Photo Credit:
Louis Rene Beres

Ominously, Iran now hints at its presumed right to attack Israel first, in permissible self-defense.

In essence, therefore, Iran is now threatening to preempt an Israeli preemption.

Advertisement

All things considered, as Benjamin Netanyahu stated once again last year at the United Nations, Israel could soon have little choice but to actually fulfill Iran’s contrived warnings. Such an authentically lawful preemption, assuredly non-nuclear, will have been mandated by the Tehran-induced strategic spiral of “escalation dominance.” Though it is reasonable to assume that Israel’s multiple and inter-penetrating ballistic missile defenses could afford some meaningful levels of protection from incoming Iranian nuclear warheads, this system would inevitably have significant “leakage.”

When dealing with nuclear weapons, even the most limited failure to intercept could yield intolerable harms.

Facing full-blown Arab attacks in June 1967, the Jewish state opted to strike first. From the standpoint of international law, this preemption against enemy military targets was a textbook example of anticipatory self-defense.

(Continued Next Week)

Advertisement

1
2
SHARE
Previous articleThe View From The Beis Medrash
Next articleYULA Receives Endowment
Louis René Beres (Ph.D., Princeton, 1971) is Emeritus Professor of International Law at Purdue. He is the author of many books and articles dealing with nuclear strategy and nuclear war. He was Chair of Project Daniel, which submitted its special report on Israel’s Strategic Future to former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, on January 16, 2003.
Loading Facebook Comments ...