Posted on 05/11/2002 5:23:41 AM PDT by krodriguesdc
"Palestine" and Nuclear War
Professor Louis Rene Beres March 17, 2002
The United Nations has given its blessings to the "vision" of a Palestinian State. In so doing, the world body missed one rather important consequence: This new Arab state, heavy with the same shrill hatreds of Israel held by existing Islamic states, will inevitably give rise to new and more deadly terrorism. Most ominously of all will be "Palestine's" effect upon catastrophic nuclear warfare in the Middle East.
A Palestinian state will utterly eliminate Israel's remaining strategic depth, giving the Israelis virtually no viable capacity to defend an already fragile land. Faced with a new enemy state resolutely committed to Israel's annihilation, Israel's leaders will have to undertake even more stringent methods of counterterrorism and self-defense against aggression. Various new forms of premption, known under international law as anticipatory self-defense, will be unavoidable.
Because the creation of a state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel will heighten the risk of regional nuclear war considerably, this newest enemy state should be viewed with real apprehension. Indeed, its creation could likely be a final step to bring an Islamic "Final Solution" to the region. After all, every Arab map of the Middle East already excludes Israel. Cartographically, Israel has already been expunged.
Architects of the Oslo Agreements had suggested all along that a "two-state solution" to the Palestinian problem would substantially reduce the risk of another major war in the Middle East. After all, we had always been told, the problem of stateless Palestinians is the source of all other problems between Israel and the Arabs. Once we have "justice" for Palestinians, the argument proceeded, Arab governments and Iran will begin to create area-wide stability and comprehensive peace settlements. Harmony shall then reign, more or less triumphantly, from the Mediterranean and Red Seas to the Persian Gulf.
But as we should have learned by now, especially from recurring Arab violations of the "peace process," the conventional Oslo wisdom was always unwise. For the most part, Iranian and Arab state inclinations to war against Israel have had absolutely nothing to do with the Palestinians. Even if Israel had continued to make all unilateral Oslo concessions, and had continued to adhere to unreciprocated agreements, these belligerent inclinations would have endured, especially from Syria, Iraq and Libya as well as from Iran, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
When Israel soon faces a new state of Palestine, the Jewish state's vulnerability to armed attack by hostile neighbors will increase markedly. If this diminished safety is accompanied by the spread of unconventional weapons to hostile states, which now seems certain, Israel could find itself confronting not only war, but genocide. It is also clear that Israel's own nuclear infrastructures will become increasingly vulnerable to surprise attack from Palestinian territories.
A new state of Palestine will preoccupy Israeli military forces to a much greater extent - much, much greater -than does the current intifada. Even if it were able to resist takeover by one of the other Islamic states in the region, a takeover accomplished either directly or by insurgent surrogates, Palestine will surely become a favored launching-point for unconventional terrorism against Israel. Various promises notwithstanding, Islamic insurgents would continue to celebrate frenzied violence against Israel's women and children as the essence of "national liberation."
Recognizing an "improved" configuration of forces vis-a-vis Israel, a larger number of Islamic enemy states will calculate that they now confront a smaller, more beleaguered adversary. Further, they will understand that a coordinated effort by certain countries that possess or are in the process of acquiring pertinent ballistic missiles could possibly endanger Israel's very survival. Taken together with the fact that global support for Israel is always fickle, especially in perilous times like these, and that individual or combined chemical/biological/nuclear warfare capabilities could bring enormous harm to Israel, the creation of Palestine will tip the balance of power in the Middle East decisively. It is unlikely that Israel could physically survive next to a Palestinian state, a state that always defines itself as extending "from the Sea to the River."
The full strategic implications for Israel of an independent Palestine should now be carefully appraised. If, in the end, such independence becomes the cause of a nuclear war in the region, everyone, Palestinians as well as Jews, will lose. But how, exactly, would a nuclear war begin in the reconfigured Middle East? One possibility would be by Arab or Iranian first strikes against Israel. These strikes could be nuclear (although this would likely be several years away) or nonnuclear. In either scenario, Israel - especially if it feels dangerously close to defeat - might resort to nuclear retaliation.
Alternatively, Israel, believing that substantial enemy attack -chemical, biological, conventional, or nuclear - is imminent, could decide to preempt. If, as we might expect, this preemption were entirely nonnuclear, it could still fail to prevent the anticipated attack against Israel. Here, Israeli nuclear weapons, having failed in their mission to support conventional preemption by deterring enemy retaliation, might have to be used for purposes of nuclear warfighting. It is also plausible that certain Islamic states might transfer unconventional weapons assets to selected terror groups, leading to WMD terror attacks by Israel's nonstate enemies.
Israel has much to fear, more than any other state on the face of the earth. The people of Israel, not the people of "Palestine," are the only ones who must soon contemplate complete eradication from this strange and destructive planet. Threatened by a growing number of adversaries with ballistic missiles and with a corollary interest in nuclear warheads, Jerusalem should know that full and codified transformation of Judea/Samaria and Gaza into Palestine will provide its enemies with the means and the incentives to destroy the Jewish State once and for all. Deprived of essential territorial integrity, and beset internally by hostile Arab citizens loyal only to "Palestine," Israel will become seriously vulnerable to total defeat. Anguished by a possible end to the Third Temple Commonwealth, the nation's leaders will begin to think seriously about nuclear weapons as a last resort (the so-called "Samson Option"). It follows that the UN Security Council's March 12th endorsement of a Palestinian state should be viewed with the most grave concern. Otherwise, Palestine, looking first very much like Lebanon, will assuredly wind up as Armageddon.
LOUIS RENE BERES (Ph.D. Princeton) is the author of SECURITY OR ARMAGEDDON: ISRAEL'S NUCLEAR STRATEGY (Lexington Books, 1986) and many other major books and articles on nuclear weapons and nuclear war. His work is well-known to Israel's military and intelligence communities, to the Prime Minister and to the IDF General Staff.
1:) Yasser is no statesman. He is a terrorist. A newly created, NON-TERRORIST state REQUIRES STATESMANSHIP. LEADERSHIP, which Yasser isn't capable of providing. Who replaces Yasser?
2:) Dictator Yasser's state has created specialized homocide schools, which are the only education some Palestinian kids HAVE EVER RECEIVED. CAN these suddenly out-of-work, brainwashed, twisted, human bomb-wannabes be reprogrammed to become normal, productive citizens of Palestine AND the world?
3:) Terrorism is not only a profitibale enterprise, it's the only thing that career terrorists have ever known and ever WANT to know. In the early '80's I asked this about the IRA. There was no real, workable solution then, as career IRA terrorists now find gainful employment with Arab terrorists, so I ask it again about the Arabs: Short of mass execution, how does the world deal with ADULT career terrorists?
Attacks almost daily, yes, but before Operation Defensive Shield there were multiple attacks daily. Most likely Israel has to do more, such as a big attack on Gaza, and then the level of violence will be brought down by another order a magnitude, at least for a decade or so.
What this article neglects to mention is that Israeli occupation of 85% of the West Bank ended years ago. Arafat could have declared a state at any time over this period, but did not because the capital would be other than Jerusalem. As for stopping the Palestinian Authority from getting nuclear weapons, this is important, but there being a Palestinian "state" will not change its importance.
The Jews agreed to partition of Palestine with little strategic depth for Israel in 1947. This is a given. The problem of course is that the Moslems believe that the Arab world should be 100% Arab. The only cure for this is military force sustained over many decades.
Attacks almost daily, yes, but before Operation Defensive Shield there were multiple attacks daily. Most likely Israel has to do more, such as a big attack on Gaza, and then the level of violence will be brought down by another order a magnitude, at least for a decade or so.
What this article neglects to mention is that Israeli occupation of 85% of the West Bank ended years ago. Arafat could have declared a state at any time over this period, but did not because the capital would be other than Jerusalem. As for stopping the Palestinian Authority from getting nuclear weapons, this is important, but there being a Palestinian "state" will not change its importance.
The Jews agreed to partition of Palestine with little strategic depth for Israel in 1947. This is a given. The problem of course is that the Moslems believe that the Arab world should be 100% Arab. The only cure for this is military force sustained over many decades.
The late Rabbi Edwin Friedmann had a great story in his small book, "Friedmann's Fables" about a lamb that was being terrorized by a tiger. All the animals in the forest tried to help the lamb figure out ways to appear less edible to the tiger, and tried to put the burden on the lamb to avoid being killed. The story ends inconclusively but with a questions about the naive perspective wherein "a tiger doesn't behave like a tiger."
It's time to tell the Islamics that there will be no pali state in Israel. If they want to go to war, so be it.
Just as the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 very likely saved the entire world from sinking into the abyss by creating in the minds of Americans a "win by any and all means... damn the opinions of others" attitude. The psychological effect on the Israelis would be quite simply astonishing. There would be no more restraint! Options that make the most sense but which have been rejected out-of-hand by successive Israeli governments would suddenly gain great favor.... namely the relocation of the entire arab population from all Israeli lands. And in the real world as opposed to the Peres-Oslo bizzarro world, relocation is the only viable answer...
An unconventional attack on the USA would have a similar but more sweeping effect. If a tiny nuke of say .5 to 5 kt were smuggled into Manhattan and detonated, resulting in an immediate loss of 100,000+ citizens our psychological break with restraint would be total! Within 30 days we would capture and control 60+ percent of the worlds oil reserves... we would no longer care what the rest of the world thought... emminent domain would be the order of the day... as the sole superpower we would take control "for the good of the entire world" ... and who would dare raise a hand against us? We would rule the Middle East and set the price of crude... we would dole out oil revenues and use it to feed the conquered Arabs... we would force democracy on them..as we did in Japan after victory in 45.
We live in a crazy time... a crazy time where our will is again so weak that only a horrendous attack can once more awaken the sleeping giant.
Why do we keep making the same mistakes over and over? Is appeasement ingrained in the western mind? Is it an unfortunate trick of genetics?
The second problem is you claim that the only cure is military force sustained over decades. Well there already has been military force sustained over the past 35 years and the violence gets worse and worse. How will 35 more years cure it?
--Boris
The solution is a large military action over a short period of time, resulting in expelling the "pallies" into their jordanian homeland, and the expansion of the borders to defensible depth.
You may be right. However, the fact is that things would have to get a good deal worse before Israel would do this. India has similar problems with Islamic terrorists, and decade after decade they can't find a level of violence which would convince the terrorists to stop either.
Speaking as someone whose supreme loyalty is 100% to the United States, but who is Jewish and also loves Israel: The tremendous support from the great majority of conservatives over the course of this infitada is extremely gratifying. I do fear that there will eventually be some conservative frustration, and just plain getting fed up, with the disunity and indecisiveness of most Israeli governments, and the way the conflict between Jews and Muslims in Palestine drags on decade after decade, even century after century. I don't despair of there ever being a "solution," but it would dishonest for me to claim to see a light at the end the tunnel.
To try the Bush delusion of a separate Pallie state in certain neighborhoods and areas of the Holy Land just a few feet from Israeli schools, women and children...Such a nightmare would be a blueprint for the destruction of Israel, she would be defenseless in any war or even skirmish.
Such an Israel, friendless as always except for the weak, vacillating USA, would have no choice but to go nuclear right away if she was to have any chance of survival. Instead of a last resort, nuclear would be the FIRST thing used!
I do wish Bush would get a sudden attack of sanity. Stafka, you are precisely right as always. Why don't you post more often?
Always the truth.
Israel has had fifty years of US support to get started in the world. They are now a technological powerhouse, and a nuclear nation, armed with atomic and perhaps even thermonuclear weapons. What more do they need to be able to say to the US "Thanks for the help, but we're going to go our own way now"?
Sometimes the best thing partners can do for each other is to agree to go their seperate ways.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.