Impending War With Iran – By Mistake?
Published in der Tagesspiegel
(Germany) on 4 March 2012
by Christoph von Marschall (link to original)
(Germany) on 4 March 2012
by Christoph von Marschall (link to original)
Translated from
by Catherine McGuinness.
Edited by Katya Abazajian.
From a rational point of view, there should be no war in Iran – because nobody wants it. But will all those involved understand their opponents’ calculations? It wouldn’t be the first time a war was started over a misunderstanding.
The window of opportunity is growing narrower. The controversy over Iran’s nuclear program is influencing decisions, including whether or not the world will see another war. It was evident in the uncertain manner of President Obama’s address on Sunday to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the pro-Israel lobby, as his tone alternated between harsh and temperate. It was also evident in Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to the White House on Monday. Iran’s parliamentary vote also played a role.
But do we really know how the debacle of President Ahmadinejad’s stockpile will influence the road to war? The same president who denies the Holocaust and regularly advocates the obliteration of Israel?
From a rational point of view, there would be no war in Iran. Nobody wants it. The Mullahs can hope that an advance of their manpower would allow them to hold their ground temporarily. However, they would lose their air force and marines, because their military is inferior. They could hit back with an act of terrorism. This would, in fact, threaten their power for a short while since war would heighten the people’s poverty and a pre-revolutionary mood already prevails.
For Barack Obama, war means greater risks to his re-election campaign. A president only seems ‘strong’ in the first few days of a conflict. When a quick victory is not reached and U.S. soldiers die under fire, the picture can change. He already absolutely does not want war forced upon him by Netanyahu. Admittedly, Obama cannot stand by and watch Iran build bombs. He wants to dissuade the regime through a mixture of sanctions and dialogues.
Israel is the only party involved whose very existence could be at stake. In Europe, this is still just barely understood. When, if probable, the extermination looms, they will put a different spin on it. Israel faces the question of whether to handle it quickly and alone or to put their confidence in the U.S.’s military ability to stop Iran from manufacturing bombs, unless nothing else remains. Israel doesn’t have the military expertise of the U.S. Their window of opportunity to set Iran’s nuclear program back by means of an air attack is swiftly closing because Iran is relocating its equipment underground. The window of opportunity for the U.S. is open longer since it has more airplanes and stronger bombs. Netanyahu will tell Obama, “Israel will only call off its military strike when the U.S. promises to demolish Iran’s nuclear program, in case Tehran doesn’t yield during negotiations.”*
The biggest risk: Do all parties involved understand their opponents’ calculations? Israel and the U.S. know worryingly little about the attitude in Iran. Also limited is the Mullah’s understanding of how decisions are made in the West. The Iraq War will not be the last to be waged over such misperceptions. Saddam behaved as though he had something to hide. He deemed the U.S. intelligence service perfect and couldn’t imagine that they wouldn’t know that he had no weapons of mass destruction and instead acted as though nothing would collapse from within.
*Editor’s note: The original quotation, accurately translated, could not be verified.
The window of opportunity is growing narrower. The controversy over Iran’s nuclear program is influencing decisions, including whether or not the world will see another war. It was evident in the uncertain manner of President Obama’s address on Sunday to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the pro-Israel lobby, as his tone alternated between harsh and temperate. It was also evident in Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to the White House on Monday. Iran’s parliamentary vote also played a role.
But do we really know how the debacle of President Ahmadinejad’s stockpile will influence the road to war? The same president who denies the Holocaust and regularly advocates the obliteration of Israel?
From a rational point of view, there would be no war in Iran. Nobody wants it. The Mullahs can hope that an advance of their manpower would allow them to hold their ground temporarily. However, they would lose their air force and marines, because their military is inferior. They could hit back with an act of terrorism. This would, in fact, threaten their power for a short while since war would heighten the people’s poverty and a pre-revolutionary mood already prevails.
For Barack Obama, war means greater risks to his re-election campaign. A president only seems ‘strong’ in the first few days of a conflict. When a quick victory is not reached and U.S. soldiers die under fire, the picture can change. He already absolutely does not want war forced upon him by Netanyahu. Admittedly, Obama cannot stand by and watch Iran build bombs. He wants to dissuade the regime through a mixture of sanctions and dialogues.
Israel is the only party involved whose very existence could be at stake. In Europe, this is still just barely understood. When, if probable, the extermination looms, they will put a different spin on it. Israel faces the question of whether to handle it quickly and alone or to put their confidence in the U.S.’s military ability to stop Iran from manufacturing bombs, unless nothing else remains. Israel doesn’t have the military expertise of the U.S. Their window of opportunity to set Iran’s nuclear program back by means of an air attack is swiftly closing because Iran is relocating its equipment underground. The window of opportunity for the U.S. is open longer since it has more airplanes and stronger bombs. Netanyahu will tell Obama, “Israel will only call off its military strike when the U.S. promises to demolish Iran’s nuclear program, in case Tehran doesn’t yield during negotiations.”*
The biggest risk: Do all parties involved understand their opponents’ calculations? Israel and the U.S. know worryingly little about the attitude in Iran. Also limited is the Mullah’s understanding of how decisions are made in the West. The Iraq War will not be the last to be waged over such misperceptions. Saddam behaved as though he had something to hide. He deemed the U.S. intelligence service perfect and couldn’t imagine that they wouldn’t know that he had no weapons of mass destruction and instead acted as though nothing would collapse from within.
*Editor’s note: The original quotation, accurately translated, could not be verified.
Next article![]( "‘Saudi America’ Heads for Energy Independence")
