Michele Kearney's Nuclear Wire - Major Energy and Environmental News and Commentary affecting the Nuclear Industry. Nuclear Activities
Thursday, October 17, 2024
Wednesday, October 16, 2024
Will a Nato nuclear drill really deter Putin? - UnHerd - Guest Post by Anatol Lieven
https://unherd.com/newsroom/will-a-nato-nuclear-drill-really-deter-putin/
Will a Nato nuclear drill really deter Putin?
By Anatol Lieven
October 16, 2024
On Monday, Nato kicked off its regular annual two-week nuclear drill, “Steadfast Noon”. It will include more than 60 aircraft from 13 countries and more than 2,000 personnel, in a bid to show the alliance’s preparedness.
In defence of the drill, Linas Linkevicius, the Lithuanian ambassador to Sweden, called it “a message to the greatest geopolitical maniac of the century.” He warned that Putin’s “nuclear bluff can and will have costs and consequences”.
If Putin really is a maniac who is ready to use nuclear force at a moment’s notice, why would a regular annual Nato drill deter him from escalation? And if on the other hand he is not a maniac and is just bluffing, then what “costs and consequences” can Nato inflict on Russia for its bluff? A drill certainly won’t inflict any.
Linkevicius’s comments provide a good illustration of the incessant tendency of Western diplomats to have their cake and eat it. Putin is simultaneously an irrational maniac who will cause a nuclear war at any moment and a leader who “bluffs” about responding harshly if certain Russian red lines are crossed. Putin is such a maniac that if not defeated in Ukraine he will go on to attack Nato and the Baltic states, probably causing a nuclear war. And yet he is such a feeble bluffer that he will not react if Nato sets out to defeat Russia in Ukraine. European diplomats can’t decide whether Putin will take action or not.
The truth is that there is only one scenario, other than a direct attack on or blockade of Russian territory, that would bring Russia to — or over — the brink of using a nuclear weapon: the prospect of outright defeat in Ukraine, which is unlikely.
As CIA Director William Burns has revealed, the only time that his agency was really worried about Kremlin nuclear escalation was in the autumn of 2022, when Russian forces had been driven out of Kharkiv and were in danger of being surrounded and crushed in Kherson. Really, though, Putin did not escalate but ordered a tactical retreat from Kherson.
Since then, however, Russia has fought Ukrainian offensives to a standstill, and is pushing forward — albeit slowly and with heavy casualties — in eastern Ukraine. There is a risk that the Ukrainian front will at some point break completely. In this event, a panicked West might decide to send troops or planes to Ukraine, triggering a direct war with Russia. It is this eventuality that Russian nuclear sabre-rattling is meant to deter.
It is true that in 2023 there was a public debate in Russia on the preventive use of nuclear weapons in a first strike. However, the proponents of this position have been roundly condemned by a majority of the Russian establishment, and Putin himself rejected the notion. “It is certainly theoretically possible to use nuclear weapons this way,” he said last year. But failing a serious threat to the existence of the Russian state, “we see no need to use it.”
This is not wholly dissimilar to the debate in the West. Certain elements have advocated Western troops for Ukraine, or a Nato “no-fly zone” over Ukraine. In other words, some argue that Nato should serve as Ukraine’s de facto infantry and air force, but the Biden administration and most of the alliance’s member states have categorically rejected this suggestion.
No doubt, this week’s Nato drill comes at a time of heightened tension, when Putin has been publicly mulling over Russia’s nuclear policy. But both the West and Russia recognise that escalation towards a real danger of nuclear war would be an act of unspeakable folly, and that, in Ronald Reagan’s words, a nuclear war “cannot be won and must never be fought”. All the same, it would be a good idea if some Western officials remembered that diplomats are supposed to be diplomatic, and that brainless, genetically-programmed tweeting should be strictly for the birds.
Anatol Lieven is a former war correspondent and Director of the Eurasia Program at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft in Washington DC.
Tuesday, October 15, 2024
Monday, October 14, 2024
Sunday, October 13, 2024
Saturday, October 12, 2024
Friday, October 11, 2024
[Salon] WHY ISRAEL IS GOING TO BOMB IRAN'S NUCLEAR FACILITIES - Guest Post by Graham Fuller
WHY ISRAEL IS GOING TO BOMB IRAN'S NUCLEAR FACILITIES
Graham E Fuller
12 October 2024
The chances are high that Israel is going to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities in the very near future. The rationale is extensive and compelling.
1- Because Israel can. The Israeli military possesses all the necessary aircraft and weaponry to attack and largely obliterate Iranian nuclear facilities.
2- Because no one can or will stop Israel from carrying out such an operation. Biden claims that he is opposed to any such step by Israel, but such claims are scarcely credible when the US has consistently backed Israel's genocidal policies against Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank, and broad civilian targets in Lebanon. No one will believe that Washington is not giving Israel the wink to go ahead via back channels. In point of fact, it would be nearly impossible for Washington to stop any such Israeli operation short of Requiring the disavowal of Israel's entire strategic game In the region up to now – which Washington has not done and will not do.
Does anyone really believe that once Israel has carried out the destruction of Iranian nuclear facilities that Washington would then move to punish Israel for or its act?
Such a proposition is laughable. Whatever Washington's public statements might be it is eminently clear that the entire Washington foreign policy establishment would privately applaud such an action by Israel, as will virtually every member of the US Congress, Israel would clearly be able to "get away with" any such action and indeed gain much private support in the US and even parts of Europe.
3- Such a military act is entirely consistent with Netanyahu's performance up-to-date. Although he has not actually uttered the words, to anyone following Natania's lifelong career it is clear that he sees this moment of conflict in the Middle East as a culmination of everything he has worked for. No, not regional peace, but for final total Israeli domination of the entire region.
Netanyahu surely knows that he has alienated large numbers of people in the west, including considerable number of Jews who condemn him for his blood thirsty acts of ethnic cleansing among Palestinians within Israel. Netanyahu is clearly prepared to take the hit, but he also has a clear eye on the history books. While many liberals in the West may condemn his policies, he is confident tat in the long view of history, he will be viewed in Israeli history as the single most important Israeli leader in the history of the nation who brought to fruition the grand vision of a Greater Israel. And meanwhile, such act also keep him in power and out of jail.
4- while any geostrategic observer of the Middle East knows that "history never stops," it is now more abundantly clear than ever that the impulses of vengeance across Arab and other Muslim world in the Middle East will be on high boil for generations. Just think of the number of Gazans alone who have lost fathers, sons, babies, mothers, daughters, grandparents and other relatives under the unremitting Israeli onslaught. Hardly everyone will seek personal blood vengeance from Israeli or Jewish individuals, but if even one out of 10 Gazans will act out of revenge, that presents a formidable long-term terrorist threat, not just to Jews, but to the West and especially America that is so deeply complicit in the spilling of Muslim blood. And it goes without saying that while the number of genuine antisemites in the world may not be that many, their numbers are on the rise given the new "justification"of their anti-Semitic views through the horrors of the Middle East war. This will be a devastating long-term legacy of the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and their many sympathizers. Large numbers of Jews, who have little fondness for Bibi Netanyahu are vividly aware of this rise of spoken, and more importantly, unspoken new reservoir of anti-Semitic feeling.
5- by carrying out the destruction of Iranian nuclear facilities by Israel – not officially earmarked by Iran for military purposes – Iran will be for generations bitterly hostile against Israel. And it will certainly find such an attack by Israel to be the single most powerful argument for the continued need for Iran to develop Nuclear weapons – the only guarantee against future Israeli military attack.
6-Although Iran is economically deeply wounded by decades of American punishing sanctions against it, it is one of only two countries in the Middle East that truly matter in a geopolitical arena in the near future. Here Iran would certainly have to rank as number one. Whatever actions taken by Israel against Iran, Tehran will clearly be determined to rebuild it strategic strength. The second significant geopolitical power in the region is Turkey. Turkey has no love for Israel. And ironically, both Turkey and Iran, both of which possess some elements of democratic process within each of their states – have been more outspoken and supportive of the Palestinian cause than any Arab state in the region except for dirt-poor but gutsy Yemen.
7- Authoritarian Arab rulers may publicly wring their hands at Palestinian suffering, but they also deeply fear the Palestinians as representing one of the very few truly mass nationalistic movements in the entire Arab world. The last thing most Arab autocrats want to see is mass political movements emerging in their own countries with blood in their eyes which will lead to their own overthrow from power when not protected by Washington.
8- The same is not true of Arab public opinion itself, or "the Arab Street". Here there are strong pro-Palestinian sympathies who view them as the most prominent of the many victims of western colonial control in the Middle East over decades and centuries. When public opinion begins to be expressed in political action calling for voice in Arab foreign affairs, the Arab world will become a far more dangerous place for Israel – who can right now at least count on rich Gulfi rulers to keep the the emotional power of their own citizens under control. That indeed is a second reason why most Arab rulers fear and dislike the Iranian regime as well--no, not because Iranians are Shiite Muslims , but because Iran is virtually the only country in the Middle East that actually underwent a genuine mass revolution that brought down Americas "best friend in the Middle East", the Shah of Iran.
The current Iranian regime probably has limited numbers of strong supporters within the country. But Iranian nationalism is an exceptionally powerful force – and hass been so for hundreds of years. Even if many of its citizens dislike the clerical regime in Tehran, the destruction by Israel of its nuclear facilities wll be deeply resented as a massive assault against Iranian prestige, power, and dignity. One wonders what the half-life of such anti-Israeli feelings will be over the decades to come in Iran.
Of course, the ultimate absurdity is the idea that Iran, in a post Israeli strike – or even in a situation of collapse of the clerical regime – will suddenly change its colors, rush to embrace Washington, Israel and the west, and disavow any geopolitical role in the region. Indeed, there is no remote reason for believing that a successor regime to the present clerical rulers --probably military --will be any less nationalistic or adventuristic in its foreign policies.
In Netanyahu's thinking, now is probably the best time to strike Iran. The region is in shambles. There is no meaningful international voice being raised against Israel that can or will do anything. Biden and hi
neutered secretary of state Blinken – also known as "Bibi's lawyer" – will only nominally wring their hands at the growing regional instability In which Washington is becoming an evermore irrelevant geopolitical player.
Question: Will Netanyahu decide to strike before, or after the important BRICS Summit coming up in Kazan' Russia in two weeks time? Increasing Israeli military attacks against Muslim countries and societies will be keenly noted in Kazan', especially since large numbers of other BRiCS States also are Muslim and fairly firmly rooted in the growing concept of "the Gobal South."
If Natanyahu strikes Iran before the meeting in Kazan', with Russia and China in attendance such an attack on Iran will have huge impact on the attendees – perhaps precisely what Israel seeks to ensure – that the "Global South" not forget its military weak stance in the world. Perhaps delivering that lesson to a group of states who have no love for Israel in any case– seeing it as a tool of western neo colonial power. –The message of intimidation to them is far more important than any flack against the Israeli state. Washington would largely cheer such a smack down by Israel against the BRICS grouping. On the other hand, if Netanyahu waits until the BRICS summit has passed, the backlash will be less immediate, although certainly will still have longer standing duration.
Either way, this presages a powerful new move towards a new and more durable formation of two Geo political blocks – the declining West, in denial about its own decline, and the emergence of the new powerful political and economic group of the BRICS Which Washington unwisely now seems to perceive as a hostile group. Truly, a self fulfilling prophecy.
If the BRICS grouping is drawn into deeper engagement in the Middle East geopolitical struggle, it will certainly be ever more deeply committed to an anti-Israeli anti-neo colonial anti-western policy. And that will suit Moscow and Beijing just fine – the chief authors of this new international grouping of rising importance.
In short, I believe that the factors pushing Netanyahu to an early attack on Iranian nuclear facilities are greater than ever before. And although Washington supposedly does not want to be drawn into yet another war in the Middle East, if war breaks out between Israel and Iran, you can be sure that Washington will be in the thick of it– Just like Bibi wants it.
Graham E Fuller is a former vice chair of the national intelligence Council at the CIA responsible for long-term global strategic forecasting. He served as an intellence operations officer across much of the Middle East.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)