Paging through a number of international news outlets concerning the dilemma Israel and Iran are facing, I have summarised what I consider to be the most relevant topics.
I hasten to add that I am no more than an interested observer using open-source information.
Israel is threatening to retaliate for Iran’s ballistic missile attack on October 1. Will it bomb Tehran's nuclear sites? Can it?
Israel sees Iran as an existential threat to its existence, and for good reason. Iran's clerical leaders have repeatedly threatened to annihilate Israel.
According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog, Iran has increased its stockpile of uranium enriched to near weapons-grade levels.
IAEA’s Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi, said earlier this year that Iran has enough uranium enriched to near-weapons-grade levels to make "several" nuclear bombs if it wanted to do so.
Still, on Monday, CIA Director Bill Burns said that while it was clear that Iran has developed the "means of delivery" for a potential nuclear weapon by building up its missile arsenal, "we do not see evidence today that the supreme leader has reversed the decision that he took at the end of 2003 to suspend the weaponisation programme."
Iran, in other words, according to Burns, may have technically halted its explicit work on nuclear weapons in 2003, but it has continued to acquire nuclear technology and expertise that is a requirement for any such programme.
Various reports have circulated as to what Israel might target. Among the options: Iran's military bases, its oil and economic infrastructure, key leaders in the Iranian regime and, perhaps the riskiest of all, nuclear sites.
Still, Israel’s killing Sept. 27 of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah by heavy bombing may be "proof of concept" for Israel to target Iran’s deeply buried nuclear facilities, according to a former Air Force intelligence officer.
Israel dropped a series of what are believed to have been 2,000-pound bombs on Nasrallah’s bunker in Beirut’s Dahiya neighbourhood. By hitting the same target repeatedly, the Israeli air force succeeded in destroying Nasrallah’s bunker.
It’s a tactic that might work on Iran’s nuclear facilities, hidden deep in mountainous desert areas.
I am inclined to discard the speculation, albeit well-reasoned and stay with an emphatic statement made by Defence Minister Yoav Gallant recently.
“Israel’s strike on Iran will be lethal, precise and especially surprising.
It won’t understand what happened to it, or how.” The statement was made during a visit to IDF Intelligence Unit 9900 — a unit that gathers intelligence in theatres of war. Gallant added, “On the other hand, Iran’s strike last week was aggressive, but it failed because it was inaccurate.”
Destroying those buried facilities would be extremely challenging," said Scott Murray, a retired Air Force colonel with extensive experience targeting U.S. adversaries in the Middle East.
Hypothetically speaking, if tasked with the job, the U.S. Air Force would likely rely on one of its largest conventional weapons to destroy such a site. The GBU-57, or "Massive Ordnance Penetrator," is a 30,000-pound bomb encased in steel that allows it to burrow deep into the earth before exploding.
Israel, as it did to kill Nasrallah in Beirut, would have to rely on a series of smaller bombs striking the same spot. However, the difference is that Israeli pilots would face surface-to-air missile defences in Iran.
“It will be ten times more difficult,” he said.
Margin note:- Furthermore, Iran’s nuclear sites are far too many and too widely dispersed for that option to be seriously considered.
Some analysts say Israel is most likely to respond to Iran's Oct. 1 attack by targeting Iranian military installations, especially those that produce ballistic missiles like the ones used in the attack. It could also seek to destroy Iranian air defence systems and missile-launching facilities.
If Israel does decide to go after Iran's nuclear facilities, which many experts on Iran and current and former officials see as unlikely, it could have impacts that go beyond military ones.
"In the process, Israel risks causing nuclear contamination as some of these facilities are close to population centres," said Ali Vaez, the Iran Project Director at Crisis Group, a Brussels-headquartered think tank. "It also exposes itself to an Iranian attack on Dimona, which could cause an environmental disaster in Israel."
Dimona is an Israeli nuclear installation located in the Negev.
Vaez said that an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear programme would also be "bound to push Iran to withdraw" from the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, which has been in force since 1970, and "dash toward the ultimate deterrent given that its conventional and regional deterrence have clearly proven insufficient to protect its homeland."
Iran has threatened to escalate its attacks against Israel if it comes under attack and it has characterised its nuclear and energy facilities as "red lines," without elaborating.
In fact, according to a 2022 week-long simulation involving 30 leading Iran and Middle East experts, any attempt by Israel to strike Iran's nuclear facilities, regardless of whether it is deemed successful, unsuccessful or even partially successful would only serve as a catalyst to further nuclear proliferation by Iran. It would also likely, according to Wikistrat, the Israel-based security and global risks consultancy that hosted the simulation, spur Iran's regional competitor Saudi Arabia to accelerate its nuclear programme and see Russia and China further drawn into the region to take a more active role in Iran's defence by supplying it with advanced defensive capabilities.
Oren Kesler, Wikistrat's CEO, said he did not think Israel would target Iran's nuclear facilities because hitting them with bombs, no matter how powerful, would not be sufficient to dismantle them. He said any bombing campaign would need to be supplemented with ground operations by special forces and this would require Israel to "reallocate its military power" from other areas such as Lebanon at a time when it forces are being stretched on other fronts.
However, Kesler said there are other things Israel may be considering as it decides what to do next.
"The answer in one word is time,” he said.
"In the Middle East, you cannot deny the impact time has. Sometimes it's the best result you can get. Israel's not going to destroy Iran's nuclear programme. It may be able to postpone it, though. And with time, you can build capabilities. You can make new alliances. You need to ask yourself, what happens if tomorrow the leadership changes in Iran? Who's to say Iran later on won't decide to move away from a policy of brinkmanship?"
In the meantime, let’s wait and see if Yoav Gallant’s surprise option produces the desired effect.
G'mar Chatima Tova.
Beni,
10th of October, 2024.
No comments:
Post a Comment