There has been a lot of speculation in recent weeks that Israel was stepping up its preparations to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities. But Jim Hoagland, The Washington Posts’s foreign affairs commentator, suggests that the Americans have persuaded the Israelis to back away from the military option to give coercive diplomacy another chance:
“The most significant indication of that change comes from strong U.S. public and private pressure on Israel to forgo military strikes while Washington seeks new U.N. economic and travel sanctions against Tehran.
Neither government will confirm that such pressure was exerted. Bush hates to say no to Israel, and he and Olmert do not want Iran to think that it now has a free hand on enrichment. But diplomatic and U.S. sources describe the pushback by Washington as intense and say it included indications that the United States would not clear Israeli bombers through Iraqi airspace or provide other logistical support in the event of attack now.“
Sallai Meridor, the Israeli Ambassador to Washington, tells Hoagland that he wants sanctions aimed at Iran’s access to petrol—despite being a major oil producer Iran imports its petrol as it has no significant refining capacity. Meridor warns that this has to be done soon as otherwise Iran will have the capacity to build a nuclear bomb by the end of 2009.
The Israeli view on how close Iran is to crossing the nuclear threshold does suggest that the approach of the new US president to the problem is going to be crucial. If the Israelis conclude that he is not prepared to take the steps necessary to stop Iran going nuclear, they will act themselves. As Hoagland ends, “Military action is truly a last resort for Israel,” [Meridor] said. “But time can quickly run out on all the other resorts.”
Comments