Many people have begun to believe that military action between Iran and Israel is inevitable. This attitude is regrettable when one considers the number of very good reasons not to initiate a preventive strike on Iran. Fortunately, Israel and the United States are democratic nations and cannot go to war without some sort of approval of their citizens. The people have a say in the matter, and if they see the facts, only one path is clear: They must demand continued diplomacy and no war with Iran.
First, the opposing case. Those advocates of war in Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu's right-wing Likud party, and their sympathizers in the United States, have declared that Iran is seeking nuclear weapons which they will not hesitate to use to destroy Israel and the Jewish people. The Iranian leadership has committed themselves to killing Jews and in the past said that Israel should be "wiped off the map," obviously a task made easier with nukes. A more technical case against Iranian nukes warns of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East and the risk of communications failures which could cause the weapons to be used. Those arguments can be more calmly discussed than the popular ones which hinge on Iran holding an eliminationist agenda against Israel.
To address the first case, one must point out it is based on exaggeration and factual sloppiness. While Iran is no friend to Israel, the old "wiped off the map" trope has been identified by The Washington Post's fact-checkers as an over-the-top translation and has been "blithely repeated" to fit any speech where one must seem tough on Iran.
Iran has the largest Jewish population of any Muslim-majority nation, recognizes them as a protected religious minority and designates one seat in its Parliament especially for a Jewish representative. This is not a perfect or even fair social arrangement - such is theocracy - but if Iranians wanted to wipe out Jewish people, which is presumably closely tied with destroying the Jewish state, would not Persians Jews have taken notice by now? Thousands of Persian Jews have immigrated to Israel or elsewhere since Iran's 1979 Revolution, so they have not exactly been trapped in by a hostile regime. It would take some spectacular logical acrobatics to say Iran still seeks the death of all Jews. There is an undeniable anti-Zionist strain in Tehran, but this does not translate to genocidal intentions.
Next, and more practically, there is no solid evidence that Iran wants to acquire a nuclear weapon. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reports this week that the CIA and Mossad, Israel's top intelligence agency, both agree that Iran has not yet decided to build a nuclear weapon. Well, President Obama has committed to making sure Iran does not possess a nuclear weapon, much to the dismay of the pro-war factions which wish to prevent Iran even nuclear capability. Obama does this not out of purely electoral concerns - because in that case, he might be better off agreeing with his hard-line Republican opponents - but with the benefit of intelligence from his military advisors.
Generally speaking, the people who know the evidence know that war is not the answer at this time. Nobody could know more than Meir Dagan, the recently retired head of Mossad. While some advocates for preventive war naively believe any conflict to be over quickly and assure peace for a long time, Dagan expects otherwise.
Dagan said on 60 Minutes that initiating a conflict with Iran "will [have] a devastating impact on our ability to continue with our daily life. I think that Israel will be in a very serious situation for quite a time." Far from a dove, Dagan orchestrated multiple covert operations against Iran to set back its nuclear program. Yet even he can tell that an open conflict would take a massive toll on all parties involved. The conservative "pro-Israel" war cheerleaders are insisting on taking an action which will disrupt daily life in Israel, possibly for years to come, to defeat a threat our intelligence agencies believe is not yet in motion. It makes one ask, in what way are these people actually pro-Israel?
Dagan, like U.S. General Martin Dempsey, views Iran as a "rational actor," meaning it would not use a nuke if such a move would be suicidal. Rational actors, though they may have differing goals, are ultimately open to negotiation.
A military strike in the region, the Pentagon expects, would open up a wider regional war. Such an event would, if anything, only increase Iranian resolve to possess nukes. The consequences of nuclear proliferation are worth avoiding, and looking at our choices, diplomacy seems to be the best way to keep it from happening.
The elected leaders of Israel and the United States must rationally assess the costs and benefits of a conflict with Iran without giving into the hysterical calls for confrontation. People everywhere, but especially the two democracies concerned, must cry out for peace. A few Israelis have initiated an online campaign, with a blog named "Israel loves Iran," expressing their desire for peace, and some Iranians have returned the sentiment. Now it is up to the Americans to demand that we do not rush into conflict. This can be difficult in the United States, where failure to support the pro-war, "pro-Israel" forces can get one wrongly branded as "anti-Israel." Americans, then, must allow the facts to speak for themselves and show that pursuing negotiations and diplomacy, not an ill-conceived act of aggression, is what is truly in the interests of the people of Iran, the United States and Israel.
Sam Carrigan's column appears Wednesdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at s.carrigan@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
ELJAZZAR: Advising changes are a step toward student success
By Farah Eljazzar | YesterdayWith the long history of student complaints regarding advising in the College, it is commendable that the University administration is committed to responding to student concerns and prioritizing student academic well-being.
BRUNMAN: Stop ghosting us, Governor Youngkin
By Wylie Brunman | 3 days agoFor the sake of students — and the Governor — his state administration should rethink its stance on this meeting and its approach to interacting with students more broadly.
EDITORIAL: End the Batten Curve
By Editorial Board | 6 days agoThe Batten School must allow professors to design grading systems tailored to the needs of their own students.
