To his consternation, Netanyahu is finding no allies among former senior security officials for his plans to attack Iran over its nuclear programme, writes Saleh Al-Naami Until recently, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and his cabinet sang the praises of Meir Dagan, who left his post as chief of Mossad five months ago. More than one minister described Dagan as "the greatest Mossad chief" in the history of Israel because of the large volume of successes during his tenure. Today, Dagan has become the arch enemy of Netanyahu and his cabinet because of his public warnings against Israel initiating a military strike on Iran's nuclear instalments, arguing that such action would be a "disastrous" step for Israel and its future. Israeli public opinion received Dagan's unprecedented warning with great interest, while his statements and reactions to them dominated public debate in Israel. The Israeli street holds Dagan in high esteem since he holds a "long record of accomplishments", and heated debate revealed that all the leaders of Israeli security agencies who retired recently agree with Dagan. They too believe that any strike against Iran's nuclear programme would constitute a strategic mistake for which Israel would pay a high price beyond its endurance. Contrary to general belief until now, according to Dagan's warnings and media leaks, political leaders such as Netanyahu and Minister of Defence Ehud Barak have relentlessly tried to convince senior security leaders to support a pre-emptive strike against Iran's nuclear project. Army Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi, Chief of Internal Intelligence (Shin Bet) Yuval Diskin, and Amos Yadlin, director of military intelligence (Aman), who all retired recently, sided with Dagan to block attempts by Netanyahu and Barak to attack Iran. Some say that Israeli President Shimon Peres described Ashkenazi as "the greatest army chief of staff in the history of Israel" essentially because of his firm position opposing a strike against Iran, which resulted in Netanyahu and Barak penalising Ashkenazi by not renewing his tenure for one more year as per tradition. The question now is why Dagan chose this timing to warn Israeli public opinion about the dangers of political leaders pursuing such a strike. Dagan has expressed great concern about the ability of incumbent leaders of security agencies �ê" who have not been in their posts for longer than a few months �ê" to resist pressure by Netanyahu and Barak to approve an attack on Iran. He believes that incumbent security leaders have not built up enough self-confidence to enable them to counter political pressure on them on this matter. Hence, Dagan wants public opinion to weigh in on the issue, to pressure the politicians to change their position. Dagan and his colleagues are worried that Netanyahu still believes that the Iranian nuclear programme poses a direct existential threat to Israel and its future, and that eliminating this threat is his primary mission in his second term in office. Sources close to the prime minister say that Netanyahu wants to go down in history on the same footing with Winston Churchill, the British prime minister who played a central role in extinguishing Nazi Germany. Netanyahu believes that Iran under the leadership of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is playing the same role as Germany under Hitler. He does not hide his strong desire to be remembered for his success in eliminating the Iranian threat. Former senior security officials base their rejection of attacking Iran on the basis that they believe Israel can only carry out a very limited strike, in part because Iran's nuclear facilities are spread across a large area. Tehran spread its facilities on purpose so that every phase of the nuclear programme is completed at a separate facility. A strike against these facilities would require a strong attack, which is beyond Israel's capabilities. The Iranians have also built their nuclear facilities below ground, which would require great military, technical and logistic capabilities to destroy, something Dagan says Israel does not possess. Israelis believe that Iranians quickly learned the lessons of the Iraqi nuclear programme which Israel destroyed in 1981. All phases of that programme were located at one nuclear reactor. Israeli security leaders believe that in the unlikely event that Israel is successful in striking Iran, there is a grave possibility that Iran would respond with an intense revenge strike against Israel. These leaders propose that Iran could launch tens of thousands of missiles against Israel for several months, which would paralyse Israel. It is almost certain that Hizbullah would also join Iran's war effort, they add, which means that a strike against Iran would auger a long regional war in which Israel would have limited options. The only option for Israel to end the war would be to use unconventional weapons, which would not be supported by the international community, making this a nightmare scenario for security leaders. In addition, all signs indicate that Israel's domestic scene is unprepared for war and many Israelis are reminding people of the incumbent government's inability to contain the fire which broke out on Al-Carmel Hills in Haifa one year ago. The losses from the fire would be "a joke" compared to losses the home front would suffer in a long regional war, they assert. No doubt, the most serious repercussion of a military strike by Israel against Iran, according to Zionist military leaders, would be an end of international pressure against Tehran to halt its nuclear programme, as well as the collapse of economic sanctions against the Islamic Republic after the US succeeded in rallying much international support for them. Such a strike would also forever liberate Iran from its international commitments not to produce nuclear weapons, and would enable Tehran to quickly and publicly transform its civilian nuclear programme into a military one without worrying about consequences. A strike would also allow Iran to carry out overt nuclear tests, which would launch a nuclear race in the region that would not only include Iran. Senior Israel security officials believe that Iran's success in developing a nuclear arsenal would add incentives for some Arab countries to acquire comparable weapons, which Israel believes would be more threatening for its security and future than Iran. This is especially true of Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Syria since they are closer to the Zionist entity and are more likely to take part in a war against Israel in the future than Iran would. Israeli security leaders have stated that assertions that Iran possesses nuclear weapons for use against Israel is exaggerated, arguing that Iranians are interested in developing a nuclear programme to promote Tehran's standing in the Arabian Gulf region, which is a more reasonable logic reason than other theories. It is also obvious that a strike against Iran would take place without the approval of the US which has several times rejected any unilateral military action by Israel, based on the belief that Iran has many ways of harming the US, especially in Afghanistan and Iraq. Despite Dagan breaking his silence and warning against the dangers of attacking Iran, some in Israel believe that Netanyahu will be able to secure the support of the newly appointed military leaders to launch strikes against Iran before September �ê" just as the Palestinians head to the UN for international recognition of their state. They argue that Netanyahu believes that not only will he be able to deal a severe blow to the Iranian nuclear programme, but the attack would complicate matters and undermine the Palestinian move at the UN before it starts. But in light of Dagan's public warnings, it will be very difficult for Netanyahu to take action against Iran. Theoretically, politicians in Israel have the right to take any decision to attack Iran irrespective of what the military says, but politicians also know that if there is the least likelihood that such a strike could fail then they alone would be held responsible for the failure. Hence, it would be very difficult for Netanyahu to attack Iran contrary to the warnings of security officials who held senior posts until very recently on the dangers of such a step. Meanwhile, one possible outcome of Dagan's warnings is a retreat in Israel's deterrence against Iran, whereby Tehran can forge ahead in the belief that a strike by Tel Aviv against its nuclear programme is now unlikely.
