The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

Breaking the Conception | Israel today

2021-10-25T00:01:17.725Z

Since the Yom Kippur War, the security establishment has believed that Israel should subject its independent policy to the American interest. • The lost concept is currently collapsing against Iran



The headlines this week about the contacts between Israel and the United States regarding the treatment of the Iranian nuclear threat were harsh.

In the body of Yoav Limor's article, it was possible to learn that the Americans are not partners with Israel in the struggle against the Iranian nuclear program.


Although on the one hand the Americans and the Israelis agree on the pace of Iran's progress towards an independent military nuclear capability. But on the other hand, the parties disagree about the steps to be taken in light of its approach to the status of a nuclear threshold state. Israel is of the opinion that the United States must act politically and economically, and at least threaten military action against Iran, if it does not re-implement the restrictions that the 2015 nuclear agreement imposes on its nuclear activities


. They are turning a blind eye to Iran's massive oil and gas exports. No military threat has been considered at all. As for political pressure, the Americans are willing to consider exerting political pressure - of any kind - but in return demand Israeli concessions to the Palestinians. Of punishment or deterrence against Iran. And if anything, the administration sees the struggle, which is nothing more than a lip service, something Israel has to pay for in Jerusalem currency or concessions in parts of Judea and Samaria.


No options for action


Limor writes that Israel has no idea what to do in the face of the administration's backlash: "Israel's effort to reach maximum coordination with the United States is due in part to the fact that Israel is left with very few options." Renew the restrictions imposed on it by the 2015 nuclear deal, even at the cost of lifting US sanctions and releasing the Iranian economy, in order to buy time "which it can use for diplomatic effort and accelerate military preparations to keep Iran from bombing in the future."


Israel's helplessness now, in the face of the abandonment of the fight against nuclear by the United States, indicates a disintegration not only of the government's hopes for coordination.


Since the Yom Kippur War in 1973, Israel's security establishment - as a group that controls the country's strategic policy - has been of the opinion that Israel's greatest strategic asset is the United States. In the eyes of the Israeli security establishment, it is better to reduce the strategic initiatives in each arena, near and far, and to stick to what is convenient for the United States, provided that it does not take a risk in independent action. It does not matter if it is American opposition to Israel's victory over the Fatah Palestinian Authority in a Muqata in Ramallah in the Defensive Wall, the defeat of Hamas in one operation or another, or Hezbollah in 2006. It does not matter if Washington sabotages Israeli cooperation with Azerbaijan or Georgia against Iran, Or thwarting the sale of Israeli weapons systems to India or Poland.The defense establishment will always prefer in such cases that Israel bend to do better with Washington.


Against Iran, this approach was reflected in 2010 when the then head of the Mossad and then chief of staff, Meir Dagan and Gabi Ashkenazi, refused to instruct the prime minister and defense ministers, Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak, to prepare what was needed to attack the nuclear facilities.

Not only did they refuse to make the preparations.

As Leon Panetta, who was the head of the CIA in the Obama administration, testified, Dagan revealed the matter to him.


Weakening of the deterrent


The people of Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid accuse Netanyahu of the current "baruch" against Washington. It is true that Netanyahu believed that with Donald Trump he would succeed in preventing Iran from reaching the nuclear finish line. But the main problem was not Netanyahu or Trump. The problem was confidence in the security system there is no need to create strategic programs to treat Iran's nuclear program, are keeping basically the US will lead the moves against Iran.


Last year quarrel ensued between the security system and Netanyahu over the announcement that following the signing of Abraham, government Trump agreed to sell F The sale, Gantz and his men argued, could hurt Israel's high-quality military advantage over its neighbors.


In light of the debate, Dr. David Wormser, an American Middle East expert who has served in senior positions in the Bush administration, wrote an article examining the cost of American military assistance against the benefits Israel derives from it. Following the publication of the article, a classified discussion on its contents took place in the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee.


Wormser reviewed the history of American military aid to Israel since the end of the war of attrition, explaining that Israel pays for aid twice: First, in exchange for American weapons, it gave up strategic independence. And second, the receipt of American weapons has put Israel in a vicious circle that leads to a constant increase in dependence on military aid.


Instead of relying on maneuvering freedom and strategic planning, he explained, "Israel has increasingly relied on modern American weapons, and American assistance to finance it. And the US, for its part, has increasingly demanded that Israel subordinate its strategic initiatives, including maneuvering and planning, to regional American policy. This process created doubts about Israel's willpower, it weakened its deterrent power and put it in doubt ... all this only increased the threats and required even more weapons.


"Almost (American) policy has required Israeli restraint and consent to accept US attempts to advance peace processes that have demanded concessions from Israel ... Israel's strategic dependence on the US has ensured that the security establishment will always support restraint and concessions."


If the sale of the F-35 caused the security establishment to worry about Israel's qualitative military advantage, the Biden's betrayal of Iran collapses the concept at the root of qualitative military advantage.

In other words, it is better for Israel to accept the American conditions for military aid, because military aid is the guarantee for its security.


The idea that an agreement that opens the door of the nuclear club to Iran will delay its progress towards an atomic arsenal, is unfounded.

It is not clear what the impact of American "political pressure" will be in light of the terrible weakness the administration has demonstrated in Afghanistan and vis-à-vis China.

But Israel's security establishment needs to recover from its American illusion.

The limited partnership with the United States must not restrict Israeli independence and security creativity. 

Source: israelhayom

All news articles on 2021-10-25

Similar news:

You may like

Trends 24h

News/Politics 2022-01-19T00:42:38.928Z

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy