Subscribe to RSS
Archive for the ‘Israel Foreign Policy’ Category:
Mossad May Be Wrong, But What About Dubai?
First there are reports about Mossad agents being in Dubai. Now an Iranian MP openly admits that his country’s agents have also been operating there. Iran and Israel do have more in common that meets the eye. Who knows, while there they may have accidentally played Tennis together. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/meir-javedanfar/mossad-may-be-wrong-what_b_479772.html
Cheering Israel To Attack Iran
Despite calls from some quarters, the state of Israel should hold its fire and resist the temptation to attack Iran in the near future.
http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2009/12/10/israel_should_hold_its_fire_on_iran.html
Israel’s Central Asian Power Play
The recent decision by the government of Turkmenistan to allow Israel to open an embassy on its soil will serve to strengthen Jerusalem’s position in Central Asia.
As Turkmenistan shares a border we Iran, we look at how this development came about and what it means for both countries.
The piece also analyzes the domestic implications of this new development.
To read click here
Or below – to our email recipients, if the links are not highlighted, please click on the blue title to see the linked pages
http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2009/06/israels_central_asian_power_pl.html
Second Postcard From Lebanon
By: Meir Javedanfar
14/01/2009
The new round of Katyusha attacks by Hezbollah have increased the possibility that a second front may open in the north. There are questions about the timing and motivation of the new attacks.
What these attacks primarily show is that Iran is worried, for a number of valid reasons:
So far, after 19 days of fighting, the international community, especially the West is still not reigning in on Israel’s operation in Gaza. This does not bode well in Iran’s dealings with the EU and the expected upcoming negotiations with the US. Iranian strategists will be justified to ask: if the West is ignoring Iran now, how will it treat Iran over the all important nuclear negotiations? How quickly is this affair reducing Iran’s position vis a vi the West? What will this do to Iran’s position in the future?
There is also the question of Iran’s balance of power politics with moderate Arab states in the region. Since the beginning the fighting, numerous trips have been made by Iranian officials such as Secretary General of the Supreme National Security Council Saeed Jalili, and Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani to regional countries such as Syria and more recently to Turkey. In all such trips, through their connections, they have tried to place pressure on Egypt, while rejecting the terms of the French – Egyptian peace proposal. Larijani even went as far as calling it a “honey injected with poison”. However these statements and efforts have still nothing yielded results. Egypt is still pressuring Hamas against Iran’s wishes while the EU and US for now seem to extend Israel’s visa in Gaza.
The Katyusha attacks this morning from the north were meant to send a message to Israel that Iran still maintains its powerful Hezbollah card and reserves the right to use it, if Tehran’s interests continue to be ignored or worst, threatened. Therefore current attitudes have to change and Iran’s point of view must be taken into consideration.
However it is probably unlikely that Iran will want a full war between Israel and Hezbollah, and this is why Palestinian militant factions are being used instead of Hezbollah to launch the attacks. Such a war could cost Hezbollah politically in the upcoming Lebanese elections in May 2009. It would make it very easy for Hezbollah’s rivals to justify their claims that Hezbollah is an Iranian puppet.
Also, so far in his career, Ayatollah Khamenei has been known to be a savvy politician. He has already seen how Hamas is in trouble. Would he be willing to risk losing two assets (Hamas and Hezbollah) in one fight? Some Iran analysts would disagree. However if he is willing to do that, Khamenei may be about to make a big mistake as such actions justify claims by Israel and the moderate Arab states that Iran is an element of instability in the region and thus it should be isolated even more. In the future, this could cost the Iranians in their efforts to improve their position in the region, especially if Obama is brought around to the anti Iran camp.
It would be in Israel’s interest to contain its response. For now, Israel seems to be placing significant pressure on Hamas and is winning in the diplomatic front. Focusing on the current struggle against Hamas and winning it will do much more damage to Iran and Hezbollah, than by opening a full second front in the north.
Delegitimizing Hamas Could Backfire
By: Meir Javedanfar
05/01/2009
The current conflict in Gaza was caused primarily by Israel’s security concerns. Since its 
evacuation of the Gaza strip in 2005, 6500 mortars and rockets were fired towards Israel. 2008 was the worst year. Over 3200 rockets and mortars were fired in that year alone. Israel which is considered as a super power in the region was seen as being unable to stop a threat which was making life very difficult for hundreds of thousands of its citizens.
However the political reasons behind Israel’s current assault can not be over looked. Operation “Cast Lead” is a war by the left and moderates wing of Israeli politics, headed by Labor and Kadima, against leaders of Palestinian right, headed by Hamas.
To Israeli moderates, the land for peace idea is the most viable long term solution for peace between their country and the Palestinians. This is why they backed Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza. Although it was a painful move, former right wing hawks such as Ariel Sharon decided to face reality. This was despite fierce criticism from right wing movements such as Likud, and their leader Benyamin Netanyahu, who showed his disagreement by resigning shortly before the initiation of the withdrawal.
Although many Palestinian moderates support the idea that Israel must withdraw to the 1967 borders, Palestinian extremist movements such as Hamas are opposed to it.
This is why Hamas has tried to its level best to dissuade Israelis from further withdrawals, and what better way to this than by attacking Israel’s southern cities from Gaza. Hamas knows that by turning Gaza into a launching pad for attacks, Israeli moderates will no longer have any justification to call for further withdrawal. Why should the Israeli voter back them, when instead of peace and security, withdrawals seem to bring instability and conflict?
This is why it is imperative not just for Israel, but also for prospects for peace in this region that Israel emerges from the current fighting with a guaranteed ceasefire by Hamas. It must be proved to the Israeli voter that the land for peace idea is still a viable one, and that it is worth defending. Otherwise the future of this region will be determined by those who stand for extremism and elimination in Gaza, and their right wing allies such as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The international community must realize this and ensure that maximum pressure is applied against Hamas so that it applies and respects a permanent ceasefire.
At the same time, Israel should ensure that it doesn’t give Hamas extra leeway by making demands which in the long run could strengthen the organization. One of them are current suggestion by Tzipi Livni and Ehud Barak that Hamas is excluded from any diplomatic agreement to end the military operation in Gaza. The main reason is because Israel does not want to legitimize Hamas.
This could backfire, and push Palestinian in the arms of Hamas again because delegitimization of Hamas could be viewed as a direct attack against Palestinian democracy. In a bid to restore their battered pride after the Gaza invasion, Palestinians may vote Hamas again in the Parliamentary elections of 2010. This is not an unrealistic scenario, especially since Israel, apart from warm words, photo ops and hand shakes with Mahmoud Abbas, has not done anything meaningful to help Fatah.
There are also security implications as well. Hamas needs to have something to lose, so that it will be worth while for it to maintain the ceasefire. Otherwise it may take up arms again.
After the end of the current conflict, Israel must also try and lure Hamas away from the arms of Ayatollah Khamenei. Despite an eight year war, initiated by the West’s former stooge in Baghdad Saddam Hussein, the Iranian government has managed to survive 29 years in power. Therefore it will have plenty to teach Hamas about how to use isolation as an opportunity to strengthen its position. Having on other option, Hamas could willingly accept it.
Political organizations are not destroyed. They are transformed. The diplomatic push to implement a ceasefire can be used an opportunity to offer carrots to Hamas. Sticks and isolation alone will not be enough to help the moderates in Hamas who have just seen the organizations military capability severely damaged and are most probably looking for a way out.
A weak Hamas should be used as an opportunity to weaken Iran’s influence, not to strengthen it.
Why Israel should accept the 48 hour ceasefire
By: Meir Javedanfar
31/12/2008
Accepting the French plan to start a 48 hour ceasefire would be a tactical victory for Israel, for a number of reasons.
The ceasefire would be used as an ultimatum as well as a face saving option for Hamas to accept a permanent ceasefire. If Hamas does not accept, international backing and understanding for Israel’s actions would increase. This would provide the Israeli Defense Forces with more justification for its actions. In the post 2003 Iraq invasion world order, international backing and credibility is as important, if not more, than the operational radius and weapons load of F-16 fighter jets.
However if Hamas does accept the ceasefire, it would provide both parties with a win-win situation. Israel could say that its military operation achieved its objective, while Hamas could say it did not sign any agreement under fire.
A ground operation in Gaza will be a difficult operation, not just militarily, but also politically.
From the military point of view, judging by the Jenin battles of 2002, one can assume that Hamas has booby trapped houses and road leading into Gaza, and is prepared to use its population as human shield. This could cause heavy casualties for Israel and Palestinian civilians. Israel would also allow Hamas to use the opportunity to create a PR disaster for Israel, just as Arafat tried with the false claim that there had been a massacre in Jenin.
Politically it will be even more difficult. It is accepted across the board in Jerusalem that Israel does not want to reoccupy Gaza for a long period or even permanently. This is why Israel withdrew in 2006.
However once a ground invasion is launched, Israel will become hostage to Hamas’s willingness to accept a ceasefire. Under this scenario, as long as Hamas refuses to accept a ceasefire, Israel would have to stay in Gaza. This would mean that Israel could again become stuck in a long drawn out guerrilla warfare. It would also have to look after Gaza’s 1.5 million population. There would always be the option of unilateral withdrawal. However this would provide Hamas with a political victory.
Iran: Pirates And Secret Wars
By: Meir Javedanfar
14/12/2008
The recent hijacking of ships by pirates in the Red Sea is raising alarm in Iran, for two reasons:
- The pirates have hijacked Iranian ships. This has had an economic and security impact for Iran. So much so, that Tehran has threatened to use force to free its crew and ships.
- Tehran sees the hand of foreign powers, especially Israel, behind the hijackings.
We in the West may dismiss such thought as yet another conspiracy theory, but the Iranians are not. In this morning’s edition of Sobhe Sadegh, which belongs to the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corp (IRGC), an editorial is dedicated to Israel’s influence in the horn of Africa and how Israel is using this to its advantage. Special emphasis is placed on Israel’s relations with rebels in Somaliland, and reports that the Israeli navy has a presence in some of the Eritrean owned islands in the Bab Al Mandeb strait. The islands in question are the Dahlak and Hunaish islands, and claims that Israel and Eritrea have cooperated militarily in these islands were also made by the Yemeni government and the Saudis.
What strengthened such beliefs was the Karine A affair, in which a Palestinian Authority ship, laden with weapons was captured in the Red Sea in 2002. The fact that the Israeli navy captured the ship 300 miles south of Eilat, and that it had been able to track its docking in Yemen, strengthened these suspicions.
The fact that the pirates of the hijacked Iranian ship, suddenly died of mysterious circumstances afterwards, created more panic. Especially since there were reports which were not confirmed nor denied by the US government, that Washington had offered the pirates $US 7 million just to inspect the vessel.
What the report in Sobhe Sadegh indicates is that Iran is becoming convinced that a silent war is being waged against its interests, at home and abroad. Last week, there was yet another report about the death of an individual working for Iran’s nuclear program. This time a Russian nuclear scientist had frozen to death, during a trip to mountains of Tehran. Previous cases included accidental death by suffocation caused by gas leakage.
Tehran’s concerns are understandable. Overt wars can be condemned in the UN and can cause damage to America and Israel. But covert wars are more difficult to fight, because unlike Iraq and Lebanon, in this case, Iran is at a disadvantage. That is not to say that Tehran won’t try in the future.
برای اسرائیل گزینه نظامی علیه ایران آخرین و بدترین گزینه است
بنیامین نتانیاهو رهبر حزب لیکود در اسراییل گفت مطمئن است که اوباما در برابر یک «ایران اتمی» مصمم و جدی است. مِئير جاودانفر تحلیلگر مسایل خاورمیانه معتقد است، نتانیاهو سیاستی را پیش میگیرد که مورد قبول آمریکا باشد.
مئیر جاودانفر، ناظر سیاسی مقیم تلآویو، میگوید، از آنجا که برای اسراییل رابطه با آمریکا بسیار مهم
است، بنابراین اسراییل بدون موافقت آمریکا دست به اقدام نظامی علیه ایران نخواهد زد.
دویچهوله: آقای جاودانفر، اظهارات اخیر بنیامین نتانیاهو را در مورد انتخاب اوباما به ریاست جمهوری آمریکا و سیاستهای آیندهی آمریکا در برابر ایران چطور ارزیابی میکنید؟
مئیر جاودانفر: به نظر من برای آقای بنیامین نتانیاهو مهم است که به دولت باراک اوباما نشان بدهد که تا حدی سیاستهای دولت او برای حزب لیکود قابل قبول خواهد بود چون علیرغم این که حزب لیکود با مذاکره با ایران موافق نیست و آن را یک راهحل درازمدت نمیبیند، ولی برای دولت اسراییل و برای حزب لیکود، که میخواهد در انتخابات بعدی برنده باشد، خیلی مهم است که تا جایی که میتواند با دولت آمریکا یکصدا باشد. چون اگر بخواهد از الان مخالفت کند، شاید وقتی که برنده شد، این به روابط بین اسراییل و آمریکا صدمه بزند. و میدانید که در سیاست خارجی اسراییل، آمریکا نخستین اولویت اورشلیم است.
موضعگیری فعلی دولت اسراییل، با توجه به انتخاب اوباما به ریاست جمهوری آمریکا در قبال ایران چطور است؟ فکر میکنید منتظر اجرای سیاستهای اوباما خواهند ماند، یا این که ممکن است خودشان دست به اقدامی علیه ایران بزنند؟
به احتمال زیاد دولت اسراییل منتظر سیاستهای دولت آمریکا خواهد بود. چون مسئلهی ایران با مثلا عراق، که اسراییل در سال ۱۹۸۱ به آنجا حمله کرد، خیلی فرق میکند. الان در خاورمیانه، ما چیزی حدود ۱۴۰ هزار سرباز آمریکایی داریم که اگر اسراییل بدون اجازهی آمریکا به ایران حمله کند، آنها در تیررس ایران قرار خواهند گرفت و صدمهی به آنها صدمهای خواهد بود به روابط اسراییل با آمریکا، که برای دولت اسراییل بسیار مهم است. بنابراین به نظر من، به احتمال زیاد دولت اسراییل فعلا با سیاستهای آمریکا موافقت و آنها را دنبال خواهد کرد. اگر در آینده دولت اسراییل متقاعد شد که ایران واقعا دارد بمب اتمی درست میکند و دولت آمریکا نمیتواند جلوی آن را بگیرد، به نظر من این احتمال که دولت اسراییل به ایران حمله کند، افزایش خواهد یافت.
تقسیم قدرت در دولت کنونی اسراییل، الان این اجازه را به دولت میدهد که بتواند جلوی تندروها را در این زمینه بگیرد؟
مسایل ایران با مسایل صلح با فلسطینیها و صلح با سوریهایها خیلی فرق میکند. مسئلهی اتمی ایران، مسئلهی فراگیری است که تمام جبهههای سیاسی اسراییل بایستی در مورد آن متحد باشند. چون عواقب این مسئله، مخصوصا عواقب حمله به آن، خیلی بزرگ خواهد بود. در حال حاضر دولت اسراییل و اکثریت سیاستمداران بر این عقیده هستند که بایستی به مذاکرات ادامه داد، بایستی به تحریمها ادامه داد، بایستی از آمریکا حمایت کرد و برای اسراییل هنوز گزینهی نظامی بدترین و آخرین گزینه است. این گزینه در آینده تنها در صورتی ممکن است تغییر کند که دولت اسراییل واقعا قانع شود که اولا دولت ایران دارد بمب اتمی میسازد و دوما، آمریکاییها هیچ کاری نمیتوانند بکنند و سوما، دولت اسراییل میتواند که عواقب حمله به ایران را تحمل بکند. اگر این سه شرط تحقق پیدا کند، که احتمالش کم است، آنوقت به نظر من تندروها در اسراییل و کسانی که از حمله به ایران حمایت میکنند برنده خواهند شد.
اگر احتمالا باراک اوباما به حرفی که در مبارزات انتخاباتیاش زد عمل بکند و بدون پیش شرط با ایران وارد مذاکره شود، فکر میکنید عکسالعمل دولت اسراییل چه خواهد بود؟
دولت اسراییل شاید ظاهرا مخالفت کند، ولی باطنا و پشت درهای بسته، دولت اسراییل هرکاری که آمریکا بتواند انجام بدهد تا مسئلهی هستهای ایران با روش مصلحتآمیزی حل شود، برای دولت اسراییل خوب است. به نظر من دولت اسراییل در کلمات و بیانهایش شاید شکایت بکند، ولی این کشور یاد گرفته است که در این منطقه، این عمل است که برنده است و اگر دولت آمریکا بتواند با سیاست مذاکرات خودش، اغتشاشات کنونی را در منطقه پایان بدهد، مخصوصا میان ایران و اسراییل، به نظر من دولت اسراییل از این اعمال و سیاست دولت آمریکا حمایت بسیار خواهد کرد.
و اگر بنا باشد چنین مذاکرهای بین دولت آمریکا و ایران در هر سطحی صورت بگیرد، فکر میکنید آیا اسراییل خواهان سهمی از این مذاکره خواهد بود، مثلا در مورد حمایت ایران از حماس و حزبالله؟
بله، برای این که یکی از نقاط مثبت مذاکرات میان ایران و آمریکا این است. الان گروههای مختلف دارند وارد قضیه صلح خاورمیانه میشوند، ایران دارد وارد این مسئله میشود و ایران بهعنوان یک بازیگر بسیار بزرگ، حضورش در این مذاکرات بسیار مهم است. ولی در عینحال نباید فراموش کنیم که اسراییل هم یکی از بازیگرهای بسیار بزرگ است، مخصوصا در مسئلهی حماس و حزبالله. این دو گروه در مرز اسراییل هستند و فعالیتهای نظامی و سیاسی میکنند و برای دولت اسراییل بسیار مهم است که در این مذاکرات شرکت کند، چون علیرغم روابط بسیار مثبت میان اسراییل و آمریکا، وقتی ما داریم راجع به امنیت این کشور حرف میزنیم، دولت اسراییل میخواهد که خودش مستقیما در تمام مذاکرات شرکت کند تا بتواند از منافع خود دفاع کند و در آینده بتواند برای رسیدن به تفاهم با دولت ایران از این مذاکرات استفاده کند. چون برای دولت اسراییل، کشور ایران یک همپیمان طبیعی است، در نتیجه برای دولت اسراییل بسیار مهم است که تا جایی که باید و شاید بتواند روابط خودش را با مردم ایران و حتا اگر شده با دولت ایران بهتر کند.
مصاحبهگر: میترا شجاعی
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,3861554,00.html