With Iran on an international charm offensive, for now Israel appears edging back from bellicose threats to strike its nuclear facilities, writes Khaled Amayreh in occupied Jerusalem Having succeeded in alerting the international community, especially Western powers, to the "immediate Iranian nuclear danger", Israel has been toning down its threats to carry out imminent air strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. Israel, which has a huge arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, including an estimated 200-250 nuclear weapons, claims Iran is on the verge of producing a nuclear device. Israeli pugnacity reached its height last week when Israeli President Shimon Peres said during a televised interview that the chances of an Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear targets were becoming more probable than ever, especially after the release of an IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) report on Iran. Other Israeli leaders, including Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Ehud Barak, made manifestly bellicose statements, suggesting that Israel might attack Iranian nuclear facilities sooner rather that later. Earlier, Israel carried out joint air force exercises with the Italian Air Force over Italy. "The experience of cooperating with the Italian Air Force was a positive one in every way," said Lieutenant Colonel Yiftah, commander of the force. "We had a good understanding on the operational situation while flying together, that quickly developed into a trusting friendly relationship. "Beyond that, we had the great opportunity to fly in extremely vast areas, even larger than Israel in its entirety, practising very complex outlines with many planes that have abilities that are unknown to us." Israeli also launched a long-range Jericho missile, in what observers considered part of Israel's saber rattling against Iran. Netanyahu said he hoped the international community would impose crippling sanctions on Iran in order to paralyse Iran's ability to continue its alleged nuclear weapons programme. Israeli leaders reiterated earlier statements emphasising that the Iranian nuclear programme was an international issue, not only an Israeli issue, and that Iran was posing a danger to world security and stability. Last week, an Israeli website with close links to the Israeli intelligence community claimed that Iran possessed a number of nuclear warheads that could annihilate Israel. The Debka website claimed the weapons had been purchased secretly from countries of the former Soviet Union in the mid-1990s. Earlier warnings about an imminent Israeli attack against Iran, along with the release of the IAEA report, seemingly succeeded in galvanising Western capitals, including Washington, London, Paris and Berlin, which all demanded tougher sanctions, and possibly more proactive action, against the Islamic republic. Western reactions prompted Israeli leaders to claim in a self-assuring tone that, "we have succeeded in making the Iranian problem an international crisis." These and other statements published in the Israeli media suggested that the initial Israeli warmongering and threats to attack the Iranian nuclear plants were more or less a calculated ploy to blackmail the international community -- especially Western powers -- into applying stiffer punitive measures against Tehran. The Obama administration said it was not taking any option off the table. Obama, some pundits suggested, was under pressure to appear more pro-Israeli at home, if only to counterbalance statements coming from the Republican camp criticising the Obama administration's indecisive approach to the Iranian crisis. Even stronger statements came from London, America's main European ally. However, a chorus of other important nations have made clear their opposition to an Israeli or US-Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities. These nations, inter alia, include Germany, France, Russia, China, India and Turkey. Such opposition is expected to restrain, at least for the time being, any dramatic escalation from Washington, in particular as the US under the Obama administration seems keener on building solid international alliances before embarking on what would be a costly military adventure abroad. Meanwhile, Iran, which earlier threatened a devastating response to any Israeli attack, is also toning down its public rhetoric, with Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi voicing his country's desire to build amicable relations with Europe. "Strengthening the ties between Europe and Iran will be helpful to Europe, since if Turkey joined the European Union, Iran will be a close neighbour to Europe." Moreover, former Iranian president Mohamed Khatami dismissed Israeli threats as "psychological warfare or a bluff", though acknowledging such psychological warfare could persuade the West to attack Iran. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying over the weekend that Iran was not seeking a confrontation with anyone. He repeated earlier statements that nuclear weapons constituted the antithesis of Iran's ideological discourse. "The Iranians are a nation of culture and logic and are not warmongers," the Iranian leader said during an event marking the unveiling of ancient artefacts returned by Britain to Iran. In addition to the "not unsuccessful charm campaign by Iran", Israel is also worried that tough sanctions targeting Iran's gasoline supplies may not come to fruition anytime soon. European and American threats to that effect, while worrisome to the Iranians, are unlikely to produce swift and unbearable results in Tehran as China, Russia and a number of Gulf states continue regular trade with Iran. More to the point, there are concerns among the more human rights sensitive countries of Europe that all-out sanctions against Iran might hurt the people while leaving the regime intact. In light of the above, any assess in Israel that the Netanyahu government, which keeps drifting to the right, even to the far right, will wait until after the US presidential elections in the hope that a new and hawkish Republican administration would resolve the Iranian crisis more decisively, even through military means. Opponents of the delay argue that putting off a decision until 2013 might be too late, as Iran could by then assemble nuclear weapons.
