powers. notably the US, UK and France simply have to say, through the UN, that any nucear threats from Iran will be met by nuclear attack……..no problem…….this could and should have been said years ago…..ideally, of course, with the backing of Russia and China……..oboy and N. Korea……simple……..let ’em have the bloody bomb and let them know the cost of even thinking of using them….
I prefer not to see another rogue grime with a bomb, especially one that wishes to blow the other out of existence.
As an American convert Muslim, the ongoing conflict and hostilities of middle eastern countries towards Israel saddens and concerns me. We are taught that Abraham is the father of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Surely this fact alone should be enough to get the so called “religious leaders” in the region at least condemning Holocaust-denial, the “push the Jews back into the sea” mentality, the approval of ongoing hostility.
I hope that the wave of liberal protests sweeping Israel by young people about housing and social factors shows a new desire to confront the elephant in the room and to make peace with the Palestinians. This would remove the excuse that many Arab countries use to be belligerent against Israel. It can be done, it almost happened after WWI when T.E. Lawrence, meeting with Chaim Weizmann and Prince Feisal drew up an amazing document. It is one of the great ” If Onlys” of history:
“Later in the day Feisal had a cordial meeting at the Carlton Hotel with Chaim Weizmann, the Zionist leader who had journeyed to Aqaba to meet with Feisal in June 1918. ” pg 463
“On January 3 there was another meeting with Weizmann, and during its course, Feisl, Weizmann, and Lawrence drew up one of the most remarkable and controversial documents in the modern history of the Middle East… It is not a lengthy document, and some of its nine articles are still being fought over today, both at the conference table and on the ground. Article I establishes that Palestine will be separated from the “Arab State,” by which Feisal, Weizmann, and Lawrence meant what is now Syria and Lebanon, and controlled with “the most cordial goodwill and understanding” by duly accredited agents of the Arab and Jewish territories—in other words, it already presupposes a partition of Palestine into two separate territories. Article III envisages drawing up a constitution. Article IV permits Jewish immigration “on a large scale, and as quickly as possible, to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil,” while preserving the existing rights of Arab peasants and tenant farmers, and “assisting them in their economic development.” Article V provides for absolutely freedom of religion and prohibits andy “religious test” for “the exercise of civil or political rights.” Article VI guarantees that Muslim holy places will remain “under Mohammadan control.” Article VII provides that “the Zionist Organization will use its best efforts” to provide the means for developing the natural resources and economic possibilities of Palestine. Article VIII—perhaps the key to the entire agreement—binds the two parties to act in “complete accord and harmony” at the coming peace conference: in short, to present a united front toward the British and the French.”
The agreement can be summed up as proposing joint Jewish-Arab control over Palestine, with Britain playing a role as the guarantor and final arbiter of any disputes between the two parties, and with no limit on Jewish immigration. Feisal had already conceded that Palestine could contain 4 million to 5 million Jewish immigrants without harm to the rights of the Arab ovulation. Since the population of Israel today is approximately 7.4 million, of which just over 1 million are Muslims, it is not so very far from what Feisal had in mind in 1919.”
It is important to note that the agreement proposes neither an Arab nor a Jewish state, but rather a state under joint Arab-Jewish control, with absolute religious freedom for all, and that no limit is set on Jewish immigration.” pp. 465-466
Quoted from _HERO: The Life and Legend of Lawrence of Arabia_, by Michael Korda
There is enough ongoing hostility between Sunni, Shi’a, and Wahabi Muslims in the region (an issues that Lawrence had also addressed in a proposed new map of the region he drew up along cultural and religious lines which was shot down by the French, Russians, and British) to fuel hundreds of conflicts.
Why should poor little Israel be so picked on? It’s not their fault that British, French and Russian colonialism after WWII carved up the Middle East into unsustainable countries and then put strict limitations on Jewish immigration to the region.
Reading about this proposed charter, drawn up in 1919, for a new Jewish/Arab Palestinian state, with “unlimited Jewish immigration”, I can’t help but think that it may have changed, have saved the lives of millions of Jews unjustly murdered under Hitler by providing them a place to relocate and thrive.
Having this peaceful state would cut the feet out from under dictators like Ahmadinejad claiming that Israel has no right to exist. I believe that since much of the blame for the mess in the Middle East lies at the feet of the colonial powers who occupied her after the fall of the Ottoman Empire in WWI, it is those powers who should be forcing Iran, and any other states, to fall in line and to stop threatening Israel.
At the same time, those states have a duty to see lasting peace come to Israel. Insha’Allah, G_D willing, this will happen sooner rather than later.
Salaam and Shalom
You’ll know it’s possible when you watch childrens
television programing in the PA, Egypt, Syria,et al
and they’re NOT encouraging kindergartners to
grow up and kill Israelis. Until then, the Israelis
would be advised to “keep their powder dry” and
upgrade all weapons as needed.
I am waiting for liberalism to sweep the Arab world, but thanks for mentioning that remarkable meeting between Feisel, TE Lawrence and Weitzmann. At least someone recognizes that there were hopes for Jewiish homeland prior to the Holocaust
@ Don — I agree, tenuous times in the Middle East. I hope that the young people are able to keep the old military/police states from forming. Based on what I have read, the more Islamist parties bring out the vote by bringing bread to the people, as well as medical and legal council, at least in Egypt. I am holding my breath and praying that this does not turn toward a renewed militarism and poisonous hatred in the region.
One other tidbit of history, perhaps someone here can enlighten me with a good book to read on the subject, is that while, during WWI, T.E. Lawrence and the Arab Bureau were backing King Feisal as the ruler of “Arabia”, the Indian office was funding, arming and promoting the return of the Saudi state. Britain was backing both sides!
The win of the house of Saud and wahhabists has had tremendous repercussions in the area, as the oil wealth of Saudi Arabia funds wahhabism and wahhabist interpretations of and translations of the Qur’an. I myself was in possession of one of these copies, and one line of the formost prayer of the Qur’an was translated as “lead me not on the path of the evil ones (the Jews) or those who have gone astray (the Christians).” No contextual basis for this translation was given.
Subsequently, I have sought out other teachers and other translations. The verse does not refer to Jews and Christians. Some have read it into the context of the Medina *of Muhammad’s (pbuh) time*. It is no way refers to religious groups today. This is reckless translating and sows mistrust, misunderstanding and prejudice.
So you must ask, how is it that I got such a free copy? Because the tremendous oil money funding the translations; the books coming out of Saudi Arabia can flood the market easily. To be honest, I am actually a little scared even writing this post lest some people who know me see it. But that is to sell them short. This is America, after all. I have only met one Muslim whom I would say was radical and I took care of that appropriately for other people to check out. He subsequently left the country. 🙂
Anyway, back to the subject of the Jewish homeland. Yes, I was amazed reading this portion of the book _HERO_. “Unlimited Jewish immigration”. And Feisal agreed to this! Before WWII! We came so close to having a safe Jewish state. The sad irony is that I blame British, French and Russian anti-Semitism for this agreement being shot down. I cannot but see it any other way. Israel/Palestine have no oil resources to fight over. They were just pawns. And anyone who thinks that anti-Semitism doesn’t run deep in Britain never had to read the ballad of “Little Saint Hugh of Lincoln”. It’s a shame, a true shame.
Salaam Shalom
Well I have to go back to my old high school history, but I recall that the the house o Saud was hoping to ally with the new Jewish homeland against colonial power such as England and France. What is interesting about that this is that it runs counter a common myth that is used by Palestinian activists, that the Zionist project was an extension of European colonialism. Zionismm was everything burt a colonial project. It emerged out of the Socialist movements in Russia and the some Jewish Orthodox movements
Thank you Made Me Think. I feel more at rest and confident about this article. thank you. 🙂