Indications of War?
Published in Asharq Al Awsat
(Saudi Arabia) on 4 March 2010
by Mamoon Fandi (link to original)
The pressing question in the Arab world today is this: Is there a war coming between Iran and Israel or between Iran and the United States due to Iran’s nuclear ambitions? There is no doubt that the statements from Israel, the instigator Hassan Nasrallah, the Damascus Meeting, the combined maneuvers between American and Israeli forces and the increase in political and diplomatic movements in the region are, when considered together, indications of war. However, do these signs of war have only the goal of deterrence, or are they real warnings and evidence of a coming war?
First off, war is beneficial to all sides. Israel needs a war to regain the trust between the army and Israeli society, whose trust was shaken after the 2006 war with Hezbollah. Also, after threats from Ahmadinejad of wiping Israel off the map, Israelis feel it is their duty to eliminate Iran’s potential nuclear strength because this strength would be otherwise used against them. In this sense, Israel might use all it has to break the power of Iran. It is a battle of existence, not a battle of borders that will occur between Israel and Iran. From here, I say that this war will be one of the worst wars in the region and possibly the ugliest.
It is important for us to know that Iran has changed its position regarding Western influence since successfully engaging in nuclear enrichment. The motives of Iranian political organizations have even pushed the country in directions that were perhaps not anticipated before the development of Iran’s nuclear abilities. In the same way, Iran’s disputed presidential election divided Iranian society into two parts, leaving the country changed yet again. Nuclear power and modern enrichment are important to heal and bridge the gap that appeared in Iran after the suspicious presidential elections.
The West is also worried about the developments of Iranian military strength, in both nuclear and ballistic technology. Therefore, it is important for Americans and Europeans to call for a diplomatic solution since other international actions by some European nations and Washington toward Iran could spin the wheels of war (causing at least an airstrike) and halt diplomacy.
Enrichment and nuclear power are basic necessities according to Iran. Therefore, Iran will not vary in their means of enriching uranium and will not agree to completely get rid of its nuclear program. Iran has many reasons for this.
After the enrichment Iranians felt proud of their country, the Revolution scientists’ accomplishments and their ability to set up a successful enrichment program. This pride causes Iranian patriotism to bloom with an Islamic color. It also makes the Revolutionary Guards feel elated and proud. Iran abandoning uranium enrichment would surely lead to internal frustration and a case of schizophrenia among the regime and its supporters, especially after the appearance of real opposition to the organization after the suspicious presidential elections.
Internal Iranian motives are to induce fear in neighbors and exert hegemony over the Gulf while achieving status as a power to be reckoned with by America. They want the U.S. to talk with Iran about Iraq, enrichment and the Gulf waters. Iran wants to become the main axis in the area, that talks with Europe or America concerning any political or security measure in the region. This is the Iranian vision. Will Washington accept this position?
In spite of the number of opinions in Washington, London and Tel Aviv, these capitals do not accept Iran as a regional nuclear power. Today, Americans deal with the Iranian issue in a purely legal manner in order to mobilize the international community against Iran, as they did with Saddam Hussein. In addition, the ruling group in Israel today is from the school of “whoever is not with us is with the terrorists.” If this is the prevailing perspective of Benyamin Netanyahu and his community, consider how the Iranian nuclear issue and politics are to be viewed by Israel. He adopted the choice to strike Iranian nuclear reactors, at least from the air, if there were not going to be enough ground forces to confront Iran. All that we see today in the Gulf region are indications of war from all sides. It seems as though the gears of war have already begun turning.
First off, war is beneficial to all sides. Israel needs a war to regain the trust between the army and Israeli society, whose trust was shaken after the 2006 war with Hezbollah. Also, after threats from Ahmadinejad of wiping Israel off the map, Israelis feel it is their duty to eliminate Iran’s potential nuclear strength because this strength would be otherwise used against them. In this sense, Israel might use all it has to break the power of Iran. It is a battle of existence, not a battle of borders that will occur between Israel and Iran. From here, I say that this war will be one of the worst wars in the region and possibly the ugliest.
It is important for us to know that Iran has changed its position regarding Western influence since successfully engaging in nuclear enrichment. The motives of Iranian political organizations have even pushed the country in directions that were perhaps not anticipated before the development of Iran’s nuclear abilities. In the same way, Iran’s disputed presidential election divided Iranian society into two parts, leaving the country changed yet again. Nuclear power and modern enrichment are important to heal and bridge the gap that appeared in Iran after the suspicious presidential elections.
The West is also worried about the developments of Iranian military strength, in both nuclear and ballistic technology. Therefore, it is important for Americans and Europeans to call for a diplomatic solution since other international actions by some European nations and Washington toward Iran could spin the wheels of war (causing at least an airstrike) and halt diplomacy.
Enrichment and nuclear power are basic necessities according to Iran. Therefore, Iran will not vary in their means of enriching uranium and will not agree to completely get rid of its nuclear program. Iran has many reasons for this.
After the enrichment Iranians felt proud of their country, the Revolution scientists’ accomplishments and their ability to set up a successful enrichment program. This pride causes Iranian patriotism to bloom with an Islamic color. It also makes the Revolutionary Guards feel elated and proud. Iran abandoning uranium enrichment would surely lead to internal frustration and a case of schizophrenia among the regime and its supporters, especially after the appearance of real opposition to the organization after the suspicious presidential elections.
Internal Iranian motives are to induce fear in neighbors and exert hegemony over the Gulf while achieving status as a power to be reckoned with by America. They want the U.S. to talk with Iran about Iraq, enrichment and the Gulf waters. Iran wants to become the main axis in the area, that talks with Europe or America concerning any political or security measure in the region. This is the Iranian vision. Will Washington accept this position?
In spite of the number of opinions in Washington, London and Tel Aviv, these capitals do not accept Iran as a regional nuclear power. Today, Americans deal with the Iranian issue in a purely legal manner in order to mobilize the international community against Iran, as they did with Saddam Hussein. In addition, the ruling group in Israel today is from the school of “whoever is not with us is with the terrorists.” If this is the prevailing perspective of Benyamin Netanyahu and his community, consider how the Iranian nuclear issue and politics are to be viewed by Israel. He adopted the choice to strike Iranian nuclear reactors, at least from the air, if there were not going to be enough ground forces to confront Iran. All that we see today in the Gulf region are indications of war from all sides. It seems as though the gears of war have already begun turning.