There has been much speculation over whether or not the Israelis will attempt a repeat of their bold operation in 1981 against the Iraqi Osirak nuclear reactor, this time against the Iranian nuclear weapons program.
Operation Opera (???? ?????, Mivtza Opera) was the surprise Israeli air strike against the Iraqi Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981.
The question of whether or not the Israelis will attempt a repeat of their successful 1981 attack is actually twofold:
WILL they do it again?
and
CAN they do it again?
Israeli Courses of Action are predicated on strategic criteria – What specific developments in Iran will “trigger” an Israeli military operation? – and whether or not such an audacious operation can be repeated, over further distances and against a more tenacious foe.
If Iran acquires certain anti-aircraft systems – such as the Russian-made S-300 air defense system (seen below), the Israel Defense Forces may be unable to mount a successful attack against any Iranian military nuclear facility.
The advanced version of S-300 (SA-20 GARGOYLE) has a range of over 150 kilometers (about 100 miles) and can intercept ballistic missiles and aircraft at low and high altitudes. This system would be an effective air defense against possible air strikes on Iran. The closest western equivalent of S-300 is the U.S. MIM-104 Patriot system or the U.S. Navy RIM-66 Standard Missile 2 (SM-2).
If unable to acquire the S-300 from Russia, Tehran may turn to China for the HongQi-9/FD-2000, a system similar to the Russian S-300 with elements “borrowed” from the US MIM-104 Patriot system.
There are also reports that Iran is buying Russian Pantsyr-S1E systems via Syria.
Challenges to Israeli operational planning include: the distance between Israeli military bases and proposed targets (almost twice the distance of the 1981 operation); the requirement to fly over hostile territory – Jordan and/or Saudi Arabia, and Iraq; and the dispersal of targets within Iran.
The distance requirement dictates an aerial refueling capability, which Israel demonstrated they possess. Israelis jets participated in a training event over Greece last summer regarded by analysts as a rehearsal for potential operations against Iran.
An option that overcomes distance limitations and overflight constraints would include sea-launched cruise missiles (from either surface or sub-surface craft). It is unknown if Israel possesses this capability.
The threat of attack from either Israel or the United States has underscored Iran’s quest for nuclear weaponry; as a countermeasure, Iran has deliberately dispersed its nuclear program throughout their country. It is not known if Israeli intelligence has accurate intelligence on actual target locations within Iran.
The Israeli government recently stated it is not considering military operations against Iran. This may be a legitimate position. On the other hand such international diplomatic posturing may represent an attempt to achieve SURPRISE (“Deception can aid the probability of achieving surprise.” – US Army Field Manual FM-3 Military Operations.)
One of the oldest dictums of war is that all other factors being equal, simplicity is to be preferred. Simplicity in this case dictates that Israel remains flexible in their military planning. In other words, any and all options remain on the table, right on up until those triggers are tripped, and the Point of No Return has been crossed.
Originally posted at STORMBRINGER.
10 responses so far
1 balconesfault // Jun 8, 2009 at 12:24 pm
Israel must also be aware that Iran is no Iraq. While Saddam dabbled in international terrorism, Iran without question has established and very strong terrorist surrogates, starting with Hamas and Hezbollah.
Add that while there may be some unspoken sympathy among even Arab governments if Israel were to successfully take out Iran’s nuclear program – were they to do so with their own nuclear strike within Iran, as some have postulated might be necessary to take out buried and hardened facilities – they would almost certainly be sowing the seeds for the elimination of their country.
Given the amount of Russian nuclear material that went unaccounted, and the amount of money in the Middle East, I firmly believe there are some nuclear devices in the Muslim world outside of Pakistan. And that any reticence over turning one of those devices over to an anti-Israeli organization would disappear were Israel to use nuclear weapons on a Muslim nation.
Dangerous game, dangerous talk.
2 Captain America // Jun 8, 2009 at 12:39 pm
Israel cannot wait for weak U.S. leadership, and an indifferent Europe to solve the Iran problem. Mossad is the best intelligence agency in the world and if they find military action necessary, American citizens should support it, even if our government does not. Displays of strength and resolve have always worked better for Israel than diplomacy. The Arab/Persian mind understands the language of power more than any other parlance and fear of reprisal cannot deter them from taking action.
3 gibberish // Jun 8, 2009 at 2:34 pm
It would be tougher for Israel to attach Iran than Iraq was.
but perhaps the biggest obstacle is not the hostile countries they must cross – it is the friendly one. Iraq airspace is obviously totally US controlled. Any attack needs total US acquiescence.
Indeed an Israeli attack until the US pulls out would basically be seen as a US proxy attack. Unless Obama says they can and should attack Iran they get shot down by patriots long before they need worry about SSwhatevers – so they won’t try
4 RLHotchkiss // Jun 8, 2009 at 2:52 pm
Like almost all such wonderings, this post ignores the fact that United States has thousands of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that Pakistan is dangerously unstable and already armed with operational nuclear weapons.
5 Bulldoglover100 // Jun 8, 2009 at 2:53 pm
And those of you lacking something in your mental make up sit around, in an almost icky manner, full of hope that they will attack…and you think Liberals are sick? Really?
No one wins in a war and if your that gung ho for it? We will be happy to put you on the front lines!
6 sinz54 // Jun 8, 2009 at 3:15 pm
If Iran successfully test-fires a nuclear bomb, Israel may consider that a casus belli, given the wild statements coming out of Ahmedinijad and the Iranian mullahs.
Israel will also take the test-firing of an Iranian nuke as proof that the Obama Administration cannot be trusted to defend Israel’s right to exist. And that will be the end of any Israel-Palestinian “peace process.” Because without America as an honest broker, there is no such process.
7 nealjking // Jun 9, 2009 at 12:51 am
As others have stated before:
- There are strong reasons to doubt that Israel would succeed in removing Iran’s nuclear capability. A lot of that stuff is underground.
- Iran would be extremely likely to take revenge on US forces by missile. Plus, they could block up the Straits of Hormuz and sink what’s left of the world economy.
8 ottovbvs // Jun 10, 2009 at 6:43 am
“In other words, any and all options remain on the table, right on up until those triggers are tripped, and the Point of No Return has been crossed.”
………Linnane needs a stay in cliche detox…….There isn’t the remotest chance Israel is going to start a pre-emptive war with Iran, because that’s what an attack on its nuclear installations would be, the start of a major war in the middle east…….A war between a nation of 6 million (20% Arab) and a nation of 75 million sittting on about 6% of the world’s proven oil reserves. Such a war would almost certainly result in the destruction of Israel…..And forget about nuclear weapons because their use, or even threatened use, would likely involve the intervention of Russia or China……The notion that Israel is going to court such outcomes in a likely failed attempt to knock out underground installations is ludicrous…..sorry to disappoint the keyboard heroes here…Then there’s the fact the US would know of any such intention and wouldn’t allow it…….Even Bush wasn’t stupid enough to sign on to that.
9 sinz54 // Jun 10, 2009 at 9:58 am
ottovbvs: If Iran successfully test-fires a nuke of at least Hiroshima-type yield (14 kilotons or bigger), then all bets are off. Israel would rather ignite a general conflagration than leave a nuclear first strike capability in the hands of the Iranian mullahs.
And once Iran test-fires a nuke, the U.S. will have no diplomatic options left. (When has any regime voluntarily disarmed its entire nuclear deterrent once it had one?)
So Israel won’t listen to Obama at that point. Netanyahu will attack.
10 balconesfault // Jun 10, 2009 at 10:04 am
If Israel attacks, I’m sure that the Obama Administration will pull out the diplomatic stops. And we’ll actively deny Iran use of any airspace controlled by us for retaliation purposes.
Will we threaten Iran with retaliation if they counter attack? I don’t think so.
Remember that we have over 100,000 US troops based in a majority Shiite country. Sorry to say this – but their lives are far more important to me than the existence of Israel, should Israel go vigilante.
And if Israel uses nukes on an attack on Iran … I say we step away, censure them, and offer refuge for any Israelis who want to flee the coming destruction of their nation.
You must log in to post a comment.