Yom Kippur

Caracal cat

Caracal battalion fighter Cpl Eleanor Joseph

For the past 39 years Yom Kippur has acquired an additional significance.

Alongside the solemn occasion of our Day of Atonement we commemorate the anniversary of the Yom Kippur War. This year and every year since 1973 it is a soul searching occasion. The memoirs of aging generals, new revelations from our own and foreign sources, shed more light on the battle narratives and all aspects of the war. The critics have spared none. .Our intelligence community, the commanders in the field, as well as Golda Meir’s kitchen cabinet’s decisions and vacillations are all mercilessly scrutinised .      All this self-flagellation   has had a cathartic effect on the IDF’s military intelligence, in fact on everyone..

It has galvanised a new approach to the importance of obtaining accurate real-time information from anywhere, no matter how distant..

This year recently opened archive material has spurred considerable speculation regarding the military intelligence findings and their interpretation.

The disclosure that a late intelligence report was not relayed in time to then Prime Minister Golda Meir momentarily shocked military observers; however most of them agreed that the communiqué came too late to have brought about any kind of preemptive action.

The whole ordeal will be repeated next week on the day the war broke out according to the Gregorian calendar, referred to by Anwar Sadat as the “October War.”

This year and every year I check our religious observance gauge regarding Yom Kippur. Earlier this week   a Ynet-Gesher poll revealed that, as in previous years, the majority of the public plans to fast on the Day of Atonement and many will also visit their local synagogue.

The survey conducted among 502 respondents over the age of 18 – a representative sample of the adult Jewish population in the State of Israel.

Asked, "Do you plan to fast this year on Yom Kippur?" about 64% said yes and 32% said no. The rest said they had yet to decide.

An analysis of these results shows that a majority of Israelis who won't fast was found only among the secular respondents (59%), while most of the ultra-Orthodox/religious Jews (100%) and traditional Jews (86%) planned to fast.

Forty-six percent said they would visit the synagogue (including 25% who plan to take part in all prayers and 21% who plan to participate in some), 36% would devote the quiet day to some "quality time" with themselves or their family, 10% would spend the day watching films, 3.5% would visit friends or family, 0.5% said they planned to travel, and 4% did not pick any of the options.

An analysis of these findings reveals that haredim (100%), religious Jews (96%) and traditional Jews (60%) favour the synagogue, while secular Jews (53.5%) prefer to stay at home – either alone or with their family.

The maximum sampling error for the survey was 4.3%.

Journalist Ben Sales the Times of Israel described what Tel Aviv’s secular Jews do on Yom Kippur. “While the Orthodox may spend Yom Kippur praying in synagogues, secular Jews are more likely to spend the Day of Atonement watching videos and biking through the city’s empty streets.

Options are opening up across the city and the country for non-Orthodox Jews seeking a meaningful way to observe the holiest day on the Jewish calendar.

Secular Israelis who attend synagogue usually go for the ‘Kol Nidre’ prayer on Yom Kippur eve or the ‘Ne’ila’ prayer during the holiday’s closing service. Quoting the director of ‘Bina’ a secular Tel Aviv yeshiva, he said, “Services are rarely meaningful to Jews who hardly ever enter a synagogue during the rest of the year. Most young people usually don’t feel connected, don’t know how to pray,” he said. “They usually have some alienation to what’s going on.”

“Bina has been countering that alienation since it was founded in  1996. It does this  by crafting a Judaism with prayers, texts and values that secular Jews can appreciate. On Yom Kippur eve this year, the yeshiva will host study sessions, discussions and a rooftop service planned to attract 400 people.

The service will feature some classic selections from the prayer book, such as the Kol Nidre prayer. But the service cum study session also will include contemporary  texts, such as poems by Israeli poet Yehuda Amichai or American Jewish musician Leonard Cohen’s song “Who by Fire,” which is inspired by U’netaneh Tokef, a High Holidays prayer that describes the process and consequences of divine judgment.

Religiously observant Jews have eagerly accepted technological solutions to old religious problems. The Institute for Science and Halacha, based in Israel has published a number of studies and recommendations to aid religious Jews to meticulously “keep the faith” in the modern age.

However, ultra Orthodox leaders are strongly opposed to other technological devices they claim are undermining their chosen lifestyle.  Before the advent of the Internet, members of ultra-Orthodox communities derived the majority of their information and knowledge from the rabbinic leadership, since mainstream/secular newspapers, television, radio, and libraries were forbidden. Now this segment of the population is facing a far more pernicious threat.

Rabbi Shmuel (HaLevi ) Wosner  warned his community, "He who stumbles into the Internet loses his eyes, heart and feelings toward all that is holy.. Users have no place in the next world.”

“Access to Smartphones is creating a ‘spiritual holocaust’”, according to Rabbi Lior Glazer and the Eda Haredit communal organisation, which recently held a ritual iPhone-smashing ceremony and banned the use of Smartphones entirely.

Prof. Yedidya Stern, director of the Israel Democracy Institute’s project on Religion and State pointed out that although many  ultra-Orthodox Jews live in self-imposed ghettos  Smartphones offer a gateway to the outside  world through which they can access all manner of uncensored information which might influence their identity.

Yet another clash last week along Israel's border with Egypt in the Har Harif area resulted in the killing of Corporal Netanel Yahalomi. An Islamic terrorist group attacked   a small IDF unit after it intercepted African infiltrators The terrorist group attacked while the Israeli soldiers were providing water to the infiltrators. Fortunately a unit of the Caracal battalion was patrolling nearby and was quick to engage the terrorists. The Caracal patrol killed three of the terrorists before the rest of the terrorists fled the scene of the attack.

The patrol’s response to the attack marked a turning point in the battalion’s history.

Prior to 2000 women were barred from combat units. That year   the Caracal battalion was formed as a way to gradually include women soldiers in combat units.  The battalion is the IDF’s only mixed female and male combat unit. The efficient deployment of the Caracal unit last Friday won it long overdue recognition. Other markedly   male “Macho” IDF units have often derided the Caracal battalion which is made up of 70% women. In the past it had to face skepticism and was often the butt of jokes.

On Sunday the Israeli news media was full of glowing reports on the hitherto little known battalion. They nicknamed it the co-ed battalion, however its name and emblem is derived from the Caracal cat.

One of the women serving in the battalion, Corporal Eleanor Joseph is an anomaly in an anomalous IDF unit. Eleanor a Christian Arab volunteered to serve in the IDF and the Caracal battalion. Fighting in a combat unit requires a mandatory extra year of army service. Eleanor’s home is near Haifa’s Waadi Nisnas  Arab neighbourhood.. Recently she requested permission to wear civilian clothes when she returns home on leave. “I feel uncomfortable every time I go home. My Arab neighbours point at me every time I appear in uniform.”

Immediately after Yom Kippur we prepare for Succot. This year the kibbutz has built an impressive Succah on the   central lawn by the dinning room. Although most people build their family Succah by their homes the main ceremony will be held on the lawn.

Have a good weekend.

Beni                27^th of September, 2012.

King Bibi

  

It has been a bad week for Bibi. Columnists on both sides of the Atlantic have taken our prime minister to task for interfering in the U.S presidential elections. Let’s start with Jeffrey Goldberg’s critical account of Netanyahu’s meddling, albeit critical but kinder. Goldberg said the prime minister   criticised the Obama administration because he believes the President won't actually stop Iran from building a nuclear weapon.
"Netanyahu genuinely believes that Obama, at the crucial moment (whether it is this year, next year or the year after), will flinch and allow Iran to cross the nuclear threshold. This is why he is pestering the President for red lines."
"Does he want Romney to win?" Goldberg asked, "Yes, probably. He's never stated this plainly, but such a desire tracks with his behavior, disposition and ideology. Does he believe Romney has a chance of winning? No. From what I understand, he apparently believes Romney doesn't have much of a chance of winning."  Just the same Netanyahu is prepared to risk alienating President Obama and a large section of the American public in an attempt to coerce the U.S administration into making a decisive stand now and not later.
Peter Beinart writing about "Netanyahu’s Bullying Act" in Newsweek's Daily Beast was a little more assertive, "Bibi thinks he can push the U.S. around. Think again. " Beinart offers an explanation for his behavior, "Netanyahu’s brazen, election-season attack on the Obama administration is that it’s a product of the prime minister’s desperate worries about Iran. And clearly, Netanyahu is desperately worried—in a way that most of Israel’s professional security experts are not." One of them, former Mossad Chief Meir Dagan, who said during an interview with CBS' "60 Minutes." "An attack on Iran now before exploring all other approaches is not the right way to do it,"

Dagan argues that a preemptive Israeli strike this year would be "reckless and irresponsible. We are going to ignite, at least from my point of view, a regional war. And wars, you know how they start. You never know how they will end.”

Peter Beinart went on to list Netanyahu's long record of interfering in American politics, " Netanyahu has been brazenly intervening in American politics—often with an eye to screwing Democratic presidents—since long before he became obsessed with Iran." Tracing his past political wheeling and dealing as far back  as 1989 when he was deputy foreign minister, he said, "Netanyahu’s general belief that when push comes to shove, U.S. leaders can be moved in the direction he wants them to go."

Columnist Bill Keller coupled Netanyahu with Mitt Romney. He said, "They have more in common than a background in management consulting and an unswerving devotion to the security of Israel. When it comes to international diplomacy, we are reminded this week, both have the subtle grace of cattle on loco weed. "(If you don't know what loco weed is you are in good company neither did I till I “googled” it.)

Christian Science Monitor staff writer Christa Case Bryant belaboured Bibi in a piece about the   Iran nuclear threat. "Netanyahu goes to the people - the American people, that is." She mentioned his interviews on NBC and CNN.

In NBC's “Meet the Press”, Netanyahu said a policy of containment such as the US had with the Soviet Union was unfeasible because Iran's leadership is different.  "I think Iran is very different, they put their zealotry over their survival – they have suicide bombers all over the place," he said. "I wouldn’t rely on their rationality."  That very emphatic opinion contrasts sharply with the learned views of some of our Iran experts. They claim the Mullahs are zealous in their declarations, but are motivated by an  innate survival instinct.

In the past  Israeli leaders have shown an affinity  for particular U.S. political leaders, however Bibi has gone much further than any of his predecessors.

Jeffrey Goldberg also touched on a few worrying  precedents, " The U.S., as Netanyahu and his allies have pointed out, did not want Pakistan and North Korea to go nuclear,  and they did.” Nevertheless, the U.S has been able contain both countries. Iran would be far more difficult to contain.

Goldberg sums up the prospects for an Israeli go it alone preemptive attack on Iranian nuclear sites. “This is a job that is too big for Israel to carry-out alone. He needs America, and he needs the man he fears will be president again."

A very hard-hitting opinion piece written by Eric. L. Lewis appeared in the New York Times, last week. "To be sure, Israel is a special ally, but that does not entitle it to make the decision on matters where United States interest and power are inextricably and centrally engaged. It is inconceivable that the United States would permit another ally dependent on American funds and American defense systems to take such a decision unilaterally. It is also inconceivable that we would permit another foreign government to intervene directly and forcefully in our political process to garner popular support for its policies over the objections of the administration."

Haaretz political commentator Anshel Pfeffer had a Jewish New Year message for his readers  A prediction about unilateral action against Iran.

"For better or worse, this Jewish New Year (5773) will not be the year of the bomb, at least if America does not change its position and there is no sign of that happening no matter who wins the elections."  Israeli analysts with good contacts in the administration have recently begun saying that if Israel attacks, the Iranians will treat it as an American act of aggression and retaliate against U.S. targets

Hence the red-light Bibi complained about.  "The red-light over Iran means 'cross us on this at your peril' " says Pfeffer, "And no matter how many times American leaders pay lip-service to Israel's 'sovereign right to defend itself,' the warning is clear. "… "That's clear and shining red - not like in 1967 when the Eshkol government thought it may have a green-light (though it didn't actually) or in other recent cases such as Operation Cast Lead or the attack on the Syrian reactor five years ago this month when the absence of a red-light basically meant green. Neither is it like issues such as settlement-building on which the countries have a difference of opinion but not something that causes undue tension."

A New York Times opinion column entitled “No Rush to War”   made a strong case for a sober cost analysis of preemptive attack option.

“A new report about the costs of a potential war with Iran failed to attract much attention. It says an attack by the United States could set back Iran’s nuclear program four years at most, while a more ambitious goal — ensuring Iran never reconstitutes its nuclear program or ousting the regime — would involve a multiyear conflict that could engulf the region.

The significance of the report by 'The Iran Project'  is not just its sober analysis but the nearly three dozen respected national security experts from both political parties who signed it: including two former national security advisers, Brent Scowcroft and Zbigniew Brzezinski; former Undersecretary of State Thomas Pickering; and the retired Gen. Anthony Zinni.

Yet Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel is trying to browbeat President Obama into a pre-emptive strike.”  ….

“There is no reason to doubt President Obama’s oft-repeated commitment to keep Iran from having a nuclear weapon. But 70 percent of Americans oppose a unilateral strike on Iran, according to a new poll by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, and 59 percent said if Israel bombs Iran and ignites a war, the United States should not come to its ally’s defense.

A public opinion poll conducted by the Israel Democracy Institute in conjunction with Tel Aviv University found that 43 percent of Jewish Israelis support Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's firm  engagement of US President Barack Obama on the issue of potential military action against  Iran. Forty percent of Israeli Jews considered Netanyahu's approach unwise.
Notably, in the event of an attack on Iran, 55% of Jewish Israelis said they did not feel at risk of being harmed.
Israel's Jews (46%) reported they feel insecure about their financial situation,

 a sentiment shared by 73% of Arab residents. When the Jewish population was dissected  along political lines, the Index found that substantially more left-wing Jewish Israelis feel  economically secure (63%) than their right-wing counterparts (46%).despite widespread discontent in a number of areas, the majority of Israeli Jewish respondents said they were optimistic about the upcoming year

New York Times correspondent Elisabeth Bumiller commiserated with Israel ambassador Michael B. Oren who is up-to-his-ears in damage control activity on Capitol Hill. “He is representing a prime minister who has infuriated the White House.”

“He’s in a very tough spot because his job is to maintain open communications between two administrations that have staked out positions that are adversarial and yet they can’t admit that they’re adversarial.”

Ms. Bumiller states a well known summary of the current dissonance. “The nub of the tension between the United States and Israel is time: Mr. Netanyahu believes that the Iranians are so close to making a nuclear bomb that Israel soon will not be able to stop it, but the United States, with superior military capabilities, argues that it will be able to detect, and prevent, Iran from passing that point. Israel in turn says it cannot outsource its national security, even to an ally like the United States.”

Elisabeth Bumiller  quoted the high volume exchange between American ambassador, Daniel B. Shapiro and Prime Minister Netanyau. “Ambassador Oren, was also in the room in Israel last month when Mr. Netanyahu, according to Representative Mike Rogers, Republican of Michigan, dressed down the American ambassador, Daniel B. Shapiro. Mr. Rogers, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, was in the meeting and told WJR, a Michigan radio station, that there was a ‘very sharp exchange’ between Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Shapiro.

It was, he said, ‘very, very clear the Israelis had lost their patience with the administration over Iran.

Not so, Mr. Oren said.

“Dan did not shout anything, he presented the Obama administration’s position — compellingly, O.K.? The prime minister conveyed Israel’s position — compellingly.”

With the approach of Yom Kippur  I extend the traditional blessing- 

 

 
 

Beni                                        20^th of September, 2012

Salad Days

A week before the Jewish New Year holiday Israelis realised that they face a greater existential threat than Iran's nuclear aspirations, namely the price of tomatoes! Admittedly King David lived three score years and ten without eating tomatoes and our sages of old never mentioned them, but we can't live without that vegetable, sometimes claimed as a fruit. Our forefathers overlooked the tomato simply because it is a comparatively recent arrival here.  Well, as everyone knows Israelis love salads. They are a staple, essential component in every meal we eat. A tomato-less salad is unthinkable, so when the price of tomatoes increased to $3.5 a kg we were really angry. Hell knows no fury like a tomato deprived Israeli. The tomato crisis replaced the ever present Iran threat on our prime-time news. Maybe we will have to risk shopping across the "Green Line" in order to buy an affordable tomato. Across the river in Jordan tomatoes are cheaper still, but the hassle with visas and border crossings rules out that option.                                               

The Iranians don't need a bomb, all they have to do is infect our tomato crops with a virulent blight and we will surrender without terms or conditions.

While Netanyahu rants on about fixing a red line to stop the Iranians building their bomb and complaining about President Obama placing a red light to stop his projected preemptive attack on Iranian nuclear sites, we are more concerned about that succulent red vegetable we can't afford to buy.

Let's forget the Mullahs this week and discuss some of our other problems.                             

In the Gaza Strip yet another hitherto unknown breakaway fundamentalist Islamic group took its turn to bombard nearby Israeli communities. The people living in these communities, kibbutzim, moshavim and small towns, collectively known as the Gaza periphery area, are ever alert for the "Colour Red" siren warning them to take cover. Finding a safe place isn't always easy. If you are out in a field or any other open space finding a place to shelter is near to impossible. Fortunately the Qassam rockets and mortar shells fired from Gaza are not accurately targeted; nevertheless they are aimed to strike rural communities and urban centres. Even at times when the  damage is slight and the injuries suffered are mostly cases of trauma, there is an accumulative stress and anxiety factor that can’t be ignored. The slight damage and few injuries statistic is often cited by the various human rights groups defending the "desperate people in Gaza" and condemning Israel’s asymmetric reprisals. Unlike the indiscriminate mortar and rocket attacks the IDF reprisals are carefully aimed to hit the people firing at us. The casualties inflicted on the terrorist groups often deter them for a while till the next attack and reprisal. The Hamas administration in Gaza isn’t interested in maintaining a war of attrition with the IDF, however breakaway groups of various persuasions often initiate attacks with the object of distancing themselves from Hamas to demarcate their independence.

Further south along the Israeli-Egyptian border the construction of   a formidable border fence is nearing completion. So far this barrier has effectively reduced the number of Africans trying to enter Israel by as much as ninety percent.

Two weeks ago a group Eritrean asylum seekers got as far as the fence and waited for something to happen. Behind them the Egyptian border police who allowed them to reach the fence wouldn’t let them return. As soon as the news of their arrival leaked out   droves of news media reporters tried vainly to approach the group. At the same time representatives of human rights groups attempted to intervene on behalf of the Eritreans, but the police and the IDF wouldn’t let them approach the fence. The fence was erected a few metres inside Israel so the refugees camped on the Egyptian side were technically in Israeli territory. Refugees mainly from Somalia, Eritrea, and  Sudan suffer extraordinary hardships  attempting to reach Israel . It seems they haven’t heard that Ahmadinejad  wants to wipe  us off the map. As far as they are concerned we are the closest bit of Europe in the Middle East. The border standoff dramatised as never before our dilemma over how to stop the influx of tens of thousands of Africans fleeing repressive governments who are seeking to enter  Israel illegally and our collective memory as a nation built by refugees. Although similar border confrontations have occurred in the past, this was the first caught on camera. In the end the problem was resolved. The Egyptians allowed the Eritreans to return, all except for two women and a teenager who were allowed to enter Israel. It’s extremely difficult to determine how many of these refugees are genuine asylum seekers and how many are looking for work.

Minister of the Interior Eli Yishai and many other people consider the African influx an existential threat.

Our indigenous defence systems: the Iron Dome,  David's Sling sometimes called Magic Wand and the Arrow group of anti-ballistic missiles provide a comprehensive tiered  defence coverage. The latter system  is being developed jointly by the Israeli defence company Rafael Advanced Defence Systems and Raytheon an American defence contractor. It is designed to intercept medium- to long-range rockets and cruise missiles, such as those possessed by Hezbollah, fired at ranges from 40 km to 300 km. Although it will be a while before the full array of systems will be operational Israel is well able to intercept missiles, short, medium and long range missiles.                      

Now if that doesn’t satisfy you there’s yet another powerful defence system in our arsenal. Something far more powerful than all the state-of-the-art pyrotechnics we have been spending billions of dollars on.

For the past eleven years Yoshiyahu Yosef Pinto, a young Israel rabbi has brought hundreds of   his followers on their annual pilgrimage to the grave of a kabbalist rabbi in Silistra, Bulgaria.  The renowned  Rabbi  Eliezer Papo, died prematurely in 1827 during a cholera plague that afflicted eastern Europe. Today Rabbi Pinto and his followers believe that prayers said at the grave of Rabbi Eliezer Papo have the power to ward off all of Israel’s enemies. Maybe so, just the same I place my trust in our three tiered defence system.

For a change I want add a bit of local news. My kibbutz is quite green-conscious. All the garbage collection points have separate bins for different kinds of rubbish. A lot of people manage their own   garden compost bin and now we have embarked on a major clean energy project. Ricor Solar started three years ago by  Ricor Cryogenic & Vacuum Systems as a fully owned subsidiary. Its primary goal is to develop and manufacture cost effective Stirling engines which convert thermal energy into electrical power.  Several prototypes are being tested in Spain by a potential Spanish partner. Another enterprise with more immediate benefits is under construction at present  We have replaced the roof covering of all the sheds in our dairy and sheep pens with solar panels. At present the same project is being extended to include all the roofs  of our factories. Early next year the entire roof area will be producing electricity which will be sold to the Israel Electric Company. It will take about five years to return the initial investment. After that it’s profit less a small upkeep cost. Other energy projects are being considered including a partnership for harnessing wind energy on the Issachar plane just north of the kibbutz. Among the  suggested names for the proposed joint venture is “Luftgeschäfte”

I want to conclude by wishing everyone Shana Tova . May the New Year bring us all good health, happiness and a little more money to pay for the rest.

Beni                                        13^th of September, 2012.

A clear red line

Among the articles and snippets of news I read this week I singled out one brief sub-column to include in my opening remarks. It concerns two stone figurines discovered during construction work carried out near Tel Moza west of Jerusalem. The figurines, one carved from limestone the other from dolomite clearly represent a ram and a buffalo. They were crafted by Neolithic hunters between 9,000 and 9,500 years ago.  .

Presumably, the figurines were a kind of talisman to ensure successful hunting. It seems that human beings, ancient and modern, have always preferred to leave little to chance. Nowadays, people embarking on a journey might prefer to keep a St Christopher or a blessing for the road on the dashboard. If they go fishing or hunting some might choose to keep a rabbit's foot or other good luck charm handy. However, in order to predict the future other means are available. Some time ago I wrote about one of them.     "About forty or fifty years ago visitors to Nazareth would often seek out an Arab woman famed for her skill in fortune telling. I believe she met her clients in a coffee shop near the Church of the Annunciation. I don’t know whether she read palms, coffee cups or Tarot cards; however her reputation as a fortune teller was widespread. People came from all over Israel to ‘consult her’. Her predictions for better or for worse were either believed or shrugged off as nonsense. With the passage of time the coffee shop became a restaurant and the fortune teller was heard of no more."

Analysts, political strategists and even run-of-the-mill casual observers, anxious to know what the Netenayahu-Barak duo is up to are advised to read “ Israel Today(Israel Hayom)” a free Hebrew language daily launched five years ago by American business magnate Sheldon Adelson. The paper’s owner and editorial board are staunch supporters of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.  Haaretz political analyst Amos Harel claims a scrutiny of  Israel Today front-page headlines can offer clues to Netanyahu's intentions, especially on the crucial issue of whether to attack Iran. Much the same as Tom Friedman echoes President Barack Omaba’s opinions in the New York Times.                                                                                                                                        Shaman’s in this part of the world and in other places once examined anomalies in the entrails of goats and sheep to predict or divine future events The practice was first common in ancient Mesopotamian, Hittite and Canaanite temples. . Saul sought the witch at Ein Dor who conjured up the spirit of Samuel who prophesised his defeat in battle.

Harel says, “In recent weeks, Israel Today has featured a barrage of worrying reports on Iran's nuclear progress and Washington's failure to halt it. But over the last few days, something interesting has happened: Last Friday, the paper instead highlighted a statement by Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, that he doesn't want America to be ‘complicit’ in an Israeli attack on Iran right now. The International Atomic Energy Agency's disturbing report on Iran's nuclear program got second billing.                 On Sunday, Iran was mostly relegated to the daily’s inside pages. On Monday, it returned to the headlines, but only in the form of Israel Defence Forces Chief of Staff Benny Gantz's vague statement that the IDF can act ‘anywhere, anytime.’”

Harel interprets the alternate increasing and decreasing of the war rhetoric as an indication that Netanyahu is seeking a way to retreat without loss of face.

“Netanyahu and Barak have been ratcheting up the pressure. But they appear to have overplayed their hand. The result has been a tougher American stance that has led Israel to calm down a bit, as reflected in recent reports that Barak has changed his mind and now opposes attacking at this time. Thus many officials now believe an attack is not as inevitable as it previously seemed. “

Harel offers his damage assessment of the Netanyahu-Barak sabre-rattling.

“In the best case, described as a possibility in a leak Monday to the New York Times, President Barack Obama will publicly set red lines and promise to attack if Iran crosses them. In the worst case, he will make do with vague generalities about Iran - but will certainly remember to settle accounts with Netanyahu if he is re-elected. Either way, it's hard to dismiss the damage the recent outpouring of Israeli verbiage has done to our strategic relationship with America. “

A lead article in The Economist  this week concluded much the same, “Israel’s prime minister, seems to have signalled that he will wait at least until after the American presidential election before deciding whether to bash Iran’s nuclear facilities. He let it be known that he expects Barack Obama, in return, to toughen his line on Iran by issuing something close to an ultimatum to the Islamic Republic that, if it still refuses to curb its nuclear programme and provide for intrusive monitoring and verification, the United States will take military action itself.”

The paper mentioned the ever mounting speculation that Netanyahu viewed the American pre-election period as the best time to attack, despite Obama’s evident discouragement, on the presumption that no candidate could be seen to condemn, let alone abandon, Israel. Mitt Romney accused Obama of weakness towards Iran and of “throwing allies like Israel under the bus”. “Furthermore,” continues the speculative opinion  mentioned by the Economist “If Israel were to strike at Iran, hawks on both sides of the Atlantic hope that America would be drawn in militarily, aiming its own far bigger firepower at the Iranian sites.”

Referring to the considerable opposition to an Israeli  unilateral attack on the Iranian nuclear facilities voiced by past security and intelligence directors,  the paper was amazed that, “This strangely public controversy over the most secret of national decisions included a petition by authors and artists denying Netanyahu’s right to decide whether to attack Iran. Nine members of his own parliamentary party then issued a counter-petition eagerly upholding his right and duty to do so. A senior former judge, Eliyahu Winograd, who headed an inquiry into Israel’s war in Lebanon in 2006, weighed in with a blistering broadcast swipe at Messrs Netanyahu and Barak, urging them not to ‘endanger the future of Israel’ and risk losing ‘everything we have built’ by launching an attack.” The Israeli sabre-rattling was intended as much for Obama as it was for Tehran. However, as John Foster Dulles certainly knew there’s a limit to brinkmanship. “The ability to get to the verge without getting into the war is the necessary art. If you try to run away from it, if you are scared to go to the brink, you are lost. “

The Economist claims, ”Netanyahu’s apparent climb-down followed a realisation by policy makers in Jerusalem that his brinkmanship had become dangerously caught up in an American election too close to call. The Israeli prime minister’s apparently less bellicose stand seems to have been co-ordinated with the White House. On September 2nd he told his cabinet that “the international community is not setting Iran a clear red line.” Until Iran sees it, he added, “it will not stop the progress of its nuclear project..                               The next day, the New York Times reported, the administration was ‘considering new declarations by President Obama on what might bring about American military action.’ On September 4th, sounding more conciliatory, Netanyahu said that ‘the clearer the red line, the less likely we’ll have conflict.’ Several other muscle-flexing actions by the Americans were also heralded in the American press. A naval exercise led by the United States with a score of friendly countries would soon take place in the Gulf. The Americans were likely to sign a new batch of anti-missile deals in the region, plainly directed against Iran. Still-tighter sanctions against Iran were in the offing, along with plans for renewed cyberwarfare against it.                                                                                                                        Such measures were hailed in America as intended to forestall an attack by squeezing the Iranians yet harder in the hope of forcing them to curb their nuclear ambitions. But the latest quarterly report of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN’s watchdog, said that Iran had sharply increased the size of its stockpile of higher-grade uranium and its capacity to enrich more.”

In an article in the Washington Post Charles Krauthammer took to task the people who advocate a policy aimed to deter Iran. They  cite cases where deterrence worked . He claims that deterring Iran is fundamentally different from deterring the Soviet Union. You could rely on the latter but not on the former.

America is a nation of 300 million; Israel, 8 million. America is a continental nation; Israel, a speck on the map, at one point eight miles wide. Israel is a ‘one bomb country.’ Its territory is so tiny, its population so concentrated that, as Iran's former President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani has famously said, ‘application of an atomic bomb would not leave anything in Israel, but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim world.’ A tiny nuclear arsenal would do the job.                                                                                                        In U.S.-Soviet deterrence, both sides knew that a nuclear war would destroy them mutually. The mullahs have thought the unthinkable to a different conclusion. They know about the Israeli arsenal. They also know, as Rafsanjani said, that in any exchange Israel would be destroyed instantly and forever, whereas the ummah – the Muslim world of 1.8 billion people whose redemption is the ultimate purpose of the Iranian revolution – would survive damaged but almost entirely intact.                                                                                        This doesn't mean that the mullahs will necessarily risk terrible carnage to their country in order to destroy Israel irrevocably. But it does mean that the blithe assurance to the contrary – because the Soviets never struck first – is nonsense.                                                                                                                                          The mullahs have a radically different worldview, a radically different grievance and a radically different calculation of the consequences of nuclear war. The confident belief that they are like the Soviets is a fantasy. That's why Israel is contemplating a pre-emptive strike. Israel refuses to trust its very existence to the convenient theories of comfortable analysts living 6,000 miles from its ground zero.”

Have a good weekend.

Beni                            6^th of September, 2012.