Gulf states hope for US action on Iran (ISRAEL HAYOM OP-ED) Yoram Ettinger 06/24/12)
Israel Hayom Articles-Index-Top
A nuclear Iran would be a clear and present threat to pro-U.S.
regimes in Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf, and would lead to a
regional and global slippery slope of violence that would severely
undermine the U.S. economy and national security.
A top official from Bahrain told me, at the office of a senior member
of the U.S. House of Representatives Armed Services Committee,
that “Saudi Arabia and Bahrain expect the U.S. to alter its policy
and resort to steps which are required to remove the Iranian nuclear
threat.” A national security adviser to a senior member of the U.S.
Senate Armed Services Committee shared with me that “Pro-U.S. Persian
Gulf leaders are panicky about the rising Iranian nuclear threat.”
Saudi Arabia and the Gulf regimes, which are considered apostates by
Teheran’s ayatollahs, are aware that, unlike nuclear Pakistan and
North Korea, Iran’s leaders have imperialistic, megalomaniac
aspirations to dominate the Persian Gulf, the Middle East and, at the
very least, the entire Muslim world.
The Gulf states realize that “effective sanctions” is a contradiction
in terms, since Russia and China, as well as India and Japan, and
probably parts of Europe, do not cooperate with the U.S. Forty years
of diplomacy and sanctions have paved the road to a nuclear North
Korea and are paving the road to a nuclear Iran.
Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states presume that the current
multilateral policy on Iran leads to a lethal slippery slope,
featuring a belligerent nuclear Iran, a meltdown of pro-U.S. Gulf
regimes, a breakdown of the oil supply system, a collapse of global
economies, an escalation of nuclear proliferation in the Middle Eat
and beyond, a radicalization of Islamic terrorism against traditional
Muslim regimes and Western democracies, and an eruption of local,
regional and possibly global wars, or, a submission by pro-U.S. Gulf
regimes and Western democracies to Iranian demands.
The Gulf states are convinced that a unilateral U.S. policy is
required to prevent the slippery slope. They want massive military
pre-emptive action to devastate Iran’s nuclear, air defense and
missiles infrastructures, minimize Iran’s retaliatory capabilities,
and preclude the calamitous ripple effects of a nuclear Iran.
The Gulf states are concerned that avoiding pre-emptive action would
further erode the U.S. posture of deterrence and military power
projection that constitutes the backbone of their national security,
would fuel fanaticism on the Arab street, and would doom pro-U.S.
Saudi and Gulf regimes.
They assume that a decisive pre-emptive military strike – with no
ground troops – is a prerequisite to a regime change in Iran, which
failed in 2009 due to Western vacillation. One cannot expect the
domestic opposition to defy the ayatollahs while the U.S. and Israel
refrain from defiance.
In 1978 and 2011, the U.S. deserted the shah of Iran and Egyptian
President Hosni Mubarak respectively, facilitating anti-U.S. regime
change. In 2012, pre-emptive military action would expose the
vulnerability of the ayatollahs, providing a significant tailwind to
a pro-U.S. regime change.
During the 1960s, the U.S. failed in its attempt to appease then
Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser and snatch him from the Soviet
bloc. It was the 1967 Six Day War, and not U.S. diplomacy, which
devastated Nasser and aborted his efforts to topple the pro-U.S.
regimes in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf.
In 2012, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states expect the U.S. to recoup
its posture of deterrence and avoid past critical errors which have
jeopardized their survival and have advanced the nuclearization of
North Korea and Iran.
Will the U.S. fulfill such expectations by altering its policy? Or
will it sustain the failed policy of sanctions and diplomacy, which
will force Israel to take pre-emptive action to avert a clear and
present danger to global sanity?
Return to Top
MATERIAL REPRODUCED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY