Israeli Attack On Iran: Likely? Necessary? Inevitable?

Israeli attack on Iran would be destabilizing Joint-Chiefs say:

—– —– —–

AFCEA International (AFCEA), established in1946, is a non-profit membership association serving the military, government, industry, and academia as an ethical forum for advancing professional knowledge and relationships in the fields of communications, IT, intelligence, and global security        —         The MAZZ-INT Blog

“Convincing Iran and Restraining Israel: Nice Trick If You Can Do It!”

The new-year began with Iran threatening to close the Strait of Hormuz if the US persisted with economic sanctions against its nuclear weapons programs. This was followed in rapid succession with

  • new strategic defense guidance pivoting a learner military towards the Asia/Pacific theater,
  • the President’s State of the Union Address, the Pentagon outlining budget winners and losers for FY 13,
  •  Assad ramping up violence to subdue the breezes of the Arab Spring in Syria,
  • sectarian based violence emerging in Iraq,
  • Secretary Panetta announcing plans to end combat operations in Afghanistan during 2013 – a year earlier than scheduled —
  • and with almost perfect symmetry as January closed Israel publicly saying it was ready to act alone to destroy Iran’s nuclear weapons infrastructure.

Geez, did I miss something in Pakistan?! And apparently Kim Jung Un is settling in as expected in Pyongyang!

Containing Chinese military power, ensuring allied access to underwater resources in accordance with accepted international principles, and keeping sea lanes open in support of free trade along with the region’s economics and demographics explains both the strategic drivers for America’s “Asia Pivot” and why it is not surprising […] I am not sure the Navy has yet come to grips with the logistics of Asian/Pacific operations.

  • China and Russia vetoed a United Nations (UN) resolution calling for Syrian President Bashar al Assad to end the use of military force to subdue anti-government protesters and seek a peaceful resolution to popular demands for more freedoms. As Assad escalated the use of military force in the wake of the Sino-Russian UN veto, the US and its allies must consider mounting a Libyan like operation without UN backing to force Assad to change or leave.
  • Iran’s influence with Syrian based Hezbollah elements certainly makes regime change a dicey course of action in terms of strategic outcomes the US would want to achieve in Syria. Then there is the question of can/should the US insert itself to right the wrongs in an Arab autocratic state?

The looming issue though right now for the United States is, can diplomatic pressure in combination with economic sanctions cause Iran to terminate its development of nuclear weapons with sufficient transparency to cause Israel not to unilaterally attack Iran’s nuclear weapons’ infrastructure?

Presumably the answer is yes, but as evidence by the 1956 strike on the Suez Canal, the 1981 attack on Iraq’s nuclear reactor, various incursions into Lebanon, and the building of settlements in the West Bank Israel will act without US support, or even in the face of US opposition, when it believes its national security is threatened.

Ideally Iran’s leadership will be convinced by the obvious impacts of the sanctions on their economy and the increasingly limited ability of Washington to restrain Jerusalem from launching a military attack to accept international verification that its nuclear program is for legitimate civilian uses as it claims. The alternative for persuading the Israelis not to attack unilaterally is for the US to offer to conduct joint or coordinated covert operations with Israel to degrade Iran’s ability produce a nuclear weapon. Attractive as US covert operations against Iran might be given the current circumstances, it would be the President again committing the United States to armed conflict if not war. The difference this time, however, would be the action would be aimed at the strategic military capability of a nation state vice targeting terrorists without national affiliation but with the nominal approval of the host nation.

Ironically, what could unknot this political and constitutional concern about the war powers of the President in an election year as well as give Israel reason not to strike on its own is if Iran actually committed an act of war in the Strait of Hormuz (attacking USN ships, laying sea mines, deny innocent passage, etc.).

Then the President could go to the Congress to “request” a declaration of war against Iran that would open a myriad of options for the US that could force Iran to negotiate or risk the destruction of the center of Shia power and influence in the Muslim world.

That’s what I think; what do you think?

—– —– —–

What Do I think? What Do I think!!
Whole world is aflame and he says what do I !!

W. W. O. D.?


Comments respectfully requested:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s