I caught a segment this morning during the 8:00 A.M. hour of MSNBC's "Morning Joe" program where Mika Brzezinski interviewed NBC's Pentagon Correspondent Jim Micklaszweski's [Mick"] opinions as to the "military option" in response to Iran's confession of a second nuclear uranium enrichment site near Quom.
Other than a brief mention by Ret. Col. Jack Jacobs this past weekend, this was the first reference I have read or heard about what the Israeli's leadership might be thinking at this point.
"Mick" said that the Obama Administration was of the opinion that the military option would be ineffectual is disabling Iran's nuclear capabilities, and that its possible use of this alternative could trigger a Middle East conflagration that would make the situation far worse. He also hinted that the Administration was actively engaged in efforts to persuade Israel not to make any comments on their possible consideration of this course of action.
I would imagine that from a public relations aspect, Obama would have to adhere to this advice. However, as I have stated on my previous posts on this subject, Israel has not always toed the line to Washington's appeal for restraint, though that Nation has exhibited much patience over the past decade.
In respect to that Nation's position, there comes a time when any Country has the right to take actions that it percieves to be in its best interest. Israel has taken that path many times in the past. We marked the anniversary of the Yom Kippour war just yesterday.
Jim's points were well taken, one of which would be the consequences any such action may have on world oil prices. However, Israel's concerns about oil may have no impact upon their concerns about their own security should Iran achieve its goal of acquiring a nuclear capabilty, which indeed it demonstrated again this morning with the successful test firings of long-range delivery systems that could easily reach targets in Israel.
All the commentaries I have read and heard are not very encouraging. Rule out China's cooperation on sanctions. They are dependent upon Iran for 15% of their energy needs. Any decision by the Chinese Goernment to endanger that supply would have to be accompanied by American and Euopean pledges to make up that difference. I guess taht's what diplomacy is all about, but who knows what will evolve. Non Security Council actions may have an effect on Iran's economy, but given the 18-month time frame for it to have enough enriched uranium to produce several nuclear weapons, that is not going to make the Israeli leadership more comfortable to give those sanctions a chance to be effective.
The bottom line is what position will Israel take? My thought is that they will make that decision not based upon short-term consequences, but on their long term security interests.
Bill Breakstone
Somers, NY
September 29, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment