web analytics
March 31, 2015 / 11 Nisan, 5775
At a Glance
InDepth
Sponsored Post


Eight Years Of Unheeded ‘Daniel’ Warnings About Iran: What Happens Next? (Part VIII)


Beres-Louis-Rene

            The views expressed in this series on Project Daniel are solely those of Professor Louis René Beres.

            Looking back, The Group had concerned itself with many complex and interpenetrating points, including the need for an expanded policy of preemption; an ongoing re-evaluation of “nuclear ambiguity;” recognizable preparations for appropriate counter-value reprisals in the case of certain WMD aggressions; adaptations to a “paradigm shift” away from classical patterns of warfare; expanded cooperation with the United States in the War Against Terror and in future inter-state conflicts in the Middle East; deployment of suitable active defense systems; avoidance of nuclear war-fighting wherever possible; and various ways to improve Israel’s nuclear deterrence.
            We had also explored vital differences between rational and non-rational adversaries; changing definitions of existential harms; legal elements of anticipatory self-defense; possibilities for peaceful dispute settlements in the region; budgetary constraints and opportunities; maintaining Israel’s qualitative edge; preparations for “regime targeting;” and implications for Israel of the growing anarchy in world affairs.

            Originally, we wrote that Israel’s Strategic Future must be understood as “a work in progress.” In this regard, nothing has changed. The geo-strategic context within which Israel must still fashion its future is continually evolving, and so, accordingly, must Israel’s strategic doctrine. Ultimately it must be from precisely such doctrine that the Jewish state’s particular policies will have to be abstracted, derived, adjusted and implemented.
            Regarding terrorist groups, new alignments are already being fashioned between various Palestinian factions and al-Qaeda. The precise configurations of these alignments are complex and multifaceted; the net effect for Israel is clearly negative.
            Israel’s Strategic Future was founded on the presumption that current threats of war, terrorism and genocide derive from a very clear “clash of civilizations,” and not merely from narrow geo-strategic differences. Today, eight years after completion of our report, both Israel and the United States remain in the cross hairs of a worldwide Jihadthat is basically cultural/theological in nature. This Jihad will not concede an inch to Obama-era norms of “multilateralism,” “coexistence” or “peaceful settlement.” 
            Israel’s strategic future is still fraught with existential peril. It is essential, therefore, that Israel approach this uncertain and problematic future with utter realism and candor. Any nuclear war against the Jewish state would likely be undertaken as a distinct form of genocide, and there can be no greater obligation for Israel than to ensure protection from such new and unforgivable crimes against humanity.

             It is with the very sober understanding that Holocaust can take new forms at the beginning of the 21st century that Project Daniel first completed its critical work eight years ago. Our task is still far from complete. Today, Israel’s long-term physical continuance as a viable state is more doubtful than ever before in its short history.

            Eight years after the presentation of Project Daniel’s final report to Israel’s Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, U.S. President Obama continues to express his preference for a “world free of nuclear weapons.” The core problem with this preference is that nuclear weapons are neither good nor evil in themselves. Although it is certainly true that any further nuclear proliferation must be controlled, it is also probable that the Cold War nuclear standoff between two hostile superpowers prevented a third world war. This often counter-intuitive understanding is very important to Israel.
            Today, should it be pressured to accept its denuclearization at a time when Iranian compliance with Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and IAEA expectations still remains very doubtful, Israel might as well consent to incremental dismemberment or national suicide. Deprived of its existing nuclear deterrent, however “ambiguous” and undisclosed, Prime Minister Netanyahu would then place a country smaller than Lake Michigan at the mercy of several sworn and increasingly capable existential enemies. Even if these enemy states, Arab as well as Iran, were to remain non-nuclear themselves, they would still be in a greatly improved position to fully defeat Israel.  Clausewitz had understood, long before the Atomic Age, that there can come a time in any military correlation of forces when “Mass counts.”        
            In the Middle East, only Israel’s enemies have mass. Over the years, therefore, a number of Arab states and Iran, themselves still non-nuclear, have called for a “nuclear weapons free zone” in the area. Even if these states were somehow to comply with the formal legal expectations of such a proposal, a remarkably optimistic presumption, their combined conventional, chemical and biological capabilities could still overwhelm Israel. In principle, perhaps, such an expanded existential vulnerability might be countered by instituting parallel forms of non-nuclear disarmament among the Arab states and Iran, but, in reality, such coinciding steps would never be taken.
            President Obama fails to realize that nuclear weapons are not the problem per se. This failure is especially apparent in the Middle East, where the main issue remains a far-reaching and still-unreconstructed Arab/Iranian commitment to excise Israel from the regional map. The true problem here is one of an extinctive cartography. No matter what is done about regional nuclear weapons, this enduring commitment to eliminate Israel will ensure regular aggressions, and protracted war.
            With its nuclear weapons, Israel can still deter enemy unconventional attacks, and most large conventional assaults. While in possession of such weapons, Israel can also launch non-nuclear preemptive strikes against any enemy state’s hard military targets that threaten Israel’s annihilation. Without nuclear weapons, any such expressions of “anticipatory self-defense” would likely represent the onset of a much wider war. This is because there would no longer be any compelling threat of an Israeli counter-retaliation.
            It follows that Israel’s nuclear weapons actually represent an important instrument of peace, and an essential impediment to the onset of regional nuclear war.
             In the matter of nuclear weapons, not all nations are created equal. For Israel, these weapons are the ultimate barrier to violent extinction. They are, for Israel, a blessing, not a curse.
            Under international law, war and genocide need not be mutually exclusive. Living in a world without nuclear weapons, the openly preferred world of U.S. President Obama, Israel’s principal enemies could drive the Jewish state into the eternal darkness, into fire, into ice. 
            President Obama will not save Israel.

            Israel must save itself.

About the Author: Louis René Beres (Ph.D., Princeton, 1971) is professor of political science and international law at Purdue University and the author of many books and articles dealing with international relations and strategic studies.


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

No Responses to “Eight Years Of Unheeded ‘Daniel’ Warnings About Iran: What Happens Next? (Part VIII)”

Comments are closed.

Current Top Story
One-third of polled Republicans see President Obama as the biggest imminent threat to the USA.
One-Third of GOP Voters See Obama Worse for US than Assad and Putin
Latest Indepth Stories
Photo from President Barack Obama's past visit to Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

{Originally posted to author’s website, FirstOne Through} TRUST Trust is the bedrock of a functional relationship. It enables one party to rely on the other. A trust that includes both intention and capability permits a sharing of responsibility and workload. The relationship between US President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu started off badly and further […]

jabotinsky with sword

Jabotinsky said “Go To Hell” was a good retort to opponents of the Jewish people; fitting for Obama.

Obama Racine

Obama pulled off one of US history’s greatest cons,twice fooling a gullible electorate and most Jews

Auschwitz Entrance

While in Auschwitz I felt a tangible intensity. I could sense that I was in a place of sheer evil.

Obama needs to wake up. The real enemy is not Netanyahu but Iran, Hizbullah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad,IS

My beliefs & actions have led to numerous death threats against me; my excommunication by my church

In November 2014, Islamic Relief Worldwide was classified as a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates.

Too rarely appreciated for its symbolic weight; it can represent freedom and independence.

Erica Pelman is a spiritually-driven woman. She is founder and director of “In Shifra’s Arms” (ISA), an organization that offers aid to pregnant Jewish women of all religious backgrounds practically, financially and emotionally. Its arms are open to any pregnant woman in need whether single, divorced, separated, or from a financially-strapped family. “Presently, we are […]

Many so-called “humanitarian NGOs” frequently abuse Israel by applying false moral equivalencies

Israeli history now has its version of “Dewey Defeats Truman” with headlines from 2 anti-Bibi papers

In God’s plan why was it necessary that Moses be raised by Pharaoh, away from his own family&people?

In their zechus may we all come to appreciate that life is a fleeting gift and resolve to spend every precious moment of it as if it were the last.

In any event, Mr. Netanyahu after the election sought to soften his statement on Palestinian statehood and apologized for what he conceded were remarks that “offended some Israeli citizens and offended members of the Israeli Arab community.”

More Articles from Louis Rene Beres

A “Palestine” could become another Lebanon, with many different factions battling for control.

Louis Rene Beres

President Obama’s core argument on a Middle East peace process is still founded on incorrect assumptions.

Once upon a time in America, every adult could recite at least some Spenglerian theory of decline.

President Obama’s core argument is still founded on incorrect assumptions.

Specific strategic lessons from the Bar Kokhba rebellion.

Still facing an effectively unhindered nuclear threat from Iran, Israel will soon need to choose between two strategic options.

For states, as for individuals, fear and reality go together naturally.

So much of the struggle between Israel and the Arabs continues to concern space.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/columns/louis-bene-beres/eight-years-of-unheeded-daniel-warnings-about-iran-what-happens-next-part-viii/2011/04/06/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: