A report in Friday's New York Times suggests that Israel's
most senior officials believe that the Iranian threat
is nothing more than a bluff.
"Israeli intelligence estimates, backed by academic studies, have cast doubt on the widespread assumption that a military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities would set off a catastrophic set of events like a regional conflagration, widespread acts of terrorism and sky-high oil prices," the newspaper stated.
Related stories:
The report further noted that these estimates play an "important role in Israel’s calculation of whether ultimately to strike Iran,"
reporter Ethan Bronner claimed.
The article alleges that from conversations Bronner had with "eight current and recent top Israeli security officials" Israel will give the sanctions some months to work "since it has been demanding the new sanctions. A military attack remains a very real option; and post attack situations are considered less perilous than one in which Iran has nuclear weapons."
The article quotes two of the Israeli officials and presents soon-to-be published research carried out by the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University and which argues that the Iranian threat to close the Strait of Hormuz is largely a bluff.
A separate paper just published by the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies says that the fear of missile warfare against Israel is exaggerated since the missiles would be able to inflict only limited physical damage.
These conclusions are compatible with statements made by Defense Minister Ehud Barak who recently said that Israel would be capable of withstanding an Iranian military response.
RSS
