[Peace-discuss] Editorial from Ha'aretz

[David Green]

An unsigned editorial from Israel's "liberal"
newspaper, with an interesting way of admitting and
justifying Israel's nuclear capability:

w w w . h a a r e t z . c o m 
  
15/05/2005

The world versus a nuclear Iran

The revolutionary Islamic regime in Tehran is trying
to buy time. A few days, until the end of the month,
when the conference reviewing the state of the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty disperses. A few weeks, until
the middle of next month, when presidential elections
take place in Iran. A few months, until they obtain
sufficient enriched uranium - fissurable material
required to produce nuclear bombs and warheads.

The Iranians are prepared to use any trick, say
anything, pretend as much as their interlocutors
desire, so long as time passes and they can, one dark
day, announce, as a fait accompli, that they possess
nuclear weapons.

It's possible that Iran's objectives are purely
defensive, deterrence or political, but its
authorities are threatening Israel - working outright
for its annihilation and operating proxies against
Israel in Lebanon, in the territories and in distant
arenas.

Israel defers its concerns regarding powerful
militaries in the region such as Egypt's and Saudi
Arabia's, in view of the pro-Western orientation of
the regimes in Cairo and Riyadh. Tehran already
fulfills one of two negative conditions - a hostile
regime - but lacks the destructive force to implement
its designs. Israel, therefore, must not treat the
Iranian nuclear threat with complacently, as though it
did not exist, or as though the problem can only be
handled by another party.

By its very existence, the Iranian threat justifies
Israeli preparations to frustrate it. As far as
tactics are concerned, the government's approach is
correct - not to lead the global efforts to thwart the
Iranian threat. Iran constitutes a challenge to the
international system, which is founded on voluntary
membership in regional and global organizations and
adherence to the charters of these organizations.

In contrast to India, Pakistan and Israel, who chose
to preserve their freedom of operation even at the
cost of forgoing benefits and remained outside the
nuclear nonproliferation treaty club, Iran tried to
gain nuclear assistance for peaceful purposes as a
member of the club, while flouting its obligation and
clandestinely working to acquire nuclear weapons.
North Korea did the same, until it withdrew from the
club.

International acquiescence to Iran's conduct would
shatter the framework for the nonproliferation
campaign. Additional countries would be quick to
conclude that they wouldn't suffer should they follow
in its footsteps. In the Middle East, the effect would
be even more immediate and severe.

Israel wouldn't be the only one to find it difficult
to do nothing. Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Turkey would
identify an Iranian threat, at least in terms of
regional supremacy. Just as Iran attacked the Iraqi
nuclear reactor in the fall of 1980 and drew pleasure
from the fact that, after its failure, Israel came
along and destroyed the reactor in June 1981, so,
unless it is stopped, a nuclear Iran would overshadow
the entire region.

The three leading countries in the European Union -
Britain, Germany and France - are close to despairing
of Iran's antics. The next stage is a report to the
Security Council, which would consider sanctions. Only
after these have been exhausted would it be time to
use force, American or otherwise. This is essentially
the correct course of action, whose weakness lies in
the fact that, meanwhile, time is passing - and the
Iranian clock may be running faster than the world
clock.
 

 


		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. 
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250