To Attack or Not to Attack: Israel Confronts a Dramatic Decision
In the heat of the public discussion on the possibility of an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stressed that he has not yet decided whether to attack Iran. At the same time, partly in response to opponents of such an attack, he made it clear that the risk of harm to the home front at this point, when Iran still does not have nuclear weapons, is dwarfed by the risks involved in an attack on Israel after Iran has gone nuclear.
Against this background, inter alia, the feverish activity in recent weeks by Netanyahu, his supporters, and the prime minister’s bureau to convince those who are sitting on the fence or have reservations about the possibility of an attack on Iran to change their position, is especially noteworthy. In this context, it was announced that the Prime Minister had succeeded in persuading Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman to join the supporters of an attack on Iran. In addition, the Prime Minister’s bureau has undertaken an intensive media campaign against President Shimon Peres, who has spoken out against an Israeli attack on Iran. The appointment of Kadima member Avi Dichter, who is known to support an attack on Iran, as minister of Home front defense, is also connected to this issue.
Undoubtedly, the Iranian issue presents Israeli decision makers, and in particular, Prime Minister Netanyahu, with a magnitude of fateful decisions. We believe that the public discussion of this issue is positive in and of itself in a democratic society like Israel. Nevertheless, it is likely to cause damage to the country if it spills over into detailed information about operational issues, and especially, if Israel’s capabilities and limitations vis-à-vis Iran are discussed. As long as it remains on the political level and does not get into details of limitations and capabilities, it must be conducted within a serious framework for discussion, professional and politically impartial. Within this framework, it is legitimate for there to be disagreements. Below we will attempt to examine the main questions the Prime Minister will seek to answer when he decides about an attack on Iran.
Available in:
Regions and themes
ISBN / ISSN
Share
Download the full analysis
This page contains only a summary of our work. If you would like to have access to all the information from our research on the subject, you can download the full version in PDF format.
To Attack or Not to Attack: Israel Confronts a Dramatic Decision
Related centers and programs
Discover our other research centers and programsFind out more
Discover all our analysesIs the Republican People’s Party (CHP) Rising from the Ashes?
The victory of the CHP [Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi, Republican People’s Party] in the Turkish municipal elections of March 2024 firmly established it as the leading party of opposition to the Islamic-conservative AKP [Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi, Justice and Development Party], which has been in power since 2002.
Israel-Palestine: One Solution, Two States
First proposed in 1936, the two-state solution has got lost over the course of several Israeli-Arab wars, colonization, the failure of the Oslo Accords, and the strategies of Israeli governments seeking rapprochement with certain Arab regimes. But it is currently the only imaginable solution. The numerous obstacles in its path could be overcome if the United States and its allies decided to impose it on the Israelis and Palestinians in opposition to their short-term visions.
"A Capital City Will Always Be a Capital City”: Konya’s Rise Under the AKP’s Rule
While the May 2023 parliamentary and presidential elections looked as a difficult test for the flagging Islamo-conservative Justice and Development Party (AKP), they eventually held on to power, demonstrating their remarkable foothold in the Turkish context. The party notably recorded one of its highest scores in Konya, confirming the massive and uninterrupted support of this two-million inhabitants central Anatolian city for Turkish political Islam.
Thirty Years on from the Oslo Accords: An Israeli Perspective
The Oslo agreements signed in 1993 raised high hopes for peace in the Middle East. But appraising the state of affairs, thirty years on, the picture is bleak.