(CNN) -- President Barack Obama's rebuke of Republicans who are "beating the drums of war"
in encouraging the United States to take military action against Iran
should be targeted not just toward those critics but also, and more
important, toward the Israeli government.
An attack on Iran would
not only fail to achieve its stated goal of denuclearizing the country,
it would unleash a devastating confrontation between Iran and Israel
that would harm thousands of Israelis and Iranians, and affect those in
neighboring states.
It would drag the U.S.
into another Middle East quagmire, and it would launch an oil crisis
that would throw the global economy into turmoil. Then, once the dust
settles (or before it does), Iran would only be more motivated to pursue
its nuclear ambition.
Asher Kaufman
In the current
environment of heated rhetoric from all sides, there is too much focus
on when and if Israel would launch a preemptive strike against Iran.
What's missing in the talks are the chance of success in stopping Iran's
nuclear plan through a military option and the regional and global
consequences of a new war.
Given the territorial
distribution of Iran's nuclear facilities and the likelihood that Iran
has readied them for possible attacks, Israel probably does not have the
military capacity to eliminate, or even seriously damage, Iran's
alleged nuclear program.
Some experts have
compared Israel's airstrikes against nuclear facilities in Iraq in 1981
and Syria in 2007 with a possible strike against Iran. But this is a
flawed analogy. In those cases, Israel launched surprise attacks against
one facility, which would not be the case with Iran. Moreover, Iran and
Israel both possess extensive arsenals of missiles. There is little
doubt that a strike would trigger an unprecedented war in the Middle
East. Israel would be far more vulnerable in such a war than Iran, due
to its small size and the fact that the country's epicenter is in one
single region, the greater Tel Aviv area.
Although Iran has come
under immense international pressure to halt its nuclear plan, it has
refused to do so. However, Iran, unlike its reputation in the West and
in Israel in particular, is a rational country with rational leadership,
which seeks to enhance its regional and global power. Iran is not
suicidal. Therefore, comparing Iran with Nazi Germany, as is often done
by Israeli leadership, is historically problematic and extremely
dangerous politically.
Unfortunately, given the
track record of engaging with Iran, perhaps in the long term we may have
to learn to live with a nuclearized Middle East that would operate
based on the Cold War dynamics of mutually assured destruction. A
nuclearized Iran might even launch a nuclear arms race involving other
regional players such as Saudi Arabia and Turkey.
The only alternative to
this pessimistic forecast is to reconsider Middle East inter-state
politics, the Arab-Israeli conflict and U.S. policy in the region.
Constructive
communication should be encouraged between the Iranian leadership and
the U.S., and it should involve other key players. The U.S. should
acknowledge the importance of having strong regional players in the
Middle East, including Iran. If the regional inter-state dynamics can be
changed for the better, Iran may be forced to rethink its strategy,
including its nuclear ambition. A rebalanced Middle East will also need
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to be resolved sooner rather than
later, since that has been a source of continuous friction.
Regrettably, with
Israel, Iran and the U.S. entrenched in their positions, it does not
look like we are heading in a direction that would solve the Iran
problem anytime soon.
Editor's note: Asher Kaufman is associate professor of history and peace studies at the University of Notre Dame's Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies. He is the author of "Reviving Phoenicia: The Search for Identity in Lebanon."
Editor's note: Asher Kaufman is associate professor of history and peace studies at the University of Notre Dame's Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies. He is the author of "Reviving Phoenicia: The Search for Identity in Lebanon."