The enemy's army Chief of staff "Benny Gantz" held a series of interviews in which he spoke of the "Israeli" vision of the Iranian threat and the options of Jewish entity, along with several issues and challenges it's facing.
In the beginning it should be noted that these meetings were held on the occasion of anniversary of the foundation of the so-called "State of Israel" on the land of Palestine in 1948, according to the Hebrew calendar, i.e. "Independence Day" in "Israeli" terminology.An expression that involves a lot of misinformation and thoughtful meaningful guidance . .. The title suggests that as if the Zionist Jews are the indigenous people who were subjected to the occupation and colonization, and managed in a historic moment to win independence. While in fact, they are the colonists, who came, settled and built their entity and power under the protection and support of the British occupation, which came out in coordination with the Zionists, after it completed its mission in providing all the elements to build "State" of the Zionists ...
It is obvious that these words " Independence Day" are selected with great indulgence, so as other concepts of normalization backgrounds and objectives, which trapped many parties, movements and personalities ...
On the other hand, "Gantz" said that Iran does not constitute in its current state an actual existential threat to the Jewish entity, but "it might pose an existential threat" in the future.
Yet it is evident that Iran, including the nuclear part of it, would not have posed a potential existential threat, if it had not been opposing the foundation of the usurping entity. Otherwise, Pakistan is an Islamic country with nuclear weapons, and "Israel" doesn't classify it as a threatening state to its existence, as there are other countries that possess nuclear weapons which the Jewish state considers non-threatening.
Responding to this issue, Gantz indicated that "Israel" is the only state in the world which has been threatened with destruction and elimination by others", in reference to Iran and its allies.
Although Gantz agreed to consider year 2012 a "decisive year" regarding the Iranian nuclear issue, yet he kept the options open by saying "the crisis won't necessarily end on 31 December 2012". "We are in a period of time where a procedure must take place, either Iran decides to be nuclear for civil means, or the world, and us will have to do something about it, the negotiations are coming to end before we reach halfway", Gantz further clarified.
It was also remarkable that Gantz linked between the credibility of the military option threat and its deterrence capability, in the sense that Iran must take into consideration the possibility of applying this option or all the "Israeli" stances and threats will turn into meaningless words ..
Thus, Gantz stance proves that a major part of "Israel's" intimidation campaign including his positions, are deliberate steps aimed, exclusively at this stage and the previous ones, to keep the Iranian issue on top of the international community concerns, especially the United States. This concept intersects with what PM Netanyahu said that "exposing the Iranian threat is one way to confront it". Accordingly, Gantz said " we should exhaust all the possible means in order not to weaken the global concern focus on the Iranian nuclear project."
There is an argument that says that "Israel's" too-much public talk about the Iranian threat means it is unlikely to take some military actions against Iran in the foreseeable future, and this argument is proven to be true as time goes by.
Regarding the relationship with the Americans, Gantz tried to emphasize that "Israel's" abstinence from attacking Iran was not due to US pressure. In order to show "Israel's" independence in decision-making regarding Iran, he said that the issue is not like "I am asking for something and it's stopping me".
He later referred to the partnership between "Israel" and the US, and said that the debate is going on within the range of interests and mutual relationships. These considerations constitute quite some restrictions, for the partner is obliged to take into consideration the interests and opinions of his partners, especially when it is between a superpower like the US and a territorial state surrounded by hostile environment heading towards worse risks .. Then the need for the senior partner increases.
Gantz also meant that "Israel's" isolation in the past years during which Iran was capable of reaching high levels, was only due to "Israel's" loss and profit accounts only, which shows and proves the power of deterrence the Islamic Republic enjoys with its allies. The proof is that "Israel" refrained for one reason only: the equation of costs and viability.
In the same context, Gantz repeated the vision that seems to be strongly present at all the parties of the "Israeli" military and political parties, regarding the divergent positions of Washington and Tel Aviv. According to him, Washington has a greater ability to cope with a certain kind of risks, while Tel Aviv cannot, "who thinks of strategic and self-interest concepts, differs from that who lives in a battlefield with a civil Home Front with the concept of "to be or not to be".
Source: Hebrew sources, translated and edited by moqawama.org
River to Sea
Uprooted Palestinian 
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!
No comments:
Post a Comment