Israel’s fateful choice

It's only fair to share...Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Email this to someone
email

Tuesday's general elections will officially end the briefest and most nonchalant electoral season Israel has ever experienced. Regrettably, the importance of these elections is inversely proportional to their lack of intensity. These are the most fateful elections Israel has ever had. The events of the past week make this point clearly.

On Monday Iran successfully launched a domestically manufactured satellite on a ballistic missile called the Safir-2 space rocket. Since the launch, experts have noted that the Safir-2 can also be used to launch conventional and nonconventional warheads. The Safir-2 has an estimated range of 2,000-3,000 kilometers. And so the successful satellite launch showed that today Iran is capable of launching missiles not only against Israel, but against southern Europe as well.

Many Israeli leaders viewed Monday's launch as a "gotcha" moment. For years they have been saying that Iran's nuclear program is a threat to global security – not merely to Israel's. And Monday's launch demonstrated that they were right all along. Israel isn't the only country on Iran's target list.

Unfortunately for Israel, the international community couldn't care less. Its response to Teheran's latest provocation was to collectively shrug its shoulders.

On Wednesday emissaries of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany convened in Wiesbaden, Germany, to discuss their joint policies toward Iran in the aftermath of the satellite launch. Some Israelis argued that Iran's provocation forced these leaders' hands. Their reputations for toughness were on the line. They would have to do something.

Unfortunately for Israel, the emissaries of Russia, Britain, China, France, Germany and the US are more interested in convincing the mullahs that they are nice than in convincing them that they are tough.

Far from deciding to take concerted action against Iran, the great powers did nothing more than wish the Obama administration good luck as it moves to directly engage the mullahs. As their post-conference press release put it, the six governments' answer to Teheran's show of force was to "agree to consult on the next steps as the US administration undertakes its [Iranian] policy review."

As President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have explained, the US is reviewing its policy toward Iran in the hopes of finding a way to directly engage the Iranian government. While they claim that the aim of these sought after direct negotiations will be to convince the mullahs to give up their nuclear weapons program, since taking office the new administration has sent out strong signals that preventing Iran from going nuclear has taken a backseat to simply holding negotiations with Teheran.

According to a report in Aviation News, last week the US Navy prevented Israel from seizing an Iranian weapons ship in the Red Sea suspected of carrying illicit munitions bound for either Gaza or Lebanon. A week and a half ago, the US Navy boarded the ship in the Gulf of Aden and carried out a cursory inspection. It demurred from seizing the ship, however, because, as Adm. Michael Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, explained on January 27, the US believed it had no international legal right to seize the vessel.

In inspecting the ship the US was operating under UN Security Council Resolution 1747, which bars Iran from exporting arms. The US argued that it lacked authority to seize the ship because 1747 has no enforcement mechanism. Yet the fact of the matter is that if the US were truly interested in intercepting the ship and preventing the arms from arriving at their destination, the language of 1747 is vague enough to support such a seizure.

And that's the point. The US was uninterested in seizing the ship because it was uninterested in provoking a confrontation with Teheran, which it seeks to engage. It was not due to lack of legal authority that the US reportedly prevented the Israel Navy from seizing the ship in the Red Sea, but due to the administration's fervent wish to appease the mullahs.

Today the ship, which was sailing under a Cypriot flag, is docked in the Port of Limassol. Cypriot authorities have reportedly inspected the ship twice, have communicated their findings to the Security Council, and are still waiting for guidance on how to deal with the ship.

ALL OF this brings us back to next Tuesday's elections. With the US effectively giving up on confronting Iran, the entire burden for blocking Iran's quest for nuclear weapons falls on Israel's shoulders.

This means that the most important question that Israeli voters must ask ourselves between now and Tuesday is which leader and which party are most capable of achieving this vital goal?

All we need to do to answer this question is to check what our leaders have done in recent years to bring attention to the Iranian threat and to build coalitions to contend with it.

In late 2006, citing the Iranian nuclear menace, Israel Beiteinu leader Avigdor Lieberman joined the Olmert government where he received the tailor-made title of strategic affairs minister. At the time Lieberman joined the cabinet, the public outcry against the government for its failure to lead Israel to victory in the war with Iran's Lebanese proxy Hizbullah had reached a fever pitch. The smell of new elections was in the air as members of Knesset from all parties came under enormous public pressure to vote no confidence in the government.

By joining the government when he did, Lieberman single-handedly kept the Olmert government in power. Explaining his move, Lieberman claimed that the danger emanating from Iran's nuclear program was so great that Israel could not afford new elections.

But what did he accomplish by saving the government by taking that job? The short answer is nothing. Not only did his presence in the government make no impact on Israel's effectiveness in dealing with Iran, it prolonged the lifespan of a government that had no interest in forming a strategy for contending with Iran by two years.

In light of this fact, perhaps more than any other Israeli politician, Lieberman is to blame for the fact that Israel finds itself today with no allies in its hour of greatest peril. Had he allowed the people to elect more competent leaders in the fall of 2006, we might have been able to take advantage of the waning years of the Bush administration to convince the US to work with us against Iran.

Then there is Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni. If Lieberman was the chief enabler of Israel's incompetent bungling of the Iranian threat, as Israel's chief diplomat, it is Livni – together with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert – who deserves the greatest condemnation for that bungling.

Throughout her tenure as foreign minister and still today as Kadima's candidate for prime minister, Livni claims that she supports using diplomacy to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. But in her three years as Israel's top diplomat, Livni never launched any diplomatic initiative aimed at achieving this goal. In fact, she has never even publicly criticized the European and American attempts to appease the mullahs.

Livni has remained silent for three years even though it has been clear for five years that the West's attempts to cut a deal with Teheran serve no purpose other than to provide the Iranians time to develop their nuclear arsenal. She has played along with the Americans and the Europeans and cheered them on as they passed toothless resolutions against Iran in the Security Council which – as the Iranian weapons ship docked in Cyprus shows – they never had the slightest intention of enforcing.

As for Defense Minister Ehud Barak, as a member of the Olmert government, his main personal failure has been his inability to convince the Pentagon to approve Israel's requests to purchase refueling jets and bunker buster bomb kits,
and to permit Israeli jets to fly over Iraqi airspace. To achieve these aims, Barak could have turned to Israel's friends in the US military and in Congress. But he did no such thing. And now, moving into the Obama administration, Israel finds itself with fewer and fewer allies in Washington's security community.

For the past several years, only one political leader in Israel has had the foresight and wisdom to both understand the dangers of Iran's nuclear program and to understand the basis for an Israeli diplomatic approach to contending with the threat that can serve the country's purposes regardless of whether or not at the end of the day, Israel is compelled to act alone.

In 2006, Likud leader Binyamin Netanyahu took it upon himself to engage the American people in a discussion of the danger Iran poses not only to Israel but to the world as a whole. In late 2006, he began meeting with key US governors and state politicians to convince them to divest their state employees' pension funds from companies that do business with Iran. This initiative and complementary efforts by the Washington-based Center for Security Policy convinced dozens of state legislatures to pass laws divesting their pension funds from companies that do business with Iran.

Netanyahu also strongly backed the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs' initiative to indict Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as an international war criminal for inciting genocide. Both the divestment campaign and the campaign against Ahmadinejad have been Israel's most successful public diplomacy efforts in contending with Iran. More than anything done by the government, these initiatives made Americans aware of the Iranian nuclear threat and so forced the issue onto the agendas of all the presidential candidates.

Instead of supporting Netanyahu's efforts, Livni, Barak and Lieberman have disparaged them or ignored them.

Because he is the only leader who has done anything significant to fight Iran's nuclear program, Netanyahu is the only national leader who has the international credibility to be believed when he says – as he did this week – that Israel will not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. Likud under Netanyahu is the only party that has consistently drawn the connection between Iran, its Palestinian, Lebanese, Iraqi and Afghan terror proxies, its Syrian client state and its nuclear weapons program, and made fighting this axis the guiding principle of its national security strategy.

GIVEN THE US-led international community's decision not to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, it is clear that in the coming months Israel will need to do two things. It will need to put the nations of the world on notice that they cannot expect us to stand by idly as they welcome Iran into the nuclear club. And Israel will need to prepare plans to strike Iran's nuclear installations without America's support.

More than ever before, Israel requires leaders who understand the gravity of the hour and are capable of acting swiftly and wisely to safeguard our country from destruction. Only Netanyahu and Likud have a credible track record on this subject.

For the sake of our country, our nation and our posterity, it is our responsibility to consider this fact when we enter the voting booths on Tuesday.

Originally published in The Jerusalem Post.

It's only fair to share...Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Email this to someone
email

16 Comments

  • Marc Handelsman, USA 02/06/2009 at 19:36

    The MIT-educated Netanyahu has English-speaking rhetorical skills that Israel needs in a Prime Minister. He also is a student of history with a keen intellect. Although his first premiership was abysmal, he and Likud should be given another opportunity to lead Israel. Finally, no other nation on Earth has the most to lose, because worldwide Jewry needs a secure home. And to preserve Zionism, Israeli voters need to choose Likud, because Iran must be stopped.

    Reply
  • Pops in Vienna 02/06/2009 at 19:37

    Great article Caroline,
    I hope your appeal ends up saving the country. A number of websites are indicatng that Bibi has blown it. Reports are that he’ll keep that pin head Barak around as Defense Minister. If it’s true, no wonder why he’s sinking in the polls.
    Never-the-less, I think Bibi is the only candidate you have that has the “stones” to take care of business. I suspect the others have secret evacuation plans and enough cash stashed away to live a comfortable life in the South of France.
    I hope the US military is just as confused about what measures they can take when a squadron of low flying IDF jets streak across Iraq heading toward Iran.
    If we learned anything from the last holocaust it should be that nobody is going to do doodly squat to prevent the Jews from being wiped out.
    I hope G-d will curse the United States, the European Union and all the other enablers who have allowed this horrible thing to happen.
    Stay safe Caroline…and mazel tov,
    Pops (and old Shabiss goy)

    Reply
  • isaac - Rio de Janeiro 02/06/2009 at 22:30

    No more Kadima.
    No more futile talking with terror.
    No more two state solution.
    Likud now.
    Am Israel Chai.

    Reply
  • bcf 02/06/2009 at 23:42

    These are times fo mortal peril for Israel Next time, if Heyl h’Avir is forced to strike to save the Jewish people from another holocaust, and US servicemen place themselves in such away as to endanger the mission and the survival of Israel, then they must be MOWN DOWN! Americans tend to be unbelievably stupid, naive and overbearing. Ordinarly that just makes them the kind of people you don’t want at your ultra-cool house party.
    In the case of protecting your people from a genocide, they have the capacity to become extremely dangerous. They should be put on notice…

    Reply
  • Ron Grandinetti, USA 02/07/2009 at 1:20

    Caroline, I agree with Mark.
    I would hope that if it is Netanyahu he will get here to the U.S., he can stir up the American public for support. I know he is always welcomed on FOX News.
    I pray the Jewish people make the right choice and likewise pray Americans wake up and put pressure on this administration to take swift action.
    Forget diplomacy, it didn’t work before; don’t think it will happen any time in the future. Besides, the longer we prolong any military action we may not have a future.

    Reply
  • Dan 02/07/2009 at 8:30

    The Israeli electorate has all the knowledge they need to fully grasp what my country intends to do.
    My country doesn’t intend, and what’s more, NEVER REALLY intended to do much about Tehran pursuing the atomic bomb.
    Diplomacy has long been futile, but the pretense thereof has long continued.
    Sanctions likewise have long been without any teeth, but the fig leaf provided by their implementation has long been availed of.
    All in the interest in providing time for Tehran either to fall through domestic turmoil, or for Tehran to finally perfect their Manhattan Project.
    The Cold War mentality prevails. Washington thinks that because Brezhnev and his ilk never went nuke, so it can be relied upon as a basis for policy that the mullahs will never actually go nuke.
    The religious motivation of those ruling in Tehran isn’t simply ignored, but positively scorned.
    Which means Israelis have all the knowledge they’ll ever need to guide their decision making in this election.
    Were I in command of the United States Armed Forces, Israel would not be facing this cruel existential dilemma, for the ruling clique in Tehran would be no more, and Iran’s Manhattan project, which is a thing of the mullahs’ devising, that too, would be no more.
    But the Bush family, State, CIA, the entire Democrat party foreign policy establishment, and of course Obama and Biden, they’re determined to allow Tehran to go nuke.
    The ball is in your court.
    You call the ball.
    You call the play.
    My government is pulling a Pontius Pilate, and publicly washing its hands of you.
    The American people don’t support such a policy, but they’re not calling the play. The Washington establishment is, and the views of that establishment has now been shaped and informed by the petrodollars swirling within the Beltway.
    The house of saud has bought love, has bought and paid for the Arab narrative, which now informs American foreign policy.
    You’re on your own.
    Good Luck. And Good Hunting!

    Reply
  • Luigi Frascati, Canada 02/07/2009 at 13:17

    Ms. Glick, as a staff member of the Center For Security Policy undoubtedly you are aware of Benjamin Weinthal’s article entitled “How Europe’s companies are feeding Iran’s bomb”. Mr. Weinthal is the Jerusalem Post’s correspondent from Berlin. However, your readers and especially those who are part of the Israeli electorate may not be acquainted with it. Mr. Weinthal’s article is important in that it underscores the economic ties between the EU and Iran, and as such it highlights how vital and imperative the substance of your post really is.
    Here is a short synopsis of Mr. Weinthal’s essay.
    1) OMV – Austria: in April 2007 the Austrian oil giant OMV signed and is currently implementing a EUR 22 billion (USD 28.5 billion) agreement with Iran to produce liquefied natural gas from Iran’s South Pars Gas Fields.
    2) ENI – Italy: Weinthal is pretty generic in his article, but a search of ENI’s website reveals that in 2005 the Italian national energy conglomerate completed Phase 4 and 5 of the South Pars Gas Fields near Bushehr for the extraction of 20 billion cubic meters of gas per year; and in 2007 ENI was awarded all exploration rights and sixty percent of the extraction rights of the Darquain Oil Field for the production of 160,000 barrels of crude per day.
    3) SIEMENS – Germany: it has just finished selling EUR 4 billion (USD 5.2 billion) worth of technological equipment to Iran, including advanced state-of-the-art communication and surveillance technology. This “intelligence platform” can be used to track financial transactions and airplane and cargo movements anywhere in the world in addition, of course, to monitoring private conversations.
    4) ANGELA MERKEL – Germany: notwithstanding her pious looks, the Administration of the soft-spoken German Chancellor has approved 2,800 commercial export deals with Iran, which have brought Germany a surplus worth of EUR 4.4 billion (USD 5.7 billion) on a total trade at EUR 6.5 billion (USD 8.4 billion) in 2008 alone, not including energy.
    In fact, with regard to Germany in particular, it can be added that practically all of the companies that are trading partners with Iran are also part of the Forced/Slave Labor Compensation Fund, set up by the German government to help pay Holocaust survivors for the labor they were forced to do during World War II. It is more than a little unsettling, therefore, to know that the same German industries that enthusiastically participated in those atrocities are now just as enthusiastically bankrolling another genocidal regime.
    All in all, Europe’s trade with Iran totaled EUR 15 billion (USD 19.5 billion) in 2008 alone, an increase of almost 15 percent over 2007, and Europe’s investments in Iran’s infrastructures top EUR 40 billion (USD 51.8 billion). In practice, Iran is paying for the Russian centrifuges with European money.
    Because of all their financial ties with the Islamic Republic, a more resolute stance towards Iran on the part of Israel will give the Europeans plenty of reasons to be worried.
    Add to this the fact that Israel, at EUR 25.7 billion (USD 33.3 billion) is the second largest trading partner of the European Union in the Mediterranean Basin after Turkey (at EUR 53.2 billion), according to the European Commission Trade website (compare this with EUR 10.2 billion trade with Egypt, negligible with Syria and the PA). Again, a more militant posture towards Iran would shake the Europeans from their political torpor, by once again putting in jeopardy their economic interests.
    The point here is that Israel has plenty of direct and indirect economic leverage on the E.U., a lot more than it is normally been given credit for, and now is the time to take advantage of it. All the more so in the wake of an America whose diplomacy of appeasement not only reinforces the hard line of the Mullahs, but that will also result in the engulfment of US and Nato troops in an ever-lasting war in Afghanistan, sponsored by Iran.
    A vote for Likud is a great leap forward for Israel, in that it will make this leverage a reality.

    Reply
  • mike packer 02/07/2009 at 14:03

    Your support for Netanyahu is also support for Ehud Barak. In the beginning of their administration this might be alright but their differences will come to a head and we will, again, be in a political crisis.
    I would reccommend voting for a National Camp party that will support Netanyahu and curb Left wingers. Then we might be able to erase the “two-state” movement.

    Reply
  • Yotam Barnoy 02/07/2009 at 19:52

    Exactly my thoughts Caroline, about Livni and the very disappointing Lieberman.
    What bugs me is this… Why aren’t you being translated? You NEED a translator to, at the very least, put up a Hebrew version of your blog. You should also be syndicated in the Israeli papers. ESPECIALLY this editorial, which could have been so pivotal.

    Reply
  • Ron Grandinetti, USA 02/07/2009 at 21:43

    Luigi, you are definetly correct. Why isn’t the U.S.and Israel putting pressure on these companies to stop.
    How about cease doing business with them directly or inderectly.
    Cut off the financial faucet and see how quickly they wake up.
    By the way I like John Bolton’s frankness. To Israel,”don’t worry whether or not the U.S. is against the military option, who’s going to stop you”.
    If so, there will be a big cheer coming from the U.S.

    Reply
  • Tomer Elias 02/08/2009 at 4:07

    I have been reading your articles for a few weeks now after been told about your writing from a friend, I have never seen anyone wright so truly about whats going on in Israel.
    This is going to be my second elections that I can vote for and reading your articles have given me much more confidence in voting for the Likud and also has given me better understanding of things.
    But the feeling now is that the general public over here doesn’t understand how important these elections are and the media isn’t helping much, allot of people are so disappointed at the current government they might not even vote.
    I do hope that on tuesday people do the right decision to choose our new leader and that our politics will see the need in creating a coalition big enough and strong enough to actually achieve something and not be passive like the current government was for the past 3 years.

    Reply
  • David Custis Kimball 02/08/2009 at 7:47

    I wish I could vote for Netanyahu, a true patriot with the excellent training from MIT (my daughter is there). It is just a matter of common sense (or for those opposed uncommon sense) to elect a person who is not afraid and who also knows the traps, the tricks, the promises of evil and degenerate life forms. Jews are so wise to not eat shellfish, as they are bottom feeders, where heavy metals and most pollution concentrates. So why would Jews now bring into their consciousness the evil and polluted hate of Hamas, and the muslims, who live off the slime of extorting money from obliging ignorance, or proclaiming a false victimhood as bait to catch the obliging stupidity who must spend other-peoples’-money fairly between evil and good causes. (Obamas’s 20.3Million$ to aid Hamas refugees (does he need his brown shirts in USA for his Krystalnacht?) Does he blame Jews for the recession, or just sees the opportunity to blame Jews.
    Netanyahu can see through this as most people of he world, thank g-d. He has the strength to shine light on the objects of scrutiny… and with that, like the Iranian ship in Cyprus, there is accountability and reasoned certainty. G-d bless those Cypriots who are not afraid to see light as illuminating, and dark as secret and suspect.
    The clandestine storage of weapons delivered to either Hezbollah or Hamas is wrong. It shall not stand as had been decided in the United Nations. Netanyahu is not afraid to measure up to that. Hopefully to reward the Cypriots who uphold law as law, instead of breaking law and then claiming we need a better law, as so many have gotten away with.
    Every honest Christian stands with Israel, to do otherwise forsakes every covenant made. Islam, so say, was formed with the help of the early Christians, who thought that in organizing them, they would be more easily brought back to the Christian fold. The promise in the desert of World Domination, the same promise I would wager comes to every soul that would suffer hunger and thirst for weeks in any desert … and accepted with the worship of the offerer (at the cost of any requested evil) can only be denied by any sane person. The promise by evil does not exist. Evil by its definition will not do what it says. It cannot. It must divert your attention to another day another and another until you are defeated. Evil will not bring you anything, but hate, ugliness, foul taste, and promises of greatness, but only upon death. Evil cannot stand forever unless nothing is left alive.
    Only imagine your child in front of a mortar or rocket grenade launcher … that the trajectory from that missile will lead back to your child.
    Imagine that your child is numb to the danger because opium, hashish, alcohol, valium or some other drug has been given to him or her from the humanitarian shipment from USA or EU.
    No one will survive if we give to Hamas … they and theirs will take everything with them to death. As only evil can celebrate.
    Bring Light; bring Netanyahu to power with life and goodness, I pray.

    Reply
  • Hartmut Pilch 02/08/2009 at 13:00

    It may well be that Netanyahu is the most capable candidate, but he too cannot perform miracles. Acquisition of nuclear arms by more and more countries may be a tidal movement that is objectively difficult to stop. Iran is a country with a high alphabetisation rate that itself is facing a lot of pressures, including internal pressures for change. Given the wisdom attributed to Netanyahu in this forum, I would assume that he too, as a prime minister, while intensifying the campaign to put pressure on the Iranian leadership, would refrain from the ultimate kind of escalation of the conflict, which put more weight on Israel’s shoulders than Israel can bear.

    Reply
  • Sempke no name 02/09/2009 at 14:52

    Unless your nation believes your nonsense as with Eisenhower or you build a party you will have nothing. If you think the collection or the geriatrics a the Crown Plaza are going to canvas are going to deploy you are mistaken.The number of dentures divided by 2 is the number of votes you will get. It was a nice gesture for Netanyahu to speak with Grandma and Grandpa but their children were not to be seen. What youth there were all exchange students and having a social gathering.The election of Abe Lincoln was an anomaly filling a vacuum over taxes and not freeing the slaves. He hih not free the slaves in the State behind the Constitution.His second election was based on he thousands of troops under arms for the union and not the John Henrys of which even Lincoln had his doubts about. In any controversy a unit led by a leader wins. A political party fights like a team, this individuality business is a lot of horse droppings. It sleeps, eats and fights as a team and a squad does not make a team.

    Reply
  • Yotam Barnoy 02/09/2009 at 16:58

    I made a translation of this op-ed. I’ll post it here and send it to my friends (noting that it’s my translation), if you don’t mind.
    הבחירה הגורלית של ישראל
    הבחירות הכלליות ביום שלישי יהוו סיום לעונת הבחירות הקצרה והנונשלנטית ביותר בהסטוריה הישראלית. למרבה הצער, הבחירות האלה חשובות בקנה מידה הפוך לחלוטין לחוסר ההתלהבות מהם. אלה הבחירות הגורליות ביותר שישראל חוותה מימיה. מאורעות השבוע שעבר מדגישים נקודה זו בברור.
    ביום שני איראן הצליחה לשגר לווין מתוצרת פנים על גבי טיל בליסטי בשם “ספיר 2”. מאז השיגור, העירו מומחים כי ב”ספיר 2″ ניתן יהיה להשתמש כדי לשגר ראשי נפץ קונבנציונלים ולא קונבנציונלים כאחד. לספיר 2 טווח משוערך של כ2000-3000 ק”מ. שיגור הלווין המוצלח הדגים כי כיום, איראן מסוגלת לשגר טילים לא רק לעבר ישראל, אלא גם לעבר דרום אירופה.
    מנהיגים ישראלים רבים ראו את השיגור ביום שני כרגע של “תפסנו אתכם”. כבר שנים שהם אומרים כי תוכנית הגרעין של איראן היא איום על הביטחון הגלובלי ולא רק על ישראל. השיגור ביום שני הוכיח שהם צדקו לאורך כל הדרך. ישראל אינה המדינה היחידה ברשימת המטרות של איראן.
    לרוע המזל של ישראל, לקהילה הבינלאומית לא אכפת. תגובתה לפרובוקציה האחרונה של איראן היא משיכת כתף קולקטיבית ותו לא.
    ביום רביעי, שליחים של חמשת החברים הקבועים של מועצת הביטחון באו”ם וגרמניה נפגשו בוויסבדן שבגרמניה כדי לדון במדיניותם המשותפת כלפי איראן לאחר שיגור הלווין. היו כאלה שטענו כי הפרובוקציה של איראן תכריח את המנהיגים האלה לפעול. אם לא, יינתנו בספק המוניטין ויכולת ההרתעה שלהם.
    חבל רק ששליחיהם של רוסיה, בריטניה, סין, צרפת, גרמניה וארה”ב יותר מעוניינים לשכנע את המולות שהם נחמדים מאשר להראות להם שהם קשוחים.
    במקום להחליט לנקוט בצעדים מוחשיים נגד איראן, הכוחות הגדולים לא נקטו בשום צעד חוץ מאשר לאחל הצלחה למינהל של אובמה בדרכו לדבר עם המולות. כפי שנוסח בפרסום הידיעות לאחר הפגישה, תשובת ששת הממשלות להפגנת כוחה של טהראן היתה “להסכים לדון בצעדים הבאים תוך כדי כך שהממשל האמריקאי ייקח על עצמו את תהליך הסקירה של מדיניותו (כלפי איראן).”
    כפי שהנשיא ברק אובמה ומזכירת המדינה הילארי קלינטון הסבירו, ארה”ב סוקרת את מדיניותה כלפי איראן במטרה למצוא דרך “להיות מעורבים” באופן ישיר עם הממשל האיראני. למרות שהם טוענים כי המטרה של המו”מ הנכסף תהיה לשכנע את המולות לוותר על תוכניתם לכלי נשק גרעינים, מאז שנכנס לתפקידו, נותן הממשל החדש אותות חזקים כי מניעת איראן גרעינית תופסת מקום משנה לעומת קיום שיחות עם טהראן.
    כפי שדווח ב”חדשות התעופה”, בשבוע שעבר מנע חיל הים האמריקאי מישראל מלהשתלט על ספינת נשק איראנית בים האדום שנחשדה בהברחת כלי נשק בלתי חוקיים לעזה או ללבנון. לפני כשבוע וחצי, עלה חיל הים האמריקאי על ספינה זו במפרץ עדן וערך בדיקה שטחית. בסופו של דבר נמנע חיל הים מלהשתלט על הספינה, מפני שכפי שהסביר הרמטכ”ל מיכאל מולן ב27 בינואר, ארה”ב האמינה שלא היתה לה זכות חוקית בינלאומית ללכוד את הספינה.
    בבדיקתה את הספינה, ארה”ב פעלה לפי החלטת מועצת הביטחון מס’ 1747 שמנעה מאיראן מלייצא כלי נשק. ארה”ב טענה שחסרה לה הסמכות לתפוס את הספינה מכיון שלהחלטה 1747 חסר מנגנון אכיפה. אך אין הדבר מדויק — עובדתית היתה ארה”ב יכולה להשתלט על הספינה ולמנוע מכלי הנשק להגיע ליעדם אם רק היתה מעוניינת. הניסוח של 1747 מעורפל דיו כדי לאפשר פעולה זו.
    זוהי בדיוק הנקודה הקריטית. ארה”ב לא היתה מעוניינת לתפוס את הספינה מכיוון שהיא לא רצתה להביא לעימות עם טהראן, איתה היא מנסה לשוחח. ארה”ב לא מנעה את חיל הים הישראלי מלהשתלט על הספינה בים סוף בגלל חוסר סמכות, אלא בגלל הרצון העז של הממשל האמריקאי לרצות את המולות.
    כיום הספינה, שהפליגה עם דגל קפריסין, עגונה בנמל לימסול שבקפריסין. כפי שנמסר, הרשויות בקפריסין בחנו את תוכן הספינות פעמיים, שלחו את ממצאיהם למועצת הביטחון, ועדיין מחכים להוראות מה לעשות עם הספינה.
    מה שמחזיר אותנו לבחירות ביום שלישי. עכשיו שארה”ב ירדה מהאפשרות של התעמתות עם איראן, העול הכבד של עצירת ההתחמשות הגרעינית של איראן נופל על כתפי ישראל.
    משמעות הדבר היא שהשאלה החשובה ביותר שהבוחרים הישראלים חייבים לשאול את עצמם מעתה ועד יום שלישי היא, איזה מנהיג/ה ואיזה מפלגה הכי מסוגלים להשיג מטרה כה חיוניות זו?
    כל מה שצריך לעשות לענות על שאלה זו, זה לבדוק בדיוק מה עשו מנהיגינו בשנים האחרונות בכדי להפנות תשומת לב לאיום האיראני ולבנות קואליציות כדי להתמודד עמו.
    בסוף 2006, מנהיג ישראל ביתנו, אביגדור ליברמן הצטרף לממשלת אולמרט בצטטו את האיום הגרעיני האיראני. ליברמן קיבל את התואר של שר לנושאים אסטרטגיים שנתפר במיוחד בשבילו. באותה עת שליברמן הצטרף לקבינט, הגיעו לשיאם הקריאות הציבוריות נגד הממשלה בעניין כשלונה בהובלת ישראל לנצחון מול החיזבאלה. ניחוח הבחירות הממשמשות ובאות היה באויר בעוד ח”כים מכל המפלגות חשו בלחץ ציבורי עצום להצביע חוסר אמון בממשלה.
    ע”י הצטרפותו לממשלה, הצליח ליברמן במו ידיו להשאיר את ממשלת אולמרט בשלטון. בהסבירו את מהלכו, ליברמן טען כי הסכנה שנבעה מהתכנית הגרעינית של איראן היתה כה גדולה שישראל לא יכלה להרשות לעצמה לערוך בחירות באותה עת.
    אך מה השיג ליברמן ע”י כך שהציל את ממשלת אולמרט? התשובה הפשוטה היא – כלום. לא רק שנוכחותו בממשלה לא השפיעה ולו בקצת על יכולתה של ישראל להתמודד מול איראן, היא גם האריכה את חייה של ממשלה שלא היה לה אינטרס כלל וכלל לרקום אסטרטגית התמודדות מול איראן.
    לאור העובדה הזאת, יתכן שיותר מכל פוליטיקאי ישראלי אחר, ליברמן הוא האשם בכך שישראל מוצאת את עצמה ללא כל בני-ברית בשעת מצוקתה. אם ליברמן היה נותן לעם לבחור מנהיגים יותר מוכשרים בסתיו 2006, יתכן והיינו יכולים לנצל את שנותיה הדועכים של ממשל בוש כדי לשכנע את ארה”ב לפעול איתנו נגד איראן.
    מה עם שרת החוץ ציפי לבני? אם ליברמן היה האדם הראשי שאיפשר את הכשל הלא-יוצלח בנוגע לאיראן, בתור הדיפלומטית הראשית של ישראל, לליבני – ביחד עם רה”מ אולמרט – מגיע מירב הגינוי על הכשל הזה.
    במשך כל תקופת הכהונה של ליבני כשרת חוץ ואפילו כיום בתור המועמדת של קדימה לראשות הממשלה, ליבני טענה וגם טוענת שהיא תומכת בשימוש בדיפלומטיה בכדי למנוע את איראן מלהשיג נשק גרעיני. אך במשך שלשת שנותיה בתור הדיפלומטית הראשית של ישראל, ליבני לא פתחה אפילו במהלך דיפלומטי אחד להשגת מטרה זו. כמו כן, היא מעולם לא מתחה ביקורות בפומבי על הנסיונות האירופאים והאמריקאים לרצות את המולות.
    ליבני שתקה במשך שלש שנים שלמות למרות שהיה זה ברור כבר לפני חמש שנים שנסיונות המערב לסגור עיסקה עם טהראן פשוט נתנו לאיראנים עוד זמן לפתח את מחסני הנשק הגרעיני שלהם. היא שיתפה פעולה עם האמריקאים והאירופאים ועודדה אותם בעוד שהם העבירו החלטות חסרות שיניים נגד איראן במועצת הביטחון, שכפי שהספינה העגונה בקפריסין מעידה, הם כלל לא התכוונו לאכוף.
    באשר לשר הביטחון אהוד ברק, בתור חבר בממשלת אולמרט, כשלונו האישי היה חוסר יכולתו לשכנע את הפנטגון לאשר את בקשות ישראל לרכוש מטוסי תדלוק ופצצות מכסחות-בונקרים, ולהשיג את הרשות למטוסי ישראל לטוס מעל המרחב האוירי העיראקי. כדי להשיג מטרות אלה, ברק היה יכול לפנות לחברים של ישראל בצבא האמריקאי ובקונגרס. אך הוא לא עשה כלום. עכשיו כשנכנס הממשל של אובמה, ישראל מוצאת את עצמה עם פחות ופחות גורמים ידידותיים בקהילת הבטחון של וושינגטון.
    במשך השנים האחרונות, רק מנהיג פוליטי אחד בישראל הפגין את יכולת ראיית הנולד ואת התבונה להבין את סכנות התכנית הגרעינית האיראנית, ולתפוס את הבסיס לשיטה ישראלית דיפלומטית שתתמודד עם האיום, ושתעזור לישראל, גם אם בסופו של יום תאלץ ישראל לפעול לבד.
    בשנת 2006, מנהיג הליכוד בנימין נתניהו לקח על עצמו לערב את העם האמריקאי בדיון בנושא הסכנה שאיראן משקפת לא רק לישראל, אלא לעולם כולו. בסוף 2006, הוא החל להיפגש עם מושלי מפתח ופוליטיקאים אמריקאים במטרה לשכנע אותם לנשל את קרני הפנציות של עובדי מדינותיהם מחברות שעושות עסקים עם איראן. יוזמה זו ומאמצים נוספים ע”י המרכז למדיניות בטחונית בוושינגטון שיכנעו עשרות רשויות מדיניות להעביר חוקים שנושלים את קרני הפנציות שלהם מחברות שעושות עסקים עם איראן.
    נתניהו אף תמך בחוזקה ביוזמה של המרכז לעניינים ציבוריים בירושלים להעמיד לדין את נשיא איראן, מאחמוד אחמאדינג’ד בתור פושע מלחמה בינלאומי על הסטה לרצח עם. גם יוזמת הנישול וגם הקמפיין נגד אחמאדינג’ד היו המאמצים הצבוריים הדיפלומטיים המוצלחים ביותר של ישראל נגד איראן. יותר מכל פעולה של הממשלה, יוזמות אלו גרמו לאמריקאים להיות מודעים לאיום האיראני הגרעיני ובכך גרמו לכל המועמדים לנשיאות להתייחס לנושא.
    במקום לתמוך במאמציו של נתניהו, לבני, ברק וליברמן המעיטו בערכם או התעלמו מהם.
    מכיון שהוא המנהיג היחיד שעשה דבר משמעותי כלשהו להילחם בתכנית הגרעינית של איראן, נתניהו הינו המנהיג הלאומי היחיד שמהימן כאשר הוא אומר – כפי שאמר השבוע – שישראל לא תתן לאיראן להשיג נשק גרעיני. הליכוד תחת הנהגת נתניהו היא המפלגה היחידה שבאופן עקבי הדגישה את הקשר שבין איראן, נציגיה הטרוריסטים הפלסטינאים, הלבנונים, העיראקיים והאפגניים, מדינת הלקוח הסורית, ותכנית הנשק הגרעינית. הליכוד הפכה את המלחמה בציר הזה לקו המנחה באסטרטגיית הביטחון הלאומי שלה.
    בהתחשב בהחלטת הקהילה הבינלאומית ובראשה ארה”ב שלא למנוע את איראן מלהשיג נשק גרעיני, ברור כי בחודשים הבאים ישראל תצטרך לעשות שני דברים. ראשית, ישראל תצטרך להודיע לאומות העולם שהם לא יכולים לצפות שהיא תשב בעצלתיים בעוד הם מקבלים את פני איראן למועדון הגרעין. ושנית, ישראל תצטרך להכין תכניות התקפה צבאיות נגד מתקני הגרעין של איראן ללא תמיכה אמריקאית.
    יותר מתמיד, ישראל זקוקה למנהיגים שמבינים את חומרת השעה ומסוגלים לנהוג במהירות ובחכמה כדי למנוע את חורבנה. רק לנתניהו ולליכוד יש הישגים מהימנים בנושא.
    למען מדינתנו ולמען הדורות הבאים, זוהי אחריותנו להתחשב בעובדות אלה לפני שניכנס לקלפי ביום שלישי הקרוב.

    Reply
  • Ron Grandinetti,USA 02/09/2009 at 17:16

    LISTEN UP PEOPLE OF ISRAEL.
    NOW IS THE TIME TO EXERCISE YOUR DUTY AND RIGHT TO VOTE.
    THIS ELECTION IS NOT ONLY IMPORTANT TO ISRAEL BUT, TO THE REST OF THE FREE WORLD.
    YOUR VOTE DOES AND WILL COUNT TRUST ME.
    ———————-
    A NUMBER OF YEARS BACK MY NEIGHBORS FATHER RAN FOR RE-ELECTION FOR MAYOR OF A SMALL COMMUNITY AND LOST H IS BID BY A HAND FULL OF VOTES. LATER HE DISCOVERED ABOUT 12 OF HIS FRIENDS DID NOT VOTE BECAUSE THEY BELIEVED HE COULD NOT LOOSE.
    ————————-
    FOR THOSE THAT DON’T VOTE AND COMPLAIN LATER, WELL YOUR OPTION NOT TO VOTE WAS THE CAUSE.
    IF YOU DON’T VOTE – NO CRY BABIES. SIMPLE AS THAT.

    Reply

Leave a Comment