Posted on 08/16/2002 11:26:54 AM PDT by 1bigdictator
US desperate to reassure Israel as Scud fears grow
Tim Cornwell Deputy Foreign Editor
THE United States is engaged in a critical effort to identify Scud missile launch sites in Iraq, analysts say, in an effort to avoid a disastrous counter-attack on Israel if it moves against Saddam Hussein.
With Israeli officials making it clear they reserve the right to respond to any Iraqi attack, Washington is desperate to reassure Tel Aviv that the Scud "issue" has been dealt with.
In 1991, Israel’s restraint in the face of Baghdad launching 39 Scud missiles at Israeli cities - causing heavy damage but few casualties - was a key factor in Washington’s ability to keeping friendly Arab countries in its Gulf war coalition.
The warning that this time, Israel would retaliate - particularly in the face of a biological or chemical attack by a cornered Saddam - has made plain the minefield Washington could face in the event of a second war designed expressly to drive Saddam from office.
The Israeli health ministry said yesterday it had inoculated 700 health workers against smallpox, as a precaution against a biological attack. A decision is expected on whether to vaccinate up to 150,000 more key personnel. It came as Israeli officials underlined that their response in a second Gulf war could be different.
In an interview with Israeli television, the air force commander Major General Dan Halutz warned: "You can’t take what happened then and think it will also happen this time, neither in the way the war will be conducted there ... nor in the manner of Israel’s reaction."
The Israeli defence minister, Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, has warned several times flatly that Israel would hit back.
US intelligence officials, meanwhile, have told the US Congress that Israel could use nuclear weapons if an Iraqi attack with non-conventional weapons causes heavy casualties, the Haaretz daily newspaper yesterday.
In London yesterday, the US national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, described Saddam as "an evil man who , left to his own devices, will wreak havoc again on his own population, his neighbours and - if he gets weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver them - all of us".
"It is a very powerful moral case for regime change," Ms Rice told BBC radio. "We certainly do not have the luxury of doing nothing."
The question of whether and how Saddam would launch a strike on Israel is now the "number one issue" facing the US as it plans an Iraq campaign, said Magnus Ranstorp, a specialist on the Middle East with the University of St Andrews’ Centre for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence.
After 11 September, Israeli military intelligence said Iraq had 11 to 15 Scud missiles pointed at Israel.
The tough line from Tel Aviv ahead of a threatened US military action to topple Saddam may be a predictable one. But analysts are focusing on what happens to the "Arab street" in pro-Western Arab countries in the event that Israel is drawn into the war.
In the Gaza strip yesterday, several hundred Palestinians staged a rally in support of Saddam, chanting: "Dear Saddam, bomb Tel Aviv."
In 1991, Israel reluctantly complied with Washington’s request to hold back. But today, Israel is not hampered in the same way because there is no coalition to hold together, said Dore Gold, an adviser to the Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon. Mr Sharon has hung his reputation on hitting back hard in the face of terrorist attacks.
"The tone has changed," said Mr Ranstorp. "The context is different. If Israel is attacked by Scuds, it changes the entire equation on the US war on Iraq."
Jordan’s King Abdullah has made plain his opposition to a US attack on Iraq. Iran, meanwhile, views with alarm the prospect of US troops across the border in Iraq.
The question of Israel’s response is a subject of rising debate. Moshe Arens, Israel’s defence minister at the time of the 1991 war, wrote this week that Israeli ground forces had been training for an invasion of western Iraq to search for missile launchers, but the war ended before it could take place.
Gen Halutz did not say how Israel would respond to a new Iraqi attack, but Israeli officials have hinted that the response to a conventional attack would consist of air strikes and ground attacks by airborne forces.
In 1991, the US supplied Israel with Patriot surface-to-air missile batteries, but the Patriot, designed as an anti-aircraft missile, proved ineffectual against Scuds. Since then Israel, with US financing, has developed the only anti-missile missile in the world, Gen Halutz said.
In addition to the smallpox vaccine, Israel’s atomic energy committee said yesterday that anti-radiation iodine tablets would be distributed to people living near Israel’s two nuclear reactors. It denied the move was connected to the Iraqi threat.
This article:
http://www.news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=898102002
Mr Sharon, Tear Down Mosques from Temple Mount!
To serve up a nice healthy dose of fear and respect.
Was Iraq ever actually in Saudi Arabia at the time or are you refering to the risk of potential invasion Iraq posed to the Saudis?
Based on numbers alone, it will be much, much more difficult. Additionally, Israel's recently-activated Arrow II missile defense system is more than capable of handling an Iraqi attack.
Finally, Saddam's #1 priority has always been regime survival. Launching a preemptive attack on Israel is tantamount to suicide. The only scenario under which Saddam would attack Israel is if he feels his regime is doomed, and he has nothing to lose.
agreed, sort of. personally, if it requires upsetting, let the apple cart flipping begin.
But a little perspective, please.
as i read what you were writing, i was thinking more or less along your lines.
After a careful evaluation, we've decided that Saddam Hussein is no threat to anybody except possibly the fleas on his dog. The United States has better things to do than worry about washed up old has beens who can't even shoot down an airplane with a lucky shot after over 10 years of trying. If the Iraqi's can find a real man to lead their country we might pay attention, But as long as all they've got is a tinpot dictator who abuses his own people for fun and profit, we'll focus on serious foreign policy issues.
Would the Iraqi people suffer a leader who only rates derision from the west? Would they depose him for failing to live up to the "axis of evil" moniker?
Just a thought.
Shalom.
Why has nobody else picked up on this obvious show of tolerance from Israel for the Moslem people? If Sharon hadn't had reason before to blast that thing to the sky he has it in spades now, yet he does not. Why? It's the heart of the two sides behind this war.
If the Arabs laid down their weapons tomorrow you would have no mor war.
If Israel laid down her weapons tomorrow you would have no more Israel.
If I were Sharon I would set up a big, highly visible, powerful looking missile launcher somewhere in Jerusalem and point the missile right at the Dome of the Rock. Then I would make an announcement that the soldier on that missile launcher has orders to shoot as soon as the next homicide bombing occurs. No delays. No questions.
And I'd cover the missile in pig fat.
I wonder what the Arabs would do?
Shalom.
Yeh, it might make a US war on Iraq unecessary.
Saddam pays $$$ to the families of homocide bombers. The Palis are holding a pro-Iraq "demonstration" for their greatest benefactor and the best customer for their only product: terrorism today.
The jihadists are also armagedonists.
They'd view this as a golden opertunity to unite the muslim world to destroy Israel.
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.