Last week in the White House, President Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reaffirmed their mutual commitment to preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. For the first time, President Obama stated that American policy toward Iran is not “containment” but aims instead to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran altogether.
The leaders disagreed, however, on what line Iran would have to cross before the allies would resort to military force. As long as this gap in America and Israel’s mobilization schedules exists, Israel should feel reassured of America’s support for its right to defend itself.
America reserves the right to independently determine the terms of its military engagements. We should respect Israel’s right to the same.
To be certain, the Iranian regime is hurting from international sanctions. Iran’s economy is collapsing. Since last year, Iran’s currency, the rial, has lost 71 percent of its value against the American dollar.
By midsummer, the European Union will no longer import Iranian oil as China, Japan and South Korea have also taken steps to reduce Iranian oil imports. America has imposed serious sanctions on Iran’s financial institutions and central bank.
President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu are wise in giving sanctions more time to work. Iran’s reaction thus far, however, raises reasonable doubts about whether its leaders can be trusted to negotiate as “rational actors.”
In recent months, Iran has continued to mislead the world in the following ways: It has denied International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors access to its nuclear facilities, lied about its enrichment of uranium for “medical research,” plotted to assassinate Saudi ambassador to the United States Adel Al-Jubeir in a cafe in Washington D.C., and threatened to close the Straits of Hormuz, choking off 20 percent of the world’s oil supply.
This behavior follows a history of Iranian actions that cannot be explained by reasonable policy objectives. In the 1980s, for example, Iran escalated a border skirmish with Iraq into one of the most brutal wars since World War II.
The regime sponsors terrorist organizations through its proxies like Hamas and Hezbollah and was notably involved in the 1992 terrorist attack on Israel’s embassy in Buenos Aires, the 1983 terrorist attack on 241 American servicemen in Lebanon and the 1996 killing of 19 servicemen in the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, among many others.
The brutal crackdown on its own citizens during the 2009 presidential elections, its shutting down of oppositional newspapers and access to social media, as well as vehement unapologetic denial of the Holocaust and statements that Israel should be “wiped off the map,” show Iran’s irrationality is real.
The amount of time Iran needs to acquire a nuclear weapon is a question of fact over which allies can reasonably differ. The threat posed to the international community is grave as a nuclear-armed Iran would embolden Iran’s terrorist agents, instigate a regional nuclear arms race and shift the balance of power in Iran’s direction and allow the country to blackmail the world.
The threat posed to Israel is real as Israel would be condemned to a permanent state of emergency and subject to annihilation by an Iranian strike.
Though Israel cannot bind America to military engagement, America should honor Israel’s right to unilaterally defend itself in multiple concrete ways.
This recognition entails rigorous American support at the U.N. Security Council and logistical support for the Israel Defense Force. It means America will not condition aid to Israel on Israeli adherence to the U.S. mobilization schedule.
American and Israeli policy are one and the same. The U.S.-Israeli alliance should not come apart over a question of timing.
Dan DiMatteo is a second-year law student at UF.
