Published 01:23 29.12.11

Latest update 01:23 29.12.11

[/list]

Mossad chief: Nuclear Iran not necessarily existential threat to Israel
Tamir Pardo says Israel using various means to
foil Iran's nuclear program, but if Iran actually obtained nuclear
weapons, it would not mean destruction of Israel.
By
Barak Ravid


Tags:
Iran
Iran nuclear
Benjamin Netanyahu

A nuclear-armed Iran wouldn't necessarily
constitute a threat to Israel's continued existence, Mossad chief Tamir
Pardo reportedly hinted earlier this week.

On Tuesday evening, Pardo addressed an audience of about 100 Israeli
ambassadors. According to three ambassadors present at the briefing, the
intelligence chief said that Israel was using various means to foil
Iran's nuclear program and would continue to do so, but if Iran actually
obtained nuclear weapons, it would not mean the destruction of the
State of Israel.


"What is the significance of the term
existential threat?" the ambassadors quoted Pardo as asking. "Does Iran
pose a threat to Israel? Absolutely. But if one said a nuclear bomb in
Iranian hands was an existential threat, that would mean that we would
have to close up shop and go home. That's not the situation. The term
existential threat is used too freely."


The ambassadors said Pardo did not comment on the possibility of an Israeli military assault on Iran.

"But what was clearly implied by his remarks
is that he doesn't think a nuclear Iran is an existential threat to
Israel," one of the envoys said.


Pardo's remarks follow lively a public debate in recent
months over a possible Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. One
of the figures at the center of this public debate has been Pardo's
predecessor as Mossad chief, Meir Dagan. Dagan has argued that Israel
should only resort to military force "when the knife is at its throat
and begins to cut into the flesh." He has also criticized Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak, accusing them of
pushing for an Israeli attack on Iran, and warned that such an assault
would have disastrous consequences.


For the past several years, Netanyahu has
characterized a nuclear Iran as an existential threat to Israel. The
prime minister has even compared Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
to Adolf Hitler and argued that Iran should be treated as Nazi Germany
should have been dealt with in 1938, just before World War II. In
contrast, Barak said in April 2010 that Iran "was not an existential
threat at the moment," but warned that it could become one in the
future.


In the cabinet, Netanyahu and Barak have
been the leading proponents of a preemptive strike on Iran's nuclear
facilities. So far, however, they have not managed to convince a
majority of either the "octet" forum of eight senior ministers or the
diplomatic-security cabinet to support their position.



In related news, The Daily Beast website
reported yesterday about one aspect of the disagreement between Israel
and the United States on the Iranian nuclear issue. It said that
Washington and Jerusalem are discussing "red lines" for Iran's nuclear
project that, if crossed, would justify a preemptive strike on the
nuclear facilities.


The website's defense reporter, Eli Lake,
wrote that Israel's ambassador to Washington, Michael Oren, lodged an
official protest with the American administration following a speech a
few weeks ago by U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta at the Saban Forum,
in which the American defense chief warned of the consequences of an
attack on Iran. The Daily Beast reported that Panetta's remarks
infuriated the Israel government and that Oren was directed to lodge the
protest.


A short time later, the White House conveyed
a message of reassurance to Israel that the Obama administration has
its own red lines for attacking Iran, so there is no need for Israel to
act unilaterally. The Israeli protest was also followed by a shift in
Panetta's rhetoric: In an interview with the American television network
CBS, Panetta said the United States would not take any option off the
table with regard to preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.


The crux of the disagreement between the two
countries revolves around the question of to what extent Iran has
managed to develop clandestine sites for uranium enrichment. As a
result, Israel and the United States are having a hard time settling on
common "red lines."


Patrick Clawson of the Washington Institute
for Near East Policy told The Daily Beast that "if Iran were found to be
sneaking out or breaking out [toward obtaining nuclear weapons], then
the president's advisers are firmly persuaded he would authorize the use
of military force to stop it." However, he added, "when the occasion
comes, we just don't know how the president will react."
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/mossad-chief-nuclear-iran-not-necessarily-existential-threat-to-israel-1.404227

View comments (22)