The Ticking Bomb The Iranian nuclear program is a contentious and
closely monitored issue in international and Israeli politics that has been
front page news on and off. The reason for that is simple – the theocratic
Islamic Republic of Iran, governed by Shi'ite Muslim clerics, has rapidly
advanced its nuclear program over the past decade. Though it claims the program
is for peaceful civilian purposes, the international community, led by Western
nations, believes it’s designed to build a nuclear weapons capability.
The buzz around this issue recurred last week, when the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of the UN released its most detailed and harshest
report about Iran’s nuclear capabilities, asserting that Iran appears to have
worked on designing an atomic bomb and that secret research may continue. In
addition, the report details Iran's work towards developing and affixing a
nuclear payload to its Shahab 3 missile, which has the capacity to reach
intermediate distances including Saudi Arabia, Turkey, southern Europe and
Israel.
The IAEA report reinforces what intelligence
agencies have known for awhile – the Iran nuclear program is a concern that can
no longer be avoided. In an effort to use diplomatic means to deal with the
Iranian nuclear issue in the past, the U.S. and its allies have offered
incentive-based packages to persuade the regime to abandon its nuclear program,
but those were declined. In reaction to Iran’s uncooperative stance, several
countries and the UN Security Council sanctioned Iran with tight financial curbs
and an expanded arms embargo in order to bring an end to Iran’s nuclear program.
Nevertheless, Iran continues to defy international demands.
The more the
diplomatic efforts seem to be unsuccessful, the more experts and laypeople alike
have speculated that Israel might perform preemptive airstrikes on Iran’s
nuclear facilities. Likewise, Israeli leaders have stated lately that they are
not taking any option off the table. The thought of military action is
understandable considering the strategic threat Israel may be facing and the
scale of damage and casualties that a weapon of mass distraction would cause.
While observing public statements regarding the handling of the Iranian nuclear
issue, I am reminded of the directives I was given in my army service. Israeli
soldiers are taught to hold fire until they recognize two elements in an enemy –
a clear intention to attack and a means to do so. In the case of Iran, their
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has already spoken very openly of his belief that
Israel should be wiped off the map. Having an atomic bomb in his possession
means he would also be capable of doing it. That’s without mentioning the
implications of what a nuclear Iran could do to back the terror organizations
fighting Israel or the triggering of a worrisome arms race in the region, as
more countries would seek to possess nuclear military capability of their own.
Nevertheless, a preemptive Israeli attack on Iran could have devastating
consequences. It would put Israel in a direct conflict with Iran, which is a
strong military power with tentacles like Hezbollah and Hamas in Israel’s back
yard. The immediate retaliation would be thousands of rockets fired toward
Israel from these organizations and from Iran itself. In that scenario, a
national state of anxiety would become the norm, let alone the toll of human
life. In addition, an Israeli offensive would increase Israel’s diplomatic
isolation in the world, as moderate countries like Egypt and Jordan would likely
cease diplomatic relations with Israel, and as relationship with the U.S. and
Europe would be strained (especially if the attack happens without their
coordination). Furthermore, it would give Iran the justification for its nuclear
program by allowing Iran to claim the need to protect itself in the face of
Israeli aggression.
Some people claim that all the calls for military
action are just meant to encourage the world powers to tighten the international
pressure on Iran. For now it seems the U.S. and Western countries, based on the
serious findings of the report, will require the UN Security Council to impose
additional sanctions - more effective and more painful - on Iran. However,
Russia and China have already raised their objections to this move, leaving
Israel with a tough dilemma: Can Israel withstand living with a nuclear threat?
Can this threat be removed at all? And what is the price that Israeli society is
willing to pay for it?
Rega Shel Ivrit Ptzatza
Metakteket –
פצצה מתקתקת (ticking bomb) Like in
English this Hebrew phrase is also a metaphor describing a problematic situation
that will eventually become dangerous if not addressed in time. Here, the
metaphor is hardly stretched at all, as the Ptzatza Metakteket of the Iranian
nuclear program is literally the production of a bomb.
Shabbat Shalom,
Roey
________________________________________
About the
Author Roey Schiff is the NFTY Shaliach. Roey grew up in Ein Vered,
Israel and has experience working with teens and leadership development. He also
holds a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science and Business Management from Ben
Gurion University. In September 2010, Roey moved to NYC to act as the NFTY and
Israel Programs Shaliach as part of the URJ Youth Division.
