Iran and the ‘Bomber Boys’

August 11, 2010

By Steve Clemons

Goldberg's piece makes it clear that Israel's national leadership, while not in complete consensus on a strike, is nonetheless dominated by those who believe that the Israeli narrative as a nation, as a ‘safe haven’ and refuge of first resort for Jews from around the world, will be undermined if Iran's nuclear programme is not confronted and rolled back. There’s widespread consensus in Israel that Iran having a nuclear weapon comes as close to repeating the conditions of a shoah, or Holocaust, as Nazi Germany.

But Israel is less and less, if at all, a refuge of first resort today—even without a war with Iran. Russian Jews are increasingly trying to go to Germany instead of Israel, and the ongoing tensions over the unresolved situation with Palestine and the fear of rockets or terrorism keep the nation on edge.

When I first learned a couple of months ago that Jeffrey Goldberg was going to be writing this piece on ‘whither an Israeli strike,’ I thought it would lay out a more compelling logic to bombing than he does in this article. Goldberg hasn’t undertaken advocacy journalism in this essay—rather, he has given us a snapshot of attitudes, postures, and his gut sense of probabilities while at the same time not pulling punches on what the dire costs could be.

Reading his essay a second, and then a third time, I sense that Israel's and America's leadership won't be ‘bombing boys’ but rather will act like them until a ‘third option’ to bombing or appeasement appears. That third option could be provided by Iran's Supreme Leader himself, or could be normalization between Israel and the Arab Middle East, or something else.

But it seems to me just as likely, if not more so, that real leadership in this showdown will be exhibited by those who demonstrate strategic restraint and generate possibilities not seen at the moment.

When Eisenhower reigned in John Foster Dulles and Curtis LeMay and forged a containment strategy of the USSR, he used their flamboyant desire to engage in war as part of his tool kit.

Both Obama and Netanyahu would be wise to do the same and to think through ways to halt the dysfunctional, paranoiac escalation between Iran and Israel. What Jeffrey Goldberg has put out for us is an early treatment of what may be Barack Obama's ‘Cuban Missile Crisis’ moment—in which tensions are high, in which many in the room on all sides are engaged in extreme brinkmanship, and in which disaster looms for all parties.

We don't know what the outcome will be—but my gut instinct pulls a different direction than Goldberg's. I think based on the interviews he has shared with all parties that more rational heads will prevail in finding a way to contain or redirect Iran's course.

Otherwise, as in a simple game theory exercise, both Israel and the United States may end up in the box of very worst outcomes with none of their basic strategic objectives achieved.

This is an abridged version of a longer article published on The Washington Note, a popular Washington-based blog written by Steve Clemons. Clemons is editor-at-large of Talking Points Memo and also directs the American Strategy Program of the New America Foundation, a centrist think tank.