A FEW, FAR TOO FEW, ADVENTURERS AND HAMAS-LOVERS IN THE ........EAST????
Opinion | An Annihilation Discourse Has Taken Over Israel
Calls for Israel to launch a nuclear attack on Iran by historian Benny Morris and many others, including those on the left, is the continuation of a strategy of vengeance that would destroy everything. We must take to the streets and protest, while we still can
Share in Facebook
Share in Twitter
Share in WhatsApp
Send in e-mailSend in e-mail
Gift this article
SaveSave article to reading list
Zen Read
Print article
Open gallery view
A Palestinian woman holding the body of her daughter, killed in an Israeli airstrike in the Maghazi refugee camp, in Gaza last month.Credit: Abdel Kareem Hana/AP
Adam Raz
Get email notification for articles from Adam RazFollow
Jul 2, 2024
For years, Israeli historian Benny Morris has been warning about Iran going nuclear.
In September 2021, he wrote in Haaretz: "Time is pressing. The moment Israel must decide between launching a preventive strike and coming to terms with a nuclear Iran and living in its shadow is very near."
-
In October 2023, at the beginning of the Israeli maneuvers in Gaza, he wrote: "The timing will never be better [to attack] than it is now," and it's "the only way remaining."
And now he has stated that if Israel can't attack the Iranian nuclear project through conventional means, "then it may not have any option but to resort to its nonconventional capabilities" (Haaretz English, July 1).
In a 2008 article in The New York Times, he proposed an Israeli nuclear attack because "the alternative is letting Tehran have its bomb." At the time, he acknowledged that "in either case, a Middle Eastern nuclear holocaust would be in the cards."
Open gallery view
Observers on the bridge of the USS Mt. McKinley watching a huge cloud mushroom over Bikini Atoll in the Marshall Islands following an atomic test blast, July 1946.Credit: Jack Rice / AP
Morris didn't say how the use of nuclear weapons would eliminate the Iranian project, but since he doesn't relate to such "trivialities," there is no need to deal with his proposal. It's also unclear why he determined that "Israel can expect reprimands from the international media, the ignorant and mindless youngsters on the campuses and assorted world leaders, but it will also enjoy significant understanding if not active support from many in the international community."
Would breaking the most important international taboo, against the use of nuclear weapons – which hasn't been violated since August 1945 – only lead to a few complaints against Israel? That's a baseless conclusion.
Would dropping nuclear bombs on Iran and the elimination of the taboo assure Israel's future? Shouldn't one shudder at the suggestion that such weapons be resorted to?
More disturbing than the "strategic" absurdity of nuking Iran is the outlook that has taken hold of many Israelis that from a diplomatic standpoint, "all is lost" – along with the normalization and legitimization of the annihilation discourse that has taken over a large segment of the public that views itself as left wing. In other words, a moral fissure.
A nuclear Iran is the greatest threat to Israel. Yitzhak Rabin stated that Israel had a window of opportunity to sign peace agreements with its neighbors before the Middle East goes nuclear. There don't appear to be many subjects on which there is a consensus that transcends parties and political movements more than the danger of the nuclearization of the Middle East. Yigal Allon, and Rabin after him, claimed that if there were a real, genuine danger of the "destruction of the Third Temple" (meaning the State of Israel), it would involve the introduction of nuclear weapons into the region. And now Iran has advanced to become a nuclear threshold state on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's watch.
It would be difficult to exaggerate the significance to Israel of a nuclear Iran. And yet, before deciding to deploy bombs, Israel has the capacity – albeit a shrinking one – to influence the international approach in the region. It should play a central role in assembling a coalition with the United States and Arab nations to build a new regional order. Clearly that's not possible under the government of Netanyahu, who recently brought about the cancellation of a meeting between Israel and the United States on the subject after he released a video critical of the Biden administration. (Netanyahu has for years been scuttling nuclear diplomacy efforts against Iran.)
People in the know, such as Ehud Barak, Yisrael Beiteinu leader Avigdor Lieberman and New Hope-United Right head Gideon Sa'ar, have recently made tough predictions in Haaretz. Last month, Yossi Verter quoted Barak as saying: "In six months to a year, Iran will launch a multifront war of attrition – Hamas, Hezbollah, Iraqi militias that will attack the Golan Heights, the Houthis and maybe a third intifada. It will be a war of attrition until collapse and then annihilation."
Open gallery view
Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak at the Labor primary results in May.Credit: Moti Milrod
That's why Netanyahu has to be removed from office through huge protests that would paralyze the country. It's the only way to perhaps prevent a collision with the iceberg. But Morris and others have thrown up their hands and are adopting a policy of annihilation.
The October 7 massacre has done damage to many people's rationality. When Netanyahu declared that Gaza would be turned to rubble, he received legitimacy for it from the Israeli public. Airstrikes over Gaza in the initial days of the war didn't prompt criticism from most of the left. On the contrary, it's only now that former senior figures such as ex-Mossad director Tamir Pardo have been prepared to state publicly that the bombardments were an act of revenge, plain and simple, which actually only further complicated our situation and, to a great extent, foiled our capacity to achieve what we wanted to do.
U.S. President Joe Biden said similar things at the beginning of the war, recounting in December that Netanyahu had told him: "You carpet-bombed Germany. You dropped the atom bomb. A lot of civilians died."
"Yeah," Biden responded. "That's why all these [international] institutions were set up after World War II to see to it that it didn't happen again." People on the left in Israel also needed the vengeance of annihilation that Netanyahu announced and which harmed the interests of those seeking peace in the region. Morris' suggestion that the doomsday weapon be used is a continuation of a strategy of vengeance that would destroy everything.
"Annihilation" has been made legitimate in the Israeli discourse. It's also evidence of Israel's moral decline. It should be rejected. People need to take to the streets and protest.
Adam Raz is a researcher at the Akevot Institute for Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Research. His (Hebrew) book "The Road to October 7: Benjamin Netanyahu, the Production of the Endless Conflict and Israel's Moral Degradation," was published in May.
Opinion | An Annihilation Discourse Has Taken Over Israel
Calls for Israel to launch a nuclear attack on Iran by historian Benny Morris and many others, including those on the left, is the continuation of a strategy of vengeance that would destroy everything. We must take to the streets and protest, while we still can
Share in Facebook
Share in Twitter
Share in WhatsApp
Send in e-mailSend in e-mail
Gift this article
SaveSave article to reading list
Zen Read
Print article
Open gallery view
A Palestinian woman holding the body of her daughter, killed in an Israeli airstrike in the Maghazi refugee camp, in Gaza last month.Credit: Abdel Kareem Hana/AP
Adam Raz
Get email notification for articles from Adam RazFollow
Jul 2, 2024
For years, Israeli historian Benny Morris has been warning about Iran going nuclear.
In September 2021, he wrote in Haaretz: "Time is pressing. The moment Israel must decide between launching a preventive strike and coming to terms with a nuclear Iran and living in its shadow is very near."
-
In October 2023, at the beginning of the Israeli maneuvers in Gaza, he wrote: "The timing will never be better [to attack] than it is now," and it's "the only way remaining."
And now he has stated that if Israel can't attack the Iranian nuclear project through conventional means, "then it may not have any option but to resort to its nonconventional capabilities" (Haaretz English, July 1).
In a 2008 article in The New York Times, he proposed an Israeli nuclear attack because "the alternative is letting Tehran have its bomb." At the time, he acknowledged that "in either case, a Middle Eastern nuclear holocaust would be in the cards."
Open gallery view
Observers on the bridge of the USS Mt. McKinley watching a huge cloud mushroom over Bikini Atoll in the Marshall Islands following an atomic test blast, July 1946.Credit: Jack Rice / AP
Morris didn't say how the use of nuclear weapons would eliminate the Iranian project, but since he doesn't relate to such "trivialities," there is no need to deal with his proposal. It's also unclear why he determined that "Israel can expect reprimands from the international media, the ignorant and mindless youngsters on the campuses and assorted world leaders, but it will also enjoy significant understanding if not active support from many in the international community."
Would breaking the most important international taboo, against the use of nuclear weapons – which hasn't been violated since August 1945 – only lead to a few complaints against Israel? That's a baseless conclusion.
- A disturbing new book about Netanyahu's relationship with Hamas
- It wasn't the Gaza disengagement but Netanyahu's policies that led to disaster
- A brief history of the Netanyahu-Hamas alliance
Would dropping nuclear bombs on Iran and the elimination of the taboo assure Israel's future? Shouldn't one shudder at the suggestion that such weapons be resorted to?
More disturbing than the "strategic" absurdity of nuking Iran is the outlook that has taken hold of many Israelis that from a diplomatic standpoint, "all is lost" – along with the normalization and legitimization of the annihilation discourse that has taken over a large segment of the public that views itself as left wing. In other words, a moral fissure.
A nuclear Iran is the greatest threat to Israel. Yitzhak Rabin stated that Israel had a window of opportunity to sign peace agreements with its neighbors before the Middle East goes nuclear. There don't appear to be many subjects on which there is a consensus that transcends parties and political movements more than the danger of the nuclearization of the Middle East. Yigal Allon, and Rabin after him, claimed that if there were a real, genuine danger of the "destruction of the Third Temple" (meaning the State of Israel), it would involve the introduction of nuclear weapons into the region. And now Iran has advanced to become a nuclear threshold state on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's watch.
It would be difficult to exaggerate the significance to Israel of a nuclear Iran. And yet, before deciding to deploy bombs, Israel has the capacity – albeit a shrinking one – to influence the international approach in the region. It should play a central role in assembling a coalition with the United States and Arab nations to build a new regional order. Clearly that's not possible under the government of Netanyahu, who recently brought about the cancellation of a meeting between Israel and the United States on the subject after he released a video critical of the Biden administration. (Netanyahu has for years been scuttling nuclear diplomacy efforts against Iran.)
People in the know, such as Ehud Barak, Yisrael Beiteinu leader Avigdor Lieberman and New Hope-United Right head Gideon Sa'ar, have recently made tough predictions in Haaretz. Last month, Yossi Verter quoted Barak as saying: "In six months to a year, Iran will launch a multifront war of attrition – Hamas, Hezbollah, Iraqi militias that will attack the Golan Heights, the Houthis and maybe a third intifada. It will be a war of attrition until collapse and then annihilation."
Open gallery view
Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak at the Labor primary results in May.Credit: Moti Milrod
That's why Netanyahu has to be removed from office through huge protests that would paralyze the country. It's the only way to perhaps prevent a collision with the iceberg. But Morris and others have thrown up their hands and are adopting a policy of annihilation.
The October 7 massacre has done damage to many people's rationality. When Netanyahu declared that Gaza would be turned to rubble, he received legitimacy for it from the Israeli public. Airstrikes over Gaza in the initial days of the war didn't prompt criticism from most of the left. On the contrary, it's only now that former senior figures such as ex-Mossad director Tamir Pardo have been prepared to state publicly that the bombardments were an act of revenge, plain and simple, which actually only further complicated our situation and, to a great extent, foiled our capacity to achieve what we wanted to do.
U.S. President Joe Biden said similar things at the beginning of the war, recounting in December that Netanyahu had told him: "You carpet-bombed Germany. You dropped the atom bomb. A lot of civilians died."
"Yeah," Biden responded. "That's why all these [international] institutions were set up after World War II to see to it that it didn't happen again." People on the left in Israel also needed the vengeance of annihilation that Netanyahu announced and which harmed the interests of those seeking peace in the region. Morris' suggestion that the doomsday weapon be used is a continuation of a strategy of vengeance that would destroy everything.
"Annihilation" has been made legitimate in the Israeli discourse. It's also evidence of Israel's moral decline. It should be rejected. People need to take to the streets and protest.
Adam Raz is a researcher at the Akevot Institute for Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Research. His (Hebrew) book "The Road to October 7: Benjamin Netanyahu, the Production of the Endless Conflict and Israel's Moral Degradation," was published in May.
/cloudfront-us-east-2.images.arcpublishing.com/reuters/MFCIQHMWHZKZVPOLZNSPA2E4P4.jpg)
