Home
Benefits
News
entertainment
shop
finance
careers
education
join military
community
 
Search for Military News:  
The Passdown Early Brief | Headlines | Warfighter's Forum | Discussions | Benefit Updates | Defense Tech
First Strike Gameplan: Israel vs. Iran
Peter Brookes | February 12, 2008
airspace in the Middle East and the Persian Gulf with its vast array of land, sea and air platforms and sensors. (Considering the geography, the possibility of unintended engagements between U.S. and Israeli forces almost eliminates the possibility of no notice being given to U.S. command authorities before a strike is launched.)

Many of the potential targets in the Iranian nuclear set, like the Natanz uranium enrichment facility, are also hardened, located near population centers and even buried as far down as 70 feet below ground. Plus, the Iranians are not likely to take this lying down. In addition to ground-based air defenses, including SA-5s and I-Hawk, the Iranian Air Force will throw an assortment of aging air assets at the Israelis, including MiG-29s, Su-24/25s, F-14s, F-4s, F-5s, F-7s and F-1s.

Moreover, an Israeli strike would severely complicate regional politics, especially for the U.S., which is (incorrectly) seen as Israel's handler. An attack by the Jewish state on a Muslim country, even troublesome Iran, would not be taken well at all in the region, especially on the "street." The situation would be further exacerbated, especially in some quarters of Iraq, if it were perceived — or it were actually the case — that the U.S. allowed the IDF to use parts of Iraqi airspace for, or turned a blind eye to, an attack on neighboring Iran.

Mission Impossible?

While these challenges to an IDF preventive strike against Iranian nuclear targets are significant, the mission, if embarked upon by Israel as a matter of national security, could be a success. The Israelis could advise the Americans of the strike in advance, allowing the two sides to deconflict their forces and providing a degree of freedom of movement in the gulf area for the IDF to operate if Washington supported the effort. Regional Arab states likely would not intervene, even if they became aware of the raid in progress. But they would protest vociferously after the strike, while privately breathing a sigh of relief, considering concerns surrounding an ascendant Iran.

Depending on the level of tactical engagement with the Iranians, the Israeli fighters, especially the F-15s, have the range to hit key targets. Precision-guided and penetration weapons such as JDAMs would likely be effective against hardened and buried targets. Nukes — as some have suggested — would not be necessary. But, the distances involved could limit the loiter time of Israeli fighters for dealing with emerging targets, especially those that might be involved in a counterstrike against Israel, such as Shahab-class road-mobile ballistic missiles. Of course, Israel's small fleet of cruise missile-capable, Dolphin-class diesel submarines, deployed to the Persian Gulf, could play an important role in a strike, especially against Bushehr in southern Iran. Israeli commandos could also play a role.

Persian Payback

Another issue that has to be taken into account by Israeli policymakers is that an IDF strike on Iran almost certainly would bring Iranian retaliation in a number of forms against Israel and its interests in the region — and beyond. Israel could expect Iranian ballistic-missile attacks against large cities such as Haifa and Tel Aviv as well as conventional and terrorist attacks by Tehran's allies, Hezbollah or Hamas. And Syria could get into the act. (By association, U.S. interests could come into Iran's crosshairs, too.)

The next chapter of Iran's nuclear weapons program is not yet written, but Israeli policymakers and defense planners do not need to be reminded that a single nuclear weapon is enough to destroy the small Jewish state — and its 7 million people. What is clear is that an Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities would not be easy or ideal — not to mention pregnant with plenty of potential negative consequences, for Israel, the U.S. and peace and stability in the Middle East more broadly. Indeed, while a strike might push back the Iranian nuclear program, it will not necessarily deter Tehran from continuing to pursue its atomic dreams: The Osirak raid served to steel Saddam's resolve to get the bomb, according to his former bomb makers.

But the green light for an attack is militarily doable if Israel perceives Tehran's Iranian nuclear weapons program might lead to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's notion that Israel must be "wiped off the map." The words of Israel's Menachem Begin government after the Osirak raid must still ring in the ears of Israel's policymakers today: "Under no circumstances will we allow an enemy to develop weapons of mass destruction against our people."

This year will likely bring more unhappy news about Iran's nuclear program as it cascades toward a weapons option. It will also be a fateful year for Israel, one that may require action against Iran — no matter what the NIE says.

<< Page  1 | 2 | 
Sound Off...What do you think? Join the discussion.


Copyright 2012 Peter Brookes. All opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily reflect those of Military.com.

 
About Peter Brookes

Peter Brookes is a Senior Fellow for national security affairs at the Heritage Foundation, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank. He is also a weekly columnist for the New York Post. Brookes frequently appears on cable news such as FOX, CNN, and MSNBC as well as hosts major market radio talk shows. He is the author of: "A Devil's Triangle: Terrorism, Weapons of Mass Destruction and Rogue States."

Before coming to Heritage, Brookes served in the Bush administration as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Asian-Pacific Affairs. Prior to the Pentagon, he worked as a staff member with the Republican staff of the Committee on International Relations in the House of Representatives. Brookes also served with the CIA's Directorate of Operations, and worked on international economic issues for the State Department at the U.N.

He also served in the U.S. Navy, including active duty in tours in Panama and Japan in aviation and intelligence/cryptologic billets. He has over 1300 flight hours aboard Navy EP-3 aircraft. Brookes is a Commander in the naval reserves. He is a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy; the Defense Language Institute; the Naval War College; and the Johns Hopkins University.

Peter Brookes' new book, "A Devil's Triangle: Terrorism, Weapons of Mass Destruction and Rogue States" is a cold, hard slap for anyone becoming complacent about security challenges in today's world, warning readers that threats to America's national security have not subsided in the four years since 9/11, but, in fact, have escalated.