---
Most of the 40 minutes that Bush devoted to this one-on-one talk with Olmert were taken up by Iran. It's not clear what was said and what caused Olmert to emerge pleased, "even more so than from previous meetings." In his speech the next day in Los Angeles, Olmert raised the public anxiety level: "We have reached the pivotal moment of truth regarding Iran. It would be an unbearable sin to future generations to allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons."
A senior political advisor to the Republican Party who has criss-crossed America in his clients' Congressional election campaigns, estimated this week that the chances of an American attack have dropped to zero. This, in his opinion, is the implication of the Democrats' victory last week. The public does not want to hear about a new military adventure. Only a large terror attack in the United States, or some other shocking event that can be connected to Iran, would make it possible to enlist public opinion for new hostilities. Ambassador Ayalon disagreed with this assessment this week. He believes that Bush will stop Iran, even by force. A good assessment of the president's intentions, but not necessarily of his ability to realize them.
One can guess that this is the message that Olmert received from Bush: I share your anxiety about the Iranian threat, but America is not able and does not want to act alone. In his speech, the prime minister said that Bush's determination "to prevent this most serious of developments is unquestionable. But America must have the support of the international community." In other words, the president told him that his hands are tied, that without the Europeans and the Russians it is impossible to do anything. The chance that they will take to the task of destroying the Iranian atomic installations looks like zero at the moment. No wonder Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad boasted this week of the approaching completion of the atomic program.
The significance of this is that the Israeli leadership will soon be facing a difficult dilemma: whether to gamble on a military action against Iran, the operational possibility of which is not clear, or to accustom the public gradually to life in the shadow of the bomb. The politicians' rhetoric is pushing for a confrontation. But strategic experts in Israel and in the United States are warning against this.
Haaretz
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
