Iran: How serious is Israel’s threat?

Well, that certainly got everyone’s attention, said Matti Friedman in the Associated Press. Last week, as the International Atomic Energy Agency was meeting in Vienna over Iran’s nuclear ambitions, Israeli leaders issued their toughest words yet on Iran. First, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, speaking in Washington, said Israel would stop Tehran from getting a bomb “by all possible means.” But it was comments from Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz that sparked an international uproar and helped send oil prices to record highs. “If Iran continues with its program for developing nuclear weapons,” Mofaz told an Israeli newspaper, “we will attack it.” It was lost on no one, said Tim Butcher in the London Daily Telegraph, that Israel has delivered on such threats before. In 1981, Israel bombed Saddam Hussein’s Osirak nuclear plant, and just last September, it took out a nuclear facility in Syria. So “Israel’s most explicit threat yet against Iran” could not be easily dismissed as mere bluster.

“Too bad the world has let the situation come to this,” said Investor’s Business Daily in an editorial. But Israel has little choice but to stand its ground. For years, despite U.N. sanctions and warnings, Iran’s “fanatical, terrorist-supporting regime” has brazenly pressed ahead with uranium enrichment, while threatening to wipe Israel off the map. And there’s been little credible threat of punishment; indeed, our feckless European allies keep blocking efforts to impose tougher sanctions. The U.S. itself has missed many an opportunity “to destabilize the Islamofascist regime” by supporting brave opposition groups within Iran. Israel’s Mofaz now is being called a saber-rattler, but he should be praised for his candor.

Sorry to disappoint you hawks, said Amir Mizroch in The Jerusalem Post, but Mofaz was speaking only for himself, not expressing official policy. In fact, Olmert has already distanced himself from Mofaz, whose motives are obvious: By posturing as “Israel’s Mr. Security,” he’s jockeying to replace the embattled Olmert as head of the ruling Kadima Party. Whatever the internal politics, said The New York Times, such bluster is reckless. Iran’s nuclear facilities, unlike Iraq’s Osirak plant, comprise more than a single target. “A sustained bombing campaign would end up killing many civilians and still might not cripple the program.” And the backlash from the Muslim world would be devastating. The White House could help Israel defuse the tension with “a grand bargain” of incentives and engagement, designed to bring Tehran to heel. Unfortunately, there’s no evidence that the Bush administration has either “the will or the skill” to pull that off.

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up