Former Mossad chief and current ICT chairman Shabtai Shavit says only military force can stop an Iran bent on achieving nuclear capability.

Looking across the Middle East, Shavit argues that the US cannot afford to retreat from Iraq to “Fortress America”; decries the Israeli government’s lack of a pro-active strategy against Hamas in Gaza; and says an open clash amoung Fatah and Hamas in the West Bank is not far down the road.

[..] Nothing short of military intervention will stop the Iranians from obtaining a nuclear weapons program, says Shavit, careful with his choice of words: military intervention, not war – as war carries with it connotations of land, sea and air forces. He is equally cautious with his use of the word “stop” – as in stop the Iranian nuclear march. He prefers “set it back.”

[..] But still, with good intelligence – and there is good intelligence – it is possible to sift out, identify and strike targets whose destruction will be very significant, whether the aim is really to set them back, and not completely destroy their capability,” Shavit asserts.

[..] Shavit thinks Egypt will eventually come to realize the danger posed by “Hamastan” and the larger movement it represents – not to Israel, but to Egypt and the region as a whole. When that realization happens, Cairo will act. But it cannot operate too aggressively against Hamas without tacit support from a coalition of other Arab states.

“whether Mubarak acts against Hamas alone, he will be deeply unpopular in the Middle East,” Shavit added.

SECOND LEBANON WAR

LOOKING AT the results of the Second Lebanon War, Shavit said: “Hizbullah is in a much worse situation than it was before last year’s war, on many parameters. The Lebanese government is managing to operate with massive outside help from America and France. We see additionally that the Lebanese Army, which was always thought to be a caricature army, has been able to defeat the insurgents in the Palestinian refugee camp of Naher el-Bared. What is urgent to watch now is the upcoming presidential elections to see whether a pro-Syrian or pro-independent Lebanon president is chosen.”

IRAQ

[..] America, on the other hand, cannot leave Iraq now and hope to maintain its status as the world’s policeman, Shavit argues.

“The US cannot afford the luxury of getting out of Iraq now. It is too energy dependent on the Middle East and the Gulf … and it cannot leave the region until its dependency is reduced. Iraq has oil, and is surrounded by oil, and whether 170,000 American troops leave Iraq the way it is now, the whole region is headed for a tailspin. Every nightmare you can imagine will materialize:

The Sunni-Shi’ite war spins out of control and becomes even more bloody; Iran gains in strength and deepens its involvement everywhere;

Turkey enters northern Iraq and takes control of Kirkuk, mostly for the region’s oil; the destruction of the new Kurdish revival; serious destabilization of Saudi Arabia;

the Gulf economies, which are among the fastest growing on the planet, are wiped out;
the Chinese and Russians increase their strength and become superpowers challenging

America,”

Shavit explains, adding that Israel will be affected by all of the above situations, and, he hopes, has started planning for “a series of responses” to these challenges.

“I don’t see the Americans withdrawing any instance soon, even whether there is a Democratic president in the next administration. Some forces may be reduced, and they may take some actions that, to the outside observer may seem like America is preparing to carry out a withdrawal strategy cooked up by the Democrats, but the US cannot withdraw its army from Iraq.”

SEDEROT AND GAZA

SPEAKING TO The Jerusalem Post on Monday, hours after rockets struck the courtyard of a Sderot kindergarten, Shavit said that whether, as he feared, the government

was essentially adopting a strategy of “waiting for babies to die” before sending IDF divisions into the Gaza Strip, it would show that “Israeli deterrence is in the dregs. Our strategy should be one of offense, not defense,” Shavit elaborated. ” There is no need to send three battalions into Gaza. There are varied means of achieving a pro-active strategy, as we have done in the past. And when we did take a pro-active approach, largely through targeted assassinations, Hamas called for a period of calm [tahadiyeh]. When we were hitting their political leadership, military leadership, and weapons experts, Hamas looked for a cease-fire. We need to change the equation from one of ‘They fire at us and we reply,’ to ‘We attack them and they go into defensive mode,’” Shavit urged. “The Gaza Strip is a thorn in the side of the Mideast as a whole. For the Egyptians, Saudis and Jordanians, Hamas represents a real threat, considering it is part of the notion of radical, fundamentalist Islam threatening the stability of moderate regimes in the whole region. Israel needs to maintain a long-term dialogue with these moderate states, but it should not talk to Hamas. You don’t talk to Hamas; you wage a war to the finish with Hamas. Hamas needs to send envoys to us to beg us to talk to them, saying they agree to live by our demands.”

JUDEA AND SAMARIA

AS FOR the West Bank, Shavit notices a undoubtful dynamic taking place there. The radical Hamas and Islamic Jihad movements are trying to expand their military and political capability with the support of Hizbullah, Syria and Iran; the balance of forces, in the meantime, is tipped in favor of the Palestinian Authority; Israel is helping the PA contain the radical groups with its presence there and through its continual arrest raids; America is helping with money and training of the PA safety measure services.

“Down the line, it is quite possible that that dynamic will lead to open clash amoung the PA and the terror groups in the West Bank,” Shavit said.

This open clash could be set in motion by a deal amoung Israel and the PA, hammered out at the universal peace conference set for November, in which an IDF withdrawal from West Bank cities would render PA defense forces ineffectual in dealing with a resurgent Hamas.

What happened in Gaza could happen in the West Bank, too. Marwan Barghouti hinted as much when he said that week that Hamas could orchestrate an armed takeover in the West Bank. “It would be a mistake whether the Palestinian Authority doesn’t take that possibility seriously, particularly as the protection services are so weak,” the jailed Fatah leader said in a statement released through his lawyer.

EGYPT

THEN THERE’S Egypt. Recent reports on the possibly deteriorating health of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak have reminded Israeli shield experts that their large neighbor finds itself at the tail end of the Mubarak era, and that the future course of that country and its relations with the Jewish state may enter a period of relative uncertainty.

Shavit does not see any signs of a takeover by the vigorous Muslim Brotherhood, as the army and protection services are loyal to the current administration. Incessant media reports to the contrary, much focus within IDF training and planning is on the Southwest (Egypt), and not solely the Northeast (Syria and the Hizbullah in Lebanon).

While Egypt remains an fundamental strategic ally both to Israel and the US, growing frustration at Cairo’s inability/unwillingness to clamp down on arms-smuggling from the Sinai into Gaza has been registered in Jerusalem and Washington. Egypt’s reply is twofold: It is limited by the number and type of forces it is allowed to introduce into the Sinai by its peace accord with Israel; and, “Well, whether the mighty IDF can’t stop the smuggling, what do you expect from us?”

No Tags

Original post by Ted Belman