- Image via Wikipedia
Dear Reader,
Greetings and Good Day,
“Public debate can only advance knowledge, help avoid systemic errors and manage divergences in an effective approach”
In a last contribute before the upcoming meeting of the US president with the Israeli PM in Washington, a post meeting perspective should be drawn.
It is well known that a major topic will be the Iranian nuclear intentions and the assessment of the various options available to guarantee the US balancing interests and the Israeli national sacrosanct concerns.
As my desire is to be very objective, I must admit that the malpractices of Israel in racism and unwillingness to pursue at any cost the peace accord with the Palestinians as essential strategy can be put aside.
This thought is possible if we consider the ME perspective with a shaken Israel, as having no deterrence, and paving the way for major confusion and conflicts in a geographic area identified by poverty, ignorance, economic distress and radicalism.
From above I consider the balancing interests of the US as marching hand in hand with a strong and secure Israeli entity and a peaceful Lebanon. The dilemma today is for both Israel and the US to term their tactical differences.
In the latest intelligence assessments it is filtered that the Iranian research in developing Uranium enrichment is not cruising at the appropriate speed, even if stockpiling is managing quantities sufficient to develop 4 or 5 weapons.
The zone of immunity in reinforcing sites maybe reached shortly, but this same zone in research as a point of no return is not yet developed. Therefore if we take a picture today we can safely say that Iran has not the bomb, but it can anytime in the near future breach the nuclear proliferation.
Is the best course to strike military assets by Mid May? or to make it always costlier for the regime to proceed in the nuclear R&D? Do we have today an interlocutor? And who is this qualified partner having legitimacy in his own land?
The problem is that even if the US president and the Israeli PM will define a common denominator, it is not clear who will be the Iranian part that will be negotiating or contending the strategic duo.
My perception is that until 2014 no agreement can be put in place, always if no breach was achieved in proliferation, and if Mr Profile will be elected president, as I am advocating since some time, and as subtly evidenced by Mr Mahdi Khalaji in his “Supreme Succession” study.
Can we expect changes from the Majlis elections on March 2 ? Perhaps yes, in terms of widening the national gap beween failed governance and desire to reform.
In truth, the galaxies of Iranian internal politics do provide us with corrupted, fragmented and much divided elite; disaffected, uninterested, imprisoned political opposition and a crumbling, sanctioned economy.
Yet this panorama that depicts the Iranian Islamic state in disarray as a symbol of governance can’t sustain the risk of a small armed minority holding the buttons of power in Iran putting at risk the entire structure and stability of the peaceful and energy generator Middle East.
In a recent study and analysis of Joseph Nye and Michael Beckley related to the national power measurement and China’s rise, we have perhaps a scientific approach to be applied to Iran.
Where the Iranian Islamic state does stand today considering wealth, innovation, conventional military capabilities, power projection and cohesion of the national tissue?
What will be the effect of the strategic demise of the Syrian dictator in terms of Iranian power projection? Obviously a UNSC resolution paving the way for humanitarian corridors coupled to the objective of the demise of Assad by applying the ARAB plan is the only way forward, where both the US, the Friends of Syria, and Israel should join to deliver a post Assad Syria by the end of April.
What is the real attribute of an Iranian nuclear bomb in terms of national power measurement and altering irreversibly the geopolitical ME landscape by weakening the Israeli state security and deterrence?
Understanding the Israeli instinct, I must say that it is up to the US president to convince the Israeli PM that the US objective will be to impede the clan of the Supreme Leader to develop a bomb under any circumstance as this will jeopardize the US national power measurements in terms of connections and global reach.
Therefore the only way to make Israel desist from a complicated/original and innovative attack on Iranian objectives will be a potent Obama, having clarity of purpose, illustrating his intentions and ensuring to secure military credibility.
It is only when the US president will succeed in accrediting his strong views backed with a true and genuine determination to launch a global strategic attack at will to protect the interests of the world anytime, that the Israeli tension will relax.
The American camp advocating only sanctions failed to introduce any solution to the problem, but succeeded in alimenting the polemic by raising critics from comfortable locations, as for the Israeli opposing camp advocating military strike it couldn’t perfect the equation of costs and benefits vis a’ vis the post strike management , hence we should find a compromise.
I propose to institute an Iranian watch room (ten members from both Israeli and US veterans), where monthly assessments will determine the evolution of the Iranian theater and will be required to update the joint policies.
This watch room will be semi public and will interact with the world opinion to inform and perform.
A second US/Israeli summit will follow in May.
My concern is that failure of the US president in the meeting at the White House will be hard to digest and its immediate consequences will be huge in terms of security and stability.
“There comes a day when potency should be expressed by power of will and by rational and substantial ANALYSIS AND SYNTHESIS, above all by concrete proposals and options “
Thank You,
33.888629
35.495479
Posted by Elie Nammour 
The Second Semester 