Attacking nuke sites may only slow progress / Experts note uncertainty of locations, possibility of retaliation (WASHINGTON TIMES) By Kristina Wong 02/28/12)
WASHINGTON TIMES Articles-Index-Top
Former high-ranking defense officials and regional experts say that
neither the U.S. nor Israel can stop Iran from producing a nuclear
The assessments counter remarks by Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta,
who has said the U.S. will not allow Iran to develop an atomic bomb,
and come amid reports that Israeli leaders are considering a military
strike on the Islamic republic’s nuclear sites.
Destroying nuclear facilities in a military strike does
not “uninvent” the technology, retired Marine CorpsGen. James
Cartwright said Monday in an interview. “The intellectual capital
“We could certainly bomb the place, but we don’t know where
everything is with any kind of certainty,” added Gen. Cartwright, who
retired as vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in August.
Natan Sachs, an expert on Israeli national security matters at the
Brookings Institution, said it would be very difficult for Israel to
stop a nuclear weapons program with a unilateral military action,
noting that Iran’s atomic installations are heavily fortified and
scattered around the country.
An attack on Iranian sites would be more complicated than Israel’s
strikes on nuclear sites in Iraq and Syria, he said. Syria´s facility
was in the very early stages of being built, and Iraq’s facility was
above ground and within the capability of the Israeli air force.
Mr. Sachs said an Israeli strike on Iran would require a synchronized
attack by more than 100 fighter jets carrying heavy bombs and
refueling over hostile territory, because a single bunker-busting
bomb would not be enough to penetrate and destroy Iran’s underground
facilities. “It is not a one-shot thing,” he said.
But Ehud Eilam, a former instructor for the Israeli Defense Forces,
said a strike on Iran could postpone its program by two to five
years, during which time international sanctions on the Islamic
republic could work. He said Israel could opt to strike every fours
year to further delay the nuclear program.
“It’s not the recommended option, but there is no good option,” he
said. “You take what you can get.”
Western nations and Israel have long suspected Iran of trying to
build an atomic bomb, and the U.S. and European Union have imposed
economic sanctions on Iran to change its leaders’ actions. Iran
repeatedly has said its nuclear program is aimed at peaceful,
An Israeli attack likely would occur at night with little warning to
the U.S. and sometime after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
and Defense Minister Ehud Barak visit Washington next week, Mr. Eliam
said. “You might just wake up two months or a few weeks from now and
hear that Israel has attacked Iran.”
Mr. Sachs said any initial strike by Israel could trigger retaliatory
rocket attacks by Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad
and possibly Hamas in the Gaza Strip, and Iran. The U.S. could be
dragged into the fray if it appears that Israel could not defend
itself against the retaliation, he said.
Gen. Cartwright said an attack could be counterproductive and
persuade more Iranians to support their country’s nuclear
program. “You do more damage because you convince more people that
they have to have it. It becomes a shield,” he said.
Reza Marashi, director of research for the National Iranian American
Council, said Gen. Cartwright’s comments join a chorus of high-
ranking former and current military officials who have come out
recently against a military strike on Iran.
Mr. Marashi said he believes they are laying the groundwork for Mr.
Obama to push back against Israel. “It’s not a coincidence that
they’re all saying the same thing at the same time,” said Mr.
Marashi, a former State Department official. (© 2012 The Washington
Times, LLC. 02/28/12)
Return to Top
MATERIAL REPRODUCED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY