'Israel will attack Iran before 2009'

by Wim Bartelds | July 10, 2008 at 05:00 pm
3295 views | 7 Recommendations | 12 comments

Photos

'Israeli attack on Iran likely before 2009'

'Israeli attack on Iran likely before 2009'

see larger image

uploaded by Wim Bartelds

(UPDATE July 16, 2008)

THE HAGUE - An Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear program "will most probably take place before 2009", western intelligence sources say. Israel now has completed the planning of three or four scenarios for an attack, and is now said to be contemplating the right time for it. Israel concluded early June that an attack would be inevitable. Since then, Israeli Air Force exercises have been underway, even using a US airbase in Iraq.

Credible sources indicate that the assumed 'necessity' of an Israeli attack is derived from three estimates: the first is that Iran, according to Israeli intelligence, will have nuclear missiles operational by the late summer of 2009; the second is that diplomacy and a package of economic incentives and sanctions will not bear sufficient fruit; the third is that an attack by the end of 2008 or later will result in insufferable losses.


Recent decision

Sources say the Israeli scenarios are based upon a recent decision by the country's government and military, that a peaceful solution is extremely improbable. The assumption that unilateral action without overt US military support will be necessary, given the probable inability of the US to open and keep up a third theatre of operations alongside those in Afghanistan and Iraq, is supposed to have played a significant part in the recent decision.

Furthermore, Israeli government circles interpret a recent US Navy exercise of the Aegis missile defense system's communications in the Mediterranean and Persian Gulf, as a clear sign of limited US involvement -the US has not sent carrier groups closer to the Strait of Hormuz, as recently requested by Israeli PM Olmert. President Bush gave Olmert the 'amber light' (i.e. veiled approval without immediate action) for an attack, and thus from an Israeli perspective confirmed the need to act anyway.


Closing window of opportunity

Israel's military planners see a rapidly closing window of opportunity: an attack must essentially be air-based, and since Iran will have its Russian-purchased S-300 air defence systems fully operational by year's end, an attack after that is believed to result in too many losses to ensure minimal success. The S-300 systems can take out aircraft, cruise missiles and ballistic missile warheads at ranges of over 90 miles and at altitudes of about 90,000 feet, with great effectiveness. Hence the planning: if non-military means don’t work, then military means must be deployed before 2009.

Last month's Israeli exercise over the Mediterranean, code-named 'Glorious Spartan', took place in cooperation with the Greek military. Greece uses the S-300 air defence system, and thus the exercise can be expected to have provided Israel with valuable information about that system.


Minimal success

According to sources familiar with Israeli planning, 'minimal success' is defined as the elimination of the five or six nuclear facilities that are the most essential in Iran's program of at least nineteen facilities, as well as the elimination of two facilities where Iran is working on modifying its ballistic Shahab-3 missiles for nuclear warheads. If this 'minimal success' is achieved, then Iran's offensive nuclear capability will be set back by at least a decade.


Nuclear experts estimate that the current number of nuclear centrifuges operated by Iran will provide sufficient enriched uranium for two or three one-ton nuclear warheads that, if fired at Tel Aviv, would kill 22,000 - 50,000 people and obliterate most of the city, thus taking out the heart of Israel's infrastructure on most levels.


According to military analysts, the total destruction of Iran's nuclear program is not an option since the scale, locations and defences of the entire Iranian program would require commitment of such a vast number of Israeli military assets that the operation would weaken Israel’s forces necessary to check Syria, Jordan and Lebanon-based Hezbollah.


Attack within weeks?

Sources would not comment on an intel rumour that an Israeli strike is to be expected in the near future -there is talk of "weeks". This rumour is based on the fact that Iran in recent months hastily began upgrading its current air defence systems, as well as on the expectation that the upgrade will be integrated and fully operational within weeks from now, thus raising possible Israeli losses in case of an attack.

Intel rumours that a strike may come soon are furthermore fed by the fact that Iran is nearing completion of its P2-type nuclear centrifuge which decimates the time needed to enrich uranium.




---------------------------

Normal 0 false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

 

The list of OSINT (i.e. open source intelligence) materials used is rather lengthy, but to give you an idea:

 

Normal 0 false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/071126irannukewmd.pdf

 

http://www.dni.gov/press_releases/20071203_release.pdf

 

http://web.mit.edu/ssp/Publications/working_papers/wp_06-1.pdf  A paper written by two MIT doctoral students two years ago -so forget its numbers and statistics, but look at the strategic notions.

 

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iran-strikes.htm -a page that contains several informative links

 

Materials from the International Crisis Group, such as: http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=4143

And of course materials from Stratfor, Globalsecurity, FAS, Jane’s, CFR, etc., as well as a number of lesser-known sources of similar quality.


http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iran/nuke/biblio.pdf

 

Also, I had a look at newspaper articles for either an analysis or a taste of the atmosphere, such as:

http://www.thecuttingedgenews.com/index.php?article=533

 

http://www.unobserver.com/index.php?pagina=layout5.php&id=4205&blz=1

 

http://www.csis.org/index.php?option=com_csis_pubs&task=view&id=4505

 

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21311

 

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,536914,00.html

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200712u/nie-iran

 

(And I specifically did not use stuff like http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article4144317.ece, since it smells of fabricated news.)

 

The OSINT was presented to reliable sources who, on condition of anonimity, presented their views.

 



 

recommend This comment thread is now closed
0
julianw

Interesting. Where did you hear about this news?

0
Wim Bartelds

Sources:  partly OSINT (i.e. open source intelligence), partly the sources mentioned in the article, whose 'background' is mentioned.

0
julianw

Thanks. Are you able to add a link to any of those sources?

0
jayp

This sounds very plausible. There's quite a bit of talk about the possibility, e.g. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/29/israelandthepalestinians.middleeast

0
korzac

Wim Bartels, look at this “Osirak Redux?Assessing Israeli Capabilities to Destroy Iranian Nuclear Facilities”, see here.

Heritage
Heritage
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 01:55 on July 11th, 2008

Wim Bartelds, I like this story. It's good stuff.

0
Heritage

Why can Israel have hundreds of nuclear weapons, the US thousands, and Iran can't even think about it?

Shouldn't counter-proliferation begin with those who have the nuclear weapons?

0
Sweetness

Why, you ask. Well, we don't want those who advocate jihad against non-believers to have a nuclear weapon. It that too hard to follow?

0
Heritage

Sweetness: Why, you ask.

To start a discussion.

Sweetness: we don't want those who advocate jihad against non-believers to have a nuclear weapon.

Iran? Iran hasn't invaded another country for 200 years. Is it possible that  Iran wants to protect itself from nations who make a habit of invading others?

Perhaps it's, "our" aggression, "our" violence, "our" brutality, that is causing the proliferation. 

Just a thought.

0
baiadha

yes

this is best comment of this story


Vinny
Vinny
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 06:57 on July 11th, 2008

Wim Bartelds, I like this story. It's good stuff.

0
Tom Perquin

Vinny are you cynacal

it's the avatar

This story was created over 3 months ago, the comment thread is now closed.

What is NowPublic?

NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.

Find out more

Crowd Power

Heritage
First Flagged at 1:55 AM, Jul 11, 2008 by Heritage
These members have powered this story:

Most Recommended Stories in World

Recommendations (7)

Most recently recommended by:
 

closeSign in to NowPublic

is reporting from