Iran and Israel: A Reckless Power Play (original) (raw)
Related papers
Tel Aviv: Institute for National Security Studies, 2014
For more than a decade, Israel and the United States have been engaged in an intensive strategic dialogue over the nature and scope of Iran's nuclear activity, the implications of the nuclear program, and the ways to handle the issue. Senior spokespeople of both countries have often stressed that although there is not total agreement on all aspects of the issue under discussion, the dialogue takes place in a very open atmosphere based on the understanding that the two nations espouse a common objective: keeping Iran from becoming a military nuclear power. In this context, both are willing WR VKDUH LQIRUPDWLRQ LQFOXGLQJ KLJKO\ FODVVL¿HG PDWHULDO At present, the United States and Israel are of the opinion that Iran intends to realize its strategic goal -attaining military nuclear capabilities -at some SRLQW LQ WKH IXWXUH DQG WKDW ,UDQ SRVVHVVHV WKH VFLHQWL¿F DQG WHFKQRORJLFDO abilities and resources to do so. Furthermore, the United States and Israel agree that a nuclear Iran would pose a real threat to their respective critical interests and those of other nations in the region. Foremost in this regard is the danger of nuclear weapons proliferation in the Middle East, should Iran have the bomb. The common assumption is that since various Middle East countries view Iran as a dangerous enemy and feel that a nuclear Iran endangers their respective critical interests, they consequently would feel compelled to balance a nuclear Iran with their own nuclear capabilities. In this context, the nations most frequently mentioned are Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Turkey. There is broad agreement that those three countries have the Prof. Zaki Shalom is a senior research fellow at INSS and a senior researcher at the Ben-Gurion Research Institute for the Study of Israel and Zionism at Ben-Gurion University.
Iran's Nuclear Program and the Israeli Objection
2013
Iran’s nuclear program is a complicated issue that involves many variables. In the process of deconstructing the issue is necessary to look over the steps that lead to today’s diplomatic confrontation. Starting from the period of the monarchy, when Iran was looked at as a friendly state to the west leading up to the latest efforts of the Islamic Republic to possess nuclear power and, according to western point of view, the potential for nuclear weapons production.
EVOLUTION OF ISRAEL'S NUCLEAR PROGRAMME: IMPLICATIONS IN POST- IRAN NUCLEAR DEAL ERA
Regional Studies Summer, 2016
Israel has always perceived itself to be in a security dilemma which emanates from its historical threat perceptions. Consequently Israeli nuclear programme has generally found a support in Western capitals and media. After the Iran nuclear deal, Israel’s regional dominance faces new challenges. Israel has mostly enjoyed unprecedented covert support from its European allies and the US over its nuclear programme. Evaluation of Israeli nuclear policy and doctrine reveals a critical role of numerous western states in making Israel an undeclared and an unparalleled nuclear power in the Middle East. Israel heavily relies on its nuclear weapons capability to ensure its security and regional hegemony but the equation is likely to change after the Iran nuclear deal. Consequently Israeli dominance can be challenged by Iran due to its rising stature while remaining a nuclear weapon threshold state in post-nuclear deal era. However Iran enjoyed extremely cordial relationship with Israel before the 1979 Iranian revolution and if the deal remains intact, Iran and Israel may look for areas of cooperation. Nevertheless if the JCPOA fails, Israel may strike Iranian nuclear installations with the US assistance.
Israel, the United States, and the Military Option against Iran
Strategic Assessment - INSS , 2014
For more than a decade, Israel and the United States have been engaged in an intensive strategic dialogue over the nature and scope of Iran’s nuclear activity, the implications of the nuclear program, and the ways to handle the issue. Senior spokespeople of both countries have often stressed that although there is not total agreement on all aspects of the issue under discussion, the dialogue takes place in a very open atmosphere based on the understanding that the two nations espouse a common objective: keeping Iran from becoming a military nuclear power. In this context, both are willing to share information, including highly classfied material.
Israel’s Nuclear Amimut Policy and its Consequences
Israel Affairs, 2015
In neither admitting nor denying its nuclear capabilities, Israel has adopted a policy of amimut, or ‘ambiguity’ in regard to its nuclear policy. By not acknowledging its nuclear capabilities, Israel has actually strayed from the traditional tenets of rational deterrence theory, which states that deterrence can be achieved when a state credibly communicates its capabilities and intent. Incredibly, despite the fact that Israel has not followed these tenets, it has still managed to achieve effective deterrence against non-conventional attacks, and furthermore avoid the automatic dire rebound results that typically accompany the build-up of arms in the international community. As successful as this approach has been, amimut has also resulted in the negative side effect of undermining Israeli democracy and perceived political control over national security affairs. This article explores the positive and negative impacts of this unique policy, and the consequences of maintaining or abandoning the policy of amimut.
Israel Confronts Iran: Rationales, Responses and Fallouts
2012
his study examines Israel's changing perception of Iran and the underlying reasons for the current Israeli tension, anxiety, verbal acrimony and fears. In deconstructing Israel's fears vis-à-vis Iran, the study looks at Israel's failures to revisit its erstwhile peripheral diplomacy and to make adequate changes. Israel was unable to overcome the nostalgia of the past bonhomie and evolve a cohesive policy on Iran. Moreover, it was afraid of the cost of such a radical shift in its fundamental plank vis-à-vis Iran: the peripheral diplomacy. With the result, Iran soon became a nightmare for Israeli foreign policy and the security establishment. The nuclear controversy is just a recent addition. Given the growing importance of Israel and Iran to India, what are New Delhi's options vis-à-vis the Israel-Iran tensions?