Not everyone is convinced that the recent meeting of Naftali Bennett with Joe Biden, despite their supposedly becoming, according to Biden, “close friends” (how “close” can that friendship be after a single meeting lasting 50 minutes?) was a success from Israel’s point of view. Former Israeli ambassador to the U.S. Michael Oren expresses his doubts here: “Could Iran use the winter to catch Israel by surprise?,” by Michael Oren, Israel Hayom, September 3, 2021:
From an appearance and visibility perspective, Prime Minister Naftali Bennett’s visit to Washington was a success. It seems he indeed managed to forge a personal connection with President Joe Biden and open a new page in US-Israel relations under the Democratic administration.
However, in terms of the essence of the visit, numerous and quite possibly critical questions remain. Beyond the administration’s diplomatic intentions, particularly in relation to reopening a Palestinian consulate in east Jerusalem, the monumental issue at hand remains what the US position will be if or when Israel is forced to take action against Iran….
While Bennett conveyed his government’s opposition to the U.S. reopening its consulate “to the Palestinians” in Jerusalem, this was not the life-and-death issue that Iran has become for Israel. Iran was the chief subject of his discussion with Biden. From the Stuxnet computer worm, to the assassination of five of Iran’s most important nuclear scientists, to the sabotage, in 2020 and 2021, of two different centrifuge plants – the second of them located 50 meters underground — at Natanz, the Mossad has managed repeatedly to slow down Iran’s march to the bomb. Nonetheless, the Iranians continue to progress in their enriching of uranium, which now stands at 60%, and the Israelis now believe that within just a few months Iran will have uranium enriched to a weapons-grade level, and will be able to produce a bomb.
The Iranians have been offered concession after concession in the Vienna talks, but have nonetheless shown no desire to conclude an agreement with the Americans to return to the 2015 nuclear deal. They ended the latest round of talks in June, and have not renewed them since. Iran is stalling for time, letting the Americans continue to think there is a chance Tehran will return to the J.C.P.O.A., while continuing to work furiously toward producing a nuclear weapon. The Biden Administration continues to pin its hopes on luring Iran back to the negotiating table, although its hard to see what further concessions it could make; it has shown that it has no desire to use force on Iran itself, and what is even worse, it has not offered its support for an Israeli operation on Iran’s nuclear facilities, which may depend for its success on the U.S. supplying bunker-busting bombs (massive ordnance penetrators, or MOPs) of a size that Israel does not now possess.
The Iranian regime, Oren notes, needs an actual weapon, and not merely the ability to produce one at short notice, for the purpose of deterrence. Tehran knows that if Gaddafi had not given up his nuclear program, he might have produced a weapon, and a threat to use it could have prevented NATO’s bombing campaign in Libya that helped in his overthrow; when Israel ended Saddam Hussein’s own nuclear project, by destroying Iraq’s Osirak reactor in Operation Opera in 1981, this ended any possibility of his producing a nuclear weapon; had he been able to do so, this could have kept the Americans from attacking Iraqi forces in Kuwait, or later, from invading. Iraq in 2003 and overturning Saddam’s regime. Iran is keenly aware of what happened to both Gaddafi and to Saddam Hussein, and wants to avoid their fate. Only an actual bomb, and not the ability to manufacture it even in a short time, will prevent an attack by America or Israel, thus ensuring the survival of the Islamic Republic. Would Kim Jong Un still be in power if he did not have nuclear weapons as North Korea’s invisible protective shield?
Oren also makes the point that the rulers of Iran think possession of a nuclear weapon will enhance the country’s prestige; it will have joined that exclusive nuclear club as its tenth member.It is galling to the ayatollahs that other non-Western countries – India, Pakistan – now are nuclear powers, but not Iran, and especially infuriating is the fact that the Zionist state has long been a nuclear power possessing hundreds of nuclear weapons.
It’s safe to assume that Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and the security advisers surrounding him have seen the images from Afghanistan and concluded that an American military response is nothing to be feared. The lack of an American reprisal following the missile fire on US bases in Iraq, carried out by pro-Iranian militias, only bolsters this conclusion.
The disorganized, confused, and at times frantic withdrawal of American soldiers and civilians, as well as of Afghan interpreters and other helpers, from Afghanistan made a deep impression on the Iranians. After 20 years and two trillion dollars spent, America, having failed to defeat the terror group, hurriedly abandoned Afghanistan. In the rush, the Americans left the Taliban more powerful than ever, for it quickly took possession of the $90 billion worth of weaponry the American military left behind. Iran, like much of the astonished world, including our European allies, was not impressed by the American performance. It has concluded that it has little to fear from the Bidenites, who are intent on relying on “diplomacy” rather than military force to persuade Iran to give up its nuclear program.
In Tehran, although officials also undoubtedly took note of the warning issued after the meeting between the Israeli prime minister and US president, whereby “other options” regarding Iran were still on the table – they certainly must have noticed that the warning didn’t include the customary “all options” on the table. We can surmise that the Iranians believe the American administration will do everything in its power to prevent Israel from launching a war that could envelop the US….
When Biden said that Iran would not get a nuclear weapon “on his watch,” the Iranians simply did not believe him. His vague allusion to having “other options” rather than, as he should have said, “all options, including the military one, are being considered,” was telling. Nor has he said anything about the need to guarantee that Israel retains its Qualitative Military Edge, or QME. He should have said “we are paying special attention to preserving Israel’s Qualitative Military Edge, especially in light of Iran’s rushing headlong to enrich uranium to weapons-grade level, and, at the same time, working furiously on its ballistic missile program.” Such remarks would have given Iran pause; the failure to make them has instead alarmed the Israelis.
The current Israeli government is a fractious coalition, from the far-right of the Yamina Party to the far-left of Meretz, and even includes a member of the Arab Ra’am Party. A decision to make a pre-emptive strike on Iran to prevent it from being able to produce a nuclear weapon would not be supported by the entire cabinet, but would likely lead to a deadlock. Could Bennett nonetheless go ahead without the support of a majority of his ministers? Even now, many of the ministers on the right have denounced Bennett for allowing the Gantz-Abbas meeting to take place, and for not being more forceful about the need to stop Iran when he met with Biden; meanwhile, ministers on the left think Bennett himself should be meeting with Abbas. Imagine the effect of a divided cabinet on decision-making in a time of possible war.
According to one possible scenario, the Iranians will continue enriching uranium and manufacturing the additional components required for a nuclear bomb and will reach the point of no return over the winter months. This would be the ideal time due to possible severe weather conditions that could impede and perhaps even neutralize the Israeli Air Force. Another consideration is the possibility of deterring Israel with a massive missile barrage by Hezbollah and other terrorist groups, without caring too much about an Israeli response against Lebanon.
Michael Oren notes that during the winter, the “severe weather conditions” could make any operation by the Israeli Air Force in Iran very difficult, and it is precisely by this winter that Iran should have enough uranium enriched to a weapons-grade level to make a bomb. Can Israel afford to wait until winter, or must it wage a preventive war before then, if the IAF is to succeed? And what would be the diplomatic fallout if Israel did not wait, but attacked Iran months before it could build that nuclear weapon? Would the Bidenites back Israel, or bemoan its decision and deliberately distance themselves from the Jewish state? There are many holdovers from the Obama Administration in Biden’s government, as well as a growing number of Democrats in Congress, who are distinctly unfriendly to the Jewish state; both groups may exploit what they would call an “unprovoked” attack on Iran as a reason for slashing American military aid to, and security cooperation with, Israel.
Another problem is Hezbollah. Iran might order its Lebanese ally to let loose with a series of ferocious rocket barrages at Israel from its storehouse of 150,000 rockets, some of which are now precision-guided. If thousands of rockets were to be launched by Hezbollah at Israel every day for a month, they could not all be intercepted by Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system; there would simply be too many of those rockets, and there are not enough Iron Dome batteries to intercept them all. Many of those rockets are therefore likely to land in Israel, wreaking havoc, especially in northern Israel, in the Galilee. The IAF would have its hands full, not just in trying to defend against the incoming rockets, but also in responding to such massive rocket attacks with airstrikes in Lebanon, diverting IAF resources and attention from the campaign to keep Iran from becoming a nuclear power.
Contrary to the widespread view among Israeli pundits that the humanitarian disaster in Lebanon limits Hezbollah’s ability to attack Israel, the current crisis is actually deterring Israel from harming or attacking Lebanon in response to Hezbollah fire. The world will not sit idly by as Israel exacerbates, through a military campaign, the suffering of the Lebanese people whose situation is already dire.
Oren argues that Israel will not be able to attack Hezbollah with massive force because the damage such an attack would cause Lebanon, already enduring the worst economic crisis of any nation in the last 150 years, would provoke international condemnation. But is that true? Won’t many Lebanese be delighted to see Israel deal a mortal blow to Hezbollah, which has been responsible for much of Lebanon’s financial immiseration? And won’t the Gulf Arab states also be glad to see Iran’s closest ally badly mauled? When Oren predicts that “the world will not sit idly by” if Israel “exacerbates…the suffering of the Lebanese people” is he right? What exactly would “the world” do instead of sitting “idly by”? Hasn’t the world sat idly by when Hezbollah over the past two decades has done so much to bring about that suffering in the first place? Of course there will be the usual UN resolutions denouncing Israel, but so what? Israel will brush them off. And Security Council resolutions about Israeli attacks in Lebanon, that unlike General Assembly resolutions are enforceable, when unfavorable to Israel will be vetoed by the U.S.
In light of this scenario, it was very important to hear a public commitment of support from the US president for Israel’s right to defend itself against any regional threat. Behind closed doors, it was crucial to hear how the US can enhance our ability to defend ourselves. This can be done by giving Israel military capabilities the US has thus far withheld from us, to other understandings. For example, will the US be willing to grant us military, logistical, diplomatic and even legal aid during a war with Iran?…
Wouldn’t it make more sense for the Americans publicly, rather than “behind closed doors,” to pledge military assistance to Israel so that it can defend itself, and to explain that part of Israel’s self-defense against a mortal threat includes the right to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, as Iran has repeatedly made clear, over the past forty years, that its aim is to destroy the Jewish state? Biden might have said to Bennett (and can still say) “We of course will continue to assure Israel’s qualitative military edge, so that it can defend itself against every kind of Iranian threat, including – above all –the nuclear one. And of course no one should expect Israel to wait until Iran acquires a nuclear weapon before acting; that would be too late; the ayatollahs have made their intention to destroy Israel abundantly clear, and they will have to be stopped before then.” Such a statement would give Tehran pause, as the Iranians try to figure out just what it means. Would that American commitment include providing Israel with bunker-busting bombs capable of destroying Iran’s nuclear facilities built deep inside a mountain at Fordow? What else might the Americans be willing to do to help our closest ally end the Iranian nuclear threat that is directed not only at Israel, but also at the Gulf Arab states, and at the United States itself? Keeping Iran guessing as to what kinds of weapons and security assistance America will provide the Jewish state could make the Iranians decide to slow down their nuclear effort, so as not, at this point, to provoke an attack.
Frank Anderson says
Think of the scene in the Mel Brooks movie Blazing Saddles, where the newly appointed Sheriff Bart is greeted by the town folk. After the preacher asks for the crowd to greet the star in friendship, he holds up his Bible, which is promptly shot to pieces by the mob. “Son, You’re On Your Own!” Israel, get ready to hear those words from Washington. Jew hating Jews remain a problem.
Keys says
My guess, Frank, is the many of Biden’s decision makers are Israel haters.
Frank Anderson says
Keys, is it necessary to guess? If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, and even flies and swims like a duck, it is probably a duck. One of the best known Jew Hating Jews in history is none other than Karl Marx, who wrote in several places his displeasure and disdain for Jews (which of course I do NOT share).
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
Will Iran Have a Nuclear Bomb by Winter?
This question contains a clear implicit assumption that Persia would use the nukes to execute a Jihad mass murder. This is definitely Islamophobic. Think about it: the Persians and all of Islam have pursued Jihad over the entirety of the Nuclear Age, but have never done a thermonuclear detonation on an enemy. Pakistan has had such weapons for a long time, and they haven’t. Maybe that’s because they’re one of our allies.
Or is it a Sunni vs. Shiite thing, with the Infidels preferring former over the latter?
So many questions, so little prior use evidence, so little time. I sure hope that Israel doesn’t down…
Frank Anderson says
A.P.F, there are several books which could show why the use of nuclear weapons is likely.
The Islamic Anti Christ, Joel Richardson
Why Israel Can’t Wait, Jerome Corsi
The Apocalypse of Ahmadinejad, Mark Hitchcock
The Iran Threat, Alireza Jafarzadeh
certainly there are others worth considering.
From my reading and understanding the issue is not Sunni v Shia, but pure Shia, seeking to bring back the missing 12th Imam through a world catastrophe, even at the expense of killing billions. I welcome other thoughts and better information.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
I remember noting Ahmadinejad’s distinct facial features during the Iran Hostage Crisis. He was a leader of the kidnapping. Next time I saw his face was years later when he popped up as President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and I said to myself, “That’s him!”. But nobody in the media made the connection.
But, anyway, kidnapping is a common crime, they happen all the time. And, notably, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khameini fired Ahmadinejad over policy differences, so Iran joining the Club Nuke is cool, it’s an honor system thing.
***
While President of Persia, Mahmoud gave a speech to a hall of college students. He related a dream he had where they bought a freighter and fitted it with an intermediate range nuclear missile and launched it over Pittsburgh and detonated it as an EMP device to shut down electricity over the eastern half of the U.S. The students stood up and cheered, some even teared up at the idea.
Here’s the point: he did *not* do it. The man was reasonable and responsible. Maybe that’s why the Supreme Leader fired him. That said, maybe the CIA should pull an operation to shoot Mr. Supreme and put Mahmoud back in power. We’d be safer, and Israel would be safer. Just like we’re safe with a nuclear Pakistan, which is strictly defensive. The EU would approve, everybody would. It’s a great idea.
Frank Anderson says
A.P.F., I ask you to read at least the first chapters of those books. I am not sure how to find them today: I have paper copies. But I suspect that if you read the first chapters, you will want to read the rest. I think the authors’ credentials are worthy and the information that is consistent between them is really worth considering. It is one thing to feel, but entirely better to know.
Frank Anderson says
APF, additional, Iran has been practicing the surface ship launching of otherwise land-based missiles for decades. Glenn Beck was discussing this on Fox well over 12 years ago.
gravenimage says
Here are the suspicions that Ahmadinejad was involved with the 1979 Iranian hostage crisis:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_the_1979_hostage_crisis
Looks as though this has never been determined one way or another beyond a reasonable doubt.
Would not surprise me, though.
Westman says
The only reason Pakistan hasn’t used nukes on India is because India also has them. They have been close to open nuclear war several times and then back down after considering the consequences. The US also considers India to be a better ally than Pakistan after learning Pakistan hid Bin Laden.
The expectation that Iran’s nut case leaders would use nukes to destroy Israel – after clearly stating their goal is the annihilation of Israel – is NOT Islamophobic. It is a realistic expectation of action by minds addled by Islamic Dogma and lives purposefully limited to make Jannah, through jihad, appear as the only relief. The Mullahs don’t care how many Iranians would be killed and have been jailing and killing them for any dissent since 1979.
Keys says
+1
gravenimage says
Good analysis, Westman.
Walter Sieruk says
Of course with that weak treasonous pseudo “president” Joe Biden sitting in the Oval Office of the White House masquerading as a real US President, that villain will most certainly allow that hostile Islamic regime of Iran obtain nuclear weapons . Biden will do nothing to stop them .
That subversive , traitorous despicable Biden wouldn’t even try to stop them even if he easily could.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
Of course with that weak treasonous pseudo “president” Joe Biden…
Are you implying that there was massive election fraud in the Nov 3 election? If that were the case, you’d be hearing about it all over the media. But that hasn’t happened, so it seems that Empathetic Joe was legitimately elected.
Keys says
APF, are you being sarcastic ?
john smith says
No way is the Pig Farmer being sarcastic, everyone knows that it was a fair genuine election result. And as the Farmer noted, you’d be hearing about it all over the media if it was fraudulent.
gravenimage says
Yes, APF is being sarcastic.
Keys says
Thanks, gi.
That’s what I thought, gravenimage, but so many have lost their minds nowadays.
As for John Smith’s comment about hearing it all over the media – when Pig Farmers fly or in in days gone by !
john smith says
+1
E T says
I stayed up on election night, I watched until 3:15 am, I worked in Canada for 35 years in many different political jobs, returning office / Secretary of State positions. I watched how through some GREAT, GREAT, GREAT miracle Trump lost the election sometime between 3 am and 7 am. I am now spending a lot of my time looking for a unicorn or a flying donkey – – no APF wasn’t being sarcastic HA HA HA
Mr x says
Obama made the biggest mistake by signing the flawed jcpoa deal. Trump plan of quiting the jcpoa deal without the europeans also was a mistake. Also the extra sanctions imposed by the usa on Iran after withdrawing from the jcpoa deal has not resulted in bringing Iran to the negotiation table. Biden should convince the European to withdraw from the deal and put pressure on the Iranian for negotiating a new deal, but that will never happen because doing so would mean that the deal which Obama signed was a flawed deal. Now Israel has very less options on the table. Attacking the nuclear facility in Iran will result in a barrage of rockets into tel aviv from hezbollah, also there is a possibility of iran itself attacking israel. I think that Iran having a nuclear bomb will never use it on Israel it is just a leverage for the ayatollah to stay in power.
gravenimage says
The Mullahs are not going to negotiate with the ‘filthy Infidels’–our lifting sanctions and shoveling money at them as Obama did is just going to facilitate their getting nukes.
Mr x says
By that logic, only option Israel has is to attack the nuclear facilities. This would most definitely met with a retaliation strike either from Iran directly or from hezbollah.
gravenimage says
The idea that shoveling money at the Mullahs and lifting sanctions on them–enabling them–is apt to make them *less* emboldened to develop nukes makes no sense.
Then, the implication that ravening Jihadists only attack Israel in “retaliation” is quite false.
Phil Copson says
There is no “deal” to be had – the only sensible course of action with people who want you dead is to hold them down by force.
Biden will never take any sensible action, because the whole point of the JCPOA, “aid” to the PA / Pakistan etc, is to fund terrorism in the guise of countering it.
gravenimage says
+1
gravenimage says
Will Iran Have a Nuclear Bomb by Winter?
……………….
Would not surprise me–and this will be foolishly enabled by Biden.
Frank Anderson says
GI, in my opinion Iran has SOME bombs now thanks to its cooperation and almost certain financing of North Korea’s nuclear bomb program in addition to its missile projects. They just do not have enough to start the war they wish. No country has ever spent as much or worked as long as Iran and failed to obtain nuclear weapons. NOT ONE in history.
I think it is better for me to refrain from speculating on the REQUIRED response when they are KNOWN to have enough bombs to start the war they seek. I have never been accused of tact and diplomacy: I can’t lie with a convincing expression and voice.
James Lincoln says
Frank Anderson,
With deep respect, in your opinion:
What would be the size, type, and number of nuclear weapons that Iran would have to possess in order to start the “war that they wish” with Israel?
Frank Anderson says
James, Iran does not intend to start a was exclusively directed at Israel, “The Little Satan”. If you read the books I cited, you will see the war they wish to see is a global catastrophe, directed at all non-shia targets, from the US, to Sunnis and everyone else. The goal of the “Twelvers” is essentially killing all humans alive to bring the believers out of this life of misery into paradise and send all non-believers into the fires of Hell.
Remember according to the muslim teaching, this life is for misery and suffering only. The next life is for comfort and pleasure, for believers, and ever lasting torture for non-believers. When a nuclear armed group has that drive to murder and suicide, they are dangerous and should be believed. Please I ask you look at those books and any others you might find helpful. Frank
Frank Anderson says
James, based on my reading for more than 50 and closer to 60 years, in my opinion, this is what Iran would want for tis attack on Israel. The destruction of the Jewish state and the collateral damage of eliminating the Palestinian menace* would take at least a dozen DELIVERED bombs. The most basic and least efficient bomb design is the Little Boy used in Hiroshima. It was rated about 15 kilotons. More efficient fission designs use half the Uranium or perhaps a quarter of the Plutonium as Little Boy to produce the same yield. Adding a capsule, container, bottle, of Lithium Deuteride turns the fission bomb into a fission-fusion bomb, yielding 100 to 1000 times the energy of the fission only device. Wrapping the fission-fusion bomb with depleted, nearly pure U-238, or just plain natural Uranium doubles the yield of the fission-fusion bomb. But according to the US Government Printing Office publication, The Effects of Nuclear Weapons, a bomb yield must increase about 10 times to double the radius of its damage.
Understanding just how small Israel’s land area to be, if is fair to estimate the goal of an attack on “Little Satan” would have the intent of total destruction. In order to deliver 12 bombs against the unreliability of a near simultaneous launch of more than 100 missiles, against probably the best operational, multi-layer anti-missile defense system in the world today, figure at least 120 bombs would need to be launched by Iran against Israel almost at the same time in its best hope and effort of saturating Israel’s defense. If Iran were able to use multiple bombs on its missiles, the reliability question would be reduced, but never eliminated. Israel would KNOW when the attack is planned and without reasonable question strike first, with every weapon, publicly known or suspected, in its arsenal.
Look at the specifications of the MOAB and Massive Ordinance Air Penetrator. Israel has no bomber large or strong enough to carry and deliver either. With the present administration, Israel would be suicidal to depend on the US to assist its defense.
Iran has many targets in addition to Israel. Especially the US. With 3 bombs exploded at an altitude about 300 miles above Salt Lake City, Omaha and Raleigh, where NO heat shield or re-entry vehicle is needed, the EMP would destroy every unprotected computer, such as pacemakers, control systems, automobiles, PC’s in the continental US. Iran can launch those missiles from the undefended Gulf of Mexico from a ship or ships based in Cuba or Venezuela, or from land bases in those or other friendly countries. Their existing missiles can be upgraded quickly using solid rocket boosters strapped onto their existing designs to have the range needed for those attacks.
Trying to guess their other targets points to Saudi Arabia and its “friends”. Altogether I would guess when Iran has more than 200 bombs in its inventory is a really good time to take shelter.
*According to some writers the only group hated more than Jews among muslims is the Palestinians. Remember how Stalin stopped the Soviet Army outside Warsaw to allow the Nazis to finish off the Polish resistance, after Stalin had slaughtered tens of thousands of Poles earlier in the war. “The enemy of my enemy is my friend, as long as it is convenient.”
I read Herman Kahn’s On Thermonuclear War while in military high school in the 1960’s and several times since. I have a copy in my collection. It is worth reading.
James Lincoln says
Frank Anderson,
Thank you for your detailed replies.
I agree, given the means, Iran could *start* with Israel – but that would likely only be the beginning as you have outlined.
And, I believe it’s safe to say, that an Islamic Republic like Iran may actually ignore the concept of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD).
P.S.
I will also make an attempt to track down the books that you had recommended.
Frank Anderson says
James, Herman Kahn may have originated the concept of MAD. He certainly discussed it in his highly regarded and original book pondering the intricacies of nuclear war. The essential requirement for MAD to have value, is a sane party opposing a sane party. There has never been a shortage of suicide bombers in islam. When the shia goal is to end all life on this earth in preference for the next life in paradise or hell, sanity is obviously absent in their decision making. If the books are not available through your library, I would start with Amazon, possibly even their free Kindle system. They were well worth my time and money.
gravenimage says
Good exchange, Frank and James.
John Lloyd Scharf says
Iran started building nukes in 2004. No later than 2008 they had their first. By winter, they will have enough to cause a NUCLEAR WINTER.