Options and Obstacles: Israel and Iran 2012

Israeli F-16 Fighter Jet preparing to refuel during long distance training maneuvers

Options and Obstacles: Israel and Iran 2012

Tensions over the possibility of military strikes between Iran and Israel have increased as each side seeks to  court the Atomic Energy Commission as well the United Nations. Americans have put the pressure on world leaders to deter any sort of nuclear development on the part of Iran, and with the rhetoric coming from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Israeli leaders have no other choice but to consider all the options.

Israel, a longtime receiver of terrorist assaults, has seen this type of activity from Arab countries in recent years and has reacted with covert offensive strikes to prevent the kind of destruction the Iranians talk so freely about. An example of this swift, corrective assault was seen in 2007 when Israel took out Syria’s nuclear power plant, which had just begun operations. Prior to this, a successful bombing of the Iraqi nuclear facility Osirak in 1981 proved that the possibility of eliminating a threat before it becomes one is always an option.

In the article from the Jerusalem Post, author Herb Keinon reports on the discussion given by newly appointed U.S. Ambassador Dan Shapiro to the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations in Jerusalem. It identifies the alliance between Israel and the U.S. and makes it clear that "any and all options are on the table." Shapiro emphasized that the use of Israeli intelligence forces on the ground are key to the American support and planning for how to handle the Iranian nuclear development.

Keinon does not got give any details on Israeli aggression toward Arab nuclear facilities and reveals nothing more than simple bureaucratic statements made by Ambassador Shapiro such as secret meetings being scheduled between world leaders. Keinon identifies but does not elaborate on Shapiro's reinstatement of Hamas as a terrorist organization. He makes a brief reference to Shapiro's reflection on his involvement and success of Iron Dome, the Israeli anti-missile defense system, which reveals that the Israelis are preparing for return fire, but overall, the author reports only the basic topics addressed at the Conference.

In terms of reliability, this article lacks resource and historical reference on the issues of nuclear development within the Arab world.  It does not reference the previous Arab-Israeli conflict with regards to nuclear facilities, sure to be a critical issue in Shapiro's new post.  The American Ambassador may have touched on this during the conference, but from this report, determining this is futile. American relations, which are critical to this dispute with Iran are only lightly described. 

In contrast to this article, Gaverial Queenan's report on the same conference uses a brief but informative historical narrative, giving the reader a better understanding of the Atomic Commission's interests as well as U.S-Israeli commitment. Queenan also gives the reader an indication of the disdain between Israel and the U.S. regarding the assassinations of the two Iranian nuclear scientists. This is crucial. Not only does it show American caution, but it also keeps Israel honest.
 
Unfortunately, neither article provides an in-depth breakdown of nuclear relations between Israel and the Arab world. A previous history of Israeli offensives on Arab nuclear facilities is essential to understanding the tension between Iran and Israel.

Syrian Nuclear Reactor

September 2007 – (Operation Orchard) Modeled after Korean nuclear facilities, satellite images taken by IDF officials located a nuclear reactor under construction in the AL-Kibar region of Syria just north of the Euphrates River. After bugging the laptop of a top Syrian official and the consultation of a defected Iranian scientists, Israeli officials acquired enough evidence implying Syria had other plans for its atomic resources. Used for the enrichment of uranium through centrifuges, the facility was apparently the next step before acquiring enough enriched uranium to build and test a nuclear weapon. Although not complete, satellite images and ground photography proved that the location was dedicated to uranium enrichment. On September 6, 2007 Israeli war planes flew over the facility and eliminated the operation. 

This map shows the location of Al-Kibar

Iraqi Nuclear Reactor

Osirak reactor before Israeli offensive

June 1981 – Operation Opera  – Purchased by the Iraqi’s from the French, the Osirak reactor was intended for peaceful use but suspicion grew on the part of the Israeli’s that its intended use was for military strikes on Israel.  Infiltration of the French support facility by Israeli intelligence resulted in the interception and destruction of the reactor’s first set of core structures before ever getting to Iraq.  Israel, so convinced of the reactor’s intent, built a model of the reactor for strategic military training purposes. Israel made significant advances in the gathering of intelligence on the ground after Iraq had made it's intentions for Israel clear. Osirak was said to be at least ten years away from production.

The assassinations of both Iranian scientists in the last year had many of the same markings used in the Egyptian scientist El-Mashad hit from 1982. This indicates that Israeli intelligence is still entrenched and probably  more aware of Iranian nuclear movement than any other country, apart from Iran itself.More info

If options for a strike have been seeded, the obstacles are inescapable for Israel. Strategic military factors play a gigantic role. Iran is much farther away than both Syria and Iraq.With Israel stretching their arm across Arab airspace, it presents a logistical nightmare, and requires precise coordination. Even with Iraq neutralized, The numbers and challenges that go with a military strike are exhausting considering the distance and maneuvers necessary to reach the region. It guarantees mid-air refueling and ensures vulnerability.

As we can see, the previous attacks and current initiatives by Israeli forces contributes to the pressure in regards to the use of nuclear energy on the part of Iran. Even though this aggression is spurred on by continual Iranian rhetoric, these factors must not be overlooked when focusing on the determination of Iran to keep enriching uranium. With the Arab League demonstrating unification in the past in regards to the elimination of Israel, and the Jewish population at an all time high, it is important for Israel to keep as many options on the table as possible. Even more critical, much of the Iranian population is in favor of nuclear development.