In diplomatic terms, who is the real power broker in the Middle East today? In the absence of a nuclear Iran, hands down it is the Saudis. They have the oil we need and they are now benefiting from increased trade with Iran. In at the back door is China, also enjoying a growing trade with Iran.
The AP headline 15 February was
Saudi official questions new sanctions on Iran
The Saudi minister spoke at a joint appearance with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who is in the Persian Gulf to shore up support for new sanctions against Iran. The Saudi minister also said efforts supported by the U.S. to rid the Middle East of nuclear weapons must apply to Israel.
Ah – that pesky point – “must include Israel.” You can gauge the Saudi power by their in your face suggestion that Israeli must be brought to heel as well.
Clinton has been working to get the Saudis to agree to fill China’s oil needs should Iran be unable to do so – clearing the way for stronger measures. Neither the US nor the Saudis are willing to characterize the measures in any definitive way.
Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal would only say that “sanctions are a long-term solution. But we see the issue in the shorter term because we are closer to the threat,” referring to Iran. “We need immediate resolution rather than gradual resolution.”
Because Obama has seemingly dragged his feet in the area and with Britain’s reputation tarnished by following the US into Iraq, French President Sarkozy. an avowed hard liner when it comes to Iran, has taken it upon himself to fill the leadership role of the West in the area. Increasingly he has become convinced that it is in Europe’s best interest to work cooperatively in the region.He has made great inroads for France in trade and in Abu Dhabi, he opened a French naval base, the country’s first foreign base since it gave up its colonies four decades ago.
…Mr Sarkozy has cleverly positioned himself both as a hardliner on Iran and as an interlocutor in the Middle East peace talks. He has met Benjamin Netanyahu, prime minister of Israel, and presidents Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority and Bashar al-Assad of Syria in the last week. He has also offered to host a Middle East peace summit. [The Telegraph]
Regardless of Sakozy’s diplomatic progress, Israel and Europe continue to count on the Americans to protect them against a nuclear Iran. They are trying to avoid making the very costly decisions involved to assume the responsibility for their own security. From that perspective, a U.S. military strike against Iran would probably retard the Iranian nuclear program by a few years which would also allow the French, the Saudis and the Israelis and other governments to further postpone making some hard choices about their security as they continue to free ride on U.S. military protection.
And here we come to that pesky element – Israel. The current view from Tel Aviv is that
,,,[a] nuclear-armed Iran would lead to “cataclysmic” changes in the Middle East. America would be weakened and Iran become dominant; pro-Western regimes would become embattled, and radical armed groups such as Hizbullah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza would feel emboldened.
Saudi Arabia, Egypt and others could, in turn, seek their own nuclear arms. In a multi-nuclear Middle East, Israel’s nuclear arms may not ensure a stabilising, cold-war-style deterrent. “If Iran gets nuclear weapons, the Middle East will look like hell,” says one senior Israeli official. “I cannot imagine that we can live with a nuclear Iran.” For Israel, 2010 is the year of decision. Yet its ability to destroy the nuclear sites is questionable, and such a strike may precipitate a regional war, or worse. [The Economist]
The Economist article provides an in-depth assessment of the options open to Israel and the conclusions reached do not bode well for an air or other conventional attack. The Israelis are counting on tough sanctions to do as much of the job as possible.
Hillary Clinton, the secretary of state, now says America will seek to impose penalties on the increasingly powerful Revolutionary Guard, “without contributing to the suffering of the ordinary [Iranians], who deserve better than what they currently are receiving.”Mr Netanyahu’s lieutenants seem inclined the other way. They say ordinary Iranians will blame their government, not the outside world, for any sanctions; so the embargo should be as crushing as possible. Domestic instability should be encouraged. Only a direct threat to the survival of the regime, they believe, will make it think again about seeking nuclear weapons. It is a harsh view, but for Israel the alternatives are even worse.
The picture in the Middle East is increasingly complex. China was not a player until recently and Sarkozy has entered into the picture in ways that do not always seem clear. The US, British and NATO forces are deeply involved in Afghanistan and the Iraq war has not wound down to allow for an easy exit. In short, there is little by way of direct military intervention that either Israel or the US could undertake without exposing their troops to untold devastation, almost obliterating Israel, sending the Middle East into an unimaginable turmoil and striking a killing blow at the US economy.
Clearly, unless there are unknown agreements or other unknown forces at work, it does not appear that this spring will see high noon in the Middle East. But then again, the essence of a surprise attack is, well, surprise.
____________________________________________
Commentary – Did Israel Just Acquire a New Bombing Capability
AFVET
February 22, 2010
Great post.
Obama clearly is one who delegates, as opposed to one who is willing to involve himself, votes “present”.
It also appears he does not possess the knowledge of international affairs to make the decisions necessary to project American strength overseas.
When it comes to domestic policy however, here comes the thug.
His whole goal is power and control over the America he has demeaned continuously by his words and actions, even on the world stage.
samhenry
February 22, 2010
Thanks very much AVET – I have read where Israel has recently taken delivery of some pretty powerful drones so who knows….
dancingczars
February 22, 2010
The little midget just doesn’t keep his mouth shut. He keeps telling the world that Israel will be blown off the map. Saw today where they now have drones capable of reaching Iran. Obama for all his bluster of Iran never having a nuclear weapon is still apparently clueless. I’ve read Israel will have a difficult time doing it alone, Obama doesn’t want any part of this dance. Hopefully covertly 15,000 pound daisy cutters can be delivered to them so they can hit the multiplicity of targets with bombs capable of penetrating deeply then exploding. The plants are all over Iran and apparently deep underground. It won’t surprise me a bit to wake up and see an attack. Also read the CIA was clueless and said we they were two years behind in getting anything nuclear. Don’t believe it for a bit. Either leaked for plausibility, or to smear the CIA with the warped view of the current administration, Jim
samhenry
February 22, 2010
I just saw the piece about the drones having been delivered but they will only get part of the job done. I’ll let our comments be the post update.
Everyone is denying there will be an attack and yet the more they deny I begin to think it may be disinformation. Who knows. One thing we do know. A nuclear armed Iran is intolerable in the region.