Israel to Obama: hold Iran's feet to fire, or else
Israel will go along with US President Barack Obama's Iran diplomacy, but try to shorten the deadline for results by signalling its willingness to attack Iranian nuclear sites if need be.
Israel votes tomorrow and its next Prime Minister - the front-runner is rightwinger Benjamin Netanyahu - is likely to go to Washington within a few months and press Mr Obama to stick to his campaign promise not to let Iran develop an atomic bomb.
Aaron David Miller, a former US Middle East negotiator now at the Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars, said the visit would entail a "strategic conversation" with Mr Obama.
"It need not be conclusive or threatening, but it will be very serious and... scare the daylights out of the president that unless the international community mobilises to address the situation, the Israelis will," said Mr Miller.
Unlike his predecessor, George W. Bush, Mr Obama has offered direct talks with Teheran. But he has yet to define his policy, which officials say is under review. He has spoken of tougher sanctions if needed and has not excluded military action.
Israelis fret that diplomatic overtures will only give Iran more time to perfect its uranium enrichment programme - which the Iranians say is meant to produce electricity, not bombs.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has found no proof of Iranian nuclear bomb-making. But the West sees as sinister Iran's refusal to stop enriching uranium - an activity it is permitted as a Non-Proliferation Treaty signatory.
Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak called this week for a "strategic agreement" with Washington to ensure that any talks with the Iranians "should be kept short and followed by harsh sanctions and readiness to take action".
And an Israeli legislator and weapons expert, Isaac Ben-Israel, said his country had a year or so to attack Iranian nuclear sites pre-emptively and could do so on its own, even if such strikes would only delay, not destroy, Iran's programme.
Iranian officials dismiss the chance of a blitz by Israel, assumed to be the Middle East's only nuclear power, but say Iran would retaliate against Israeli and US interests if attacked.
"We are not worried about an Israeli attack," Aliakbar Javanfekr, an aide to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, told Reuters last week, adding that "wise people" in the US and Europe would restrain the Israelis.
2 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Ruth. R. Goldirova
Feb 9th 2009, 18:54
Nuclear for none or Nuclear for all. North Korea didn’t feel comfortable having a South Korea with nuclear weapons at its backyard. Pakistan and India, Canada and USA, Europe and Russia are other examples. Arabs countries have right not to feel safe having Israel-nuclear neighbors. Hitherto, Iran declares its nuclear programme to cover civilians purposes this was confirmed by Atomic Energy Agency, on the other hand all Israel’s neighbors are within Israel’s long and short-range nuclear missiles. While Iran is a signatory member with Atomic Energy Agency and its nuclear programme under surveillance, Israel does not allow any inspection from Atomic Energy Agency. Is Israel above law? Wars only occur where weapons of mass destruction and deterrent weapons don’t exist. What about Iraq and North Korea examples? In 2003-while North Korea was testing nuclear long-range missiles and defying the International community (USA), the later went to attack Iraq instead. Wasn’t the message sent by the USA clear enough to read: If you don’t have a deterrent weapon you have no place on planet Earth? A nuclear Israel coupled with Israel occupation to Palestinian’s territory turning the Middle East into a powder keg.
A. Muscat
Feb 9th 2009, 17:14
Reading the above gives the impersonation that Israel is more like a group of warmonger terrorist gangs than a civilized country!