War Gaming sez: In Tehran's view, Israel no longer poses a threat

If you've ever thought war gaming was a stupid waste of time, you better read this

GERTZ:
Iran was believed to have dismissed Israel as a military threat.

A simulation at Israel's leading strategic institute re-enacted a crisis over Iran's nuclear program in which an Israeli military option failed to deter Teheran. The exercise by the Institute for National Security Studies envisioned Iran as overcoming U.S. opposition and Israeli military threats as Teheran proceeded with its nuclear program.

"The Iranians (simulations teams) estimated that because of internal and international considerations [U.S. President Barack] Obama would not dare launch a military attack on Iran's nuclear installations," INSS said in a report on the simulation. "Nor in their view did Israel pose a real threat."

If limited to air strikes, I concur completely

The report, titled "U.S.-Iran Negotiations: Simulation Exercise at INSS," did not focus on a Western or Israeli military option against Iran. Instead, the scenarios were limited to Iranian-U.S. negotiations to end Teheran's uranium enrichment program.

INSS organized teams meant to represent Iran, Israel and the United States. At one point, an explosion was reported at Iran's Arak heavy water production plant, for which Israel was blamed.

The report said the Iranian team demonstrated superiority over U.S. negotiators. INSS said Teheran regarded U.S. President Barack Obama as weak and indecisive.

Israel was also seen as vacillating. The simulation showed an Israeli team that could not form a firm position on Iran even while pressing Washington to pursue a military option.

"Israel became a perceptible burden on the United States in the sense that its threats of military action demanded that the United States devote energy to neutralize this possibility," the report on the simulation said. "Conversely, the lack of credibility of these threats in U.S. eyes meant they could not be used by the United States as a possible 'stick' in its negotiations with Iran."

Organizers of the simulation said Obama must improve his negotiating strategy with Iran. But INSS did not rule out the prospect that Obama was simply not serious in stopping Iran's nuclear program.

"At the same time, perhaps he [Obama] is simply not serious enough about arriving at a negotiated outcome," the report said. "It is up to Israeli decision makers to assess which alternative is most likely, and on that basis develop Israel's own approach."

Lifted directly from the report:

Regarding Iran, its main strength is that it has a clearly defined ultimate aim: obtaining nuclear weapons capability. This aim guides its tactics in confronting the international community. In contrast, while in general terms the US as well as Israel wants to stop Iran from becoming a nuclear state, it lacks well-defined aims and consolidated strategies for dealing with the Iranian nuclear issue. What we observed is that this situation played to Iran's advantage, allowing it to determine to a large degree the pace and even the content of the talks. It used tactics of playing for time and flooding the US with vast amounts of irrelevant information to delay substantive discussion. Iran was also minded to form international coalitions and acquire allies, and demonstrated much flexibility to changing situations.

The Iranians felt superior and displayed this edge towards the Americans in the negotiations game. The US in general and President Obama in particular was perceived as weak. The Iranians estimated that because of internal and international considerations Obama would not dare launch a military attack on Iran's nuclear installations. Nor in their view did Israel pose a real threat. And overall, it was emphasized through the Iranian team in the simulation that Iran saw no way that it could be forced to suspend its ongoing uranium enrichment project unless the regime itself was put in danger. In this context, it was apparent that a military attack on Iran that is not preceded by an intensive campaign to sway world public opinion could cause severe harm to Israel and/or to the US, immunize Iran against further attacks, and generally strengthen Tehran's position.

Any of this surprising in the least? Sound familiar?

I have been saying for years for Israel to be successful regarding Iranian nukes, it is COMPULSORY to go all the way. GAME CHANGER. If they do not, they WILL FACE a regional nuclear war later.

That's all there is.

If I were Netanyahu I don't know if I could launch such an attack, but what I would do is launch a public frank discussion of the choices. And I would ignore the Iranian bluster in return.

An Israel publicly talking about the potential need for a compulsory massive attack with all weapons required for removal of the mullahcracy, and IRGC along with destruction of the nuclear program, in order to avoid a second Holocaust, MIGHT sober up the people of Iran as well.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Russia: No agreement on Iran sanctions (msnbc.msn.com)
• Powers meet on Iran's nuclear program, no agreement (ctv.ca)
• Middle East atomic conflict would kill tens of millions: report (nationalpost.com)
• Iran's second uranium enrichment plant may have made Israeli strike less likely (telegraph.co.uk)
• 5 more fresh articles...