Opinions | Columnists
Israel's worst nightmare
Tel Aviv and its allies in Washington are frustrated with the talks with Iran.
- By Marwan Kabalan, Special to Gulf News
- Published: 23:41 July 25, 2008
Last week, the Bush administration took many off guard when it sent Undersecretary of State William Burns to join envoys from France, Britain, Russia, China and Germany in talks with Iranian officials in a renewed effort to convince Tehran to abandon its nuclear programme. European diplomats welcomed the shift in US policy. "The presence of an American is good news," French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner stated. "France has always said that not only sanctions need to be imposed, dialogue is necessary."
Others, however, were less pleased by the US reversal. The participation of a senior American official in direct talks with Iran sent shockwaves throughout Israel. The word "appeasement" was widely used to describe the new US policy towards Iran.
In the US, the reaction of pro-Israeli circles was similarly hysterical. In the Wall Street Journal, Michael Rubin, a prominent intellectual who champions Israeli causes in the US, harshly criticised the diplomatic gesture by the Bush administration. "The State Department places its about-face in the context of multilateralism. This is nonsense", he wrote. "Ms Rice's State Department has bolstered Ahmadinejad and his fellow travellers. As Ahmadinejad begins his re-election campaign, he can say he has successfully brought Washington to its knees through blunt defiance, murder of US troops in Iraq, and Holocaust denial. Should he win re-election in 2009, he will have Mr Bush's whiplash diplomacy to thank for his greatest - and, given the state of his economy, perhaps only - victory," Rubin concluded.
The sort of language used by Rubin and colleagues shows how Israel and its allies in Washington are frustrated by the Geneva talks.
Lobbying hard
For the past few years, Israeli officials have been inflating the danger of Iran's nuclear programme and have hence been lobbying hard to persuade the Bush administration to attack Iran's nuclear facilities. Israel relied almost completely on the support of allies and friends within the Bush administration. Hardliners such as Vice-President Dick Cheney, former secretary of defence Donald Rumsfeld and ex-ambassador to the UN John Bolton were more enthusiastic about attacking Iran than Israel itself. With such a strong front of hawks, it was thought, it would not be difficult to repeat the Iraqi scenario.
Over the past two years, however, most of Israel's friends in the US administration fell. Israel was dealt a severe blow by the resignation of Rumsfeld and the departure of Bolton. To add insult to injury, Robert Gates, who replaced Rumsfeld as secretary of defence, expressed strong opposition to any sort of military action against Iran. Gates, former director of the CIA, was a member of the Iraq Study Group (ISG). After eight months of thorough analysis, the ISG put before the administration a number of recommendations in November 2006.
It urged Bush to begin a new diplomatic offensive to build an international consensus over Iran's nuclear programme. It called also for engagement with Tehran, using incentives and disincentives. Indeed, all of these recommendations were opposed by Israel, but more importantly by the vice president. But, Cheney's position was further weakened by the National Intelligence Estimate which exonerated Iran from seeking nuclear weapons. Cheney's influence completely diminished when Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice joined Gates in opposing military action.
Israel believes if this administration does not strike at Iran, the next will not have the guts to do so. And as the Bush administration approaches its end, Israel gets more jumpy about the possibility that Iran may have gotten away with its nuclear programme. Should this happen, Israel's worst nightmare would become true.
Dr Marwan Kabalan is lecturer in Media and International Relations, Faculty of Political Science and Media, Damascus University, Damascus, Syria.
Share this article
More from Columnists
More from Opinions
Popular in Opinions
-
Opinions
Speak Your Mind: World hunger
Who is responsible for world hunger? Are there any solution?
Opinion Editor's choice
-
Jobs vital to global recovery
Higher unemployment reduces purchasing power and revenues
-
Afghan people hold key to civil society
Besides stamping out corruption, the Karzai government must evolve new frameworks
-
Europe opts for the quiet life
The new leader of the European Council got his job because he's a technocratic choice
