Top Israelis Push To Stop
Bibi's Imminent Hit on Iran
by Nancy Spannaus
Aug. 7—In the face of what they know to be the intention of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak, for an imminent Israeli attack on Iran—an Obama scheme which would quickly trigger world thermonuclear war—virtually every high-level active and retired Israeli defense and security official is fighting all-out to stop them. Those who are retired are doing it with high-profile public warnings, among other means.
EIR's own sources within the U.S. military-intelligence establishment confirm the evaluation of these Israelis, that Netanyahu and Barak are serious about carrying out a strike on Iran within the next 8 to 12 weeks. At the same time, the Obama Administration, along with British intelligence, is escalating its support for the overthrow of the Bashar Al-Assad government in Syria, which is seen as, among other things, a stepping-stone to the hit against Iran. The warmongers believe they have removed a major obstacle to that violent overthrow, by subverting the Kofi Annan plan for resolving the Syrian sitution, to the point that the widely respected UN diplomat felt compelled to resign his position as special envoy.
Outside Israel, it is the top levels of the U.S. military, and the governments of Russia and China, who are working non-stop to prevent an action against Syria or Iran, which would lead almost immediately to a thermonuclear confrontation between the U.S. and Russia. Both Damascus and Tehran have made it clear that they see the alliance of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United States as responsible for sabotaging the Annan mission, and have blasted the threats by Obama's UN Ambassador Susan Rice, backed by the British, to act outside the Security Council.
Such a violation of the principle of national sovereignty would, the Russian government has emphasized, lead directly in the direction of nuclear war.
An Imminent Attack?
On Aug. 4, the Jerusalem Post published an interview with ex-Mossad head Ephraim Halevy on the threat of such an attack, which he expects within "the next few weeks." The daily put the interview at the very top of its Internet edition, after placing a similar warning by ex-military intelligence head Gen. Aharon Ze'evi Farkash at the top of the previous day's edition—and the Jerusalem Post is by no means a peacenik paper.
The story is headlined, "Halevy: Israel Should Not Strike Iran Without U.S. Approval," and the kicker says, "While Israel might 'act alone,' former Mossad chief says, it should not do so without the consent of its closest ally, adding that Iranian threat is grave, but not existential."
Halevy says that there is no telling how far back a military strike will set the Iranian enrichment program program. Within ten years of Israel's attack on Iraq's Osirak reactor, Saddam Hussein rebooted the program in triplicate, he said. If there were a guarantee of stopping Iran's nuclear pursuit altogether, a military strike would be more attractive.
Halevy has warned against such an attack repeatedly since November 2011, when he said that it "could affect not only Israel, but the entire region for 100 years." On Aug. 2, the New York Times quoted him saying, "If I were Iranian, I would be afraid, very afraid."
Halevy was the director of the Mossad 1998-2002, preceding Meir Dagan, another of the highly respected leaders who are now trying to prevent a disastrous war. After leaving the Mossad, he became the fourth head of the Israeli National Security Council. Born in London in 1934, Halevy is especially remembered for his role in bringing about Israel's peace treaty with Jordan.
While Halevy has consistently warned against a flight-forward strike on Iran, General Farkash is speaking up for the first time. Farkash emphasized that an attack could take place in the immediate weeks ahead, because Netanyahu would not wish to be so flagrant as to launch an attack in October, on the eve of the U.S. elections. He urged a delay on a decision until the late Spring of 2013. President Obama, however, is likely to want an "October surprise," which he would expect to contribute to his re-election bid, now in serious trouble against the equally pandering Mitt Romney.
What should be kept in mind is that the statements by these former Israeli military-intelligence officials are coming from a circle of former government officials who are, as in the United States, kept briefed on the ongoing security threats and policy debates within the current government. When they speak of a potentially imminent attack, they know whereof they speak. Ha'aretz journalist Amos Harel emphasized that point in an article Aug. 5.
Nor should anyone get the idea that it is only former officials who oppose a strike on Iran. Leaks to the Israeli press have reported that a majority of Netanyahu's security cabinet opposes a strike, but the prime minister has stridently insisted that it's his responsibility to make the decision—he even said he will testify to that, if forced to appear before a commission of inquiry.
The list of Israeli military-intelligence figures opposing the war which Netanyahu is virtually shouting that he is about to launch, is impressive indeed. In addition to Farkash and Halevy, they are Maj. Gen. (res.) Amos Yadlin, who succeeded Farkash as Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) intelligence chief, former Mossad chief Dagan, former Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazy, former Shin Bet chief Avi Dichter, and former Defense Minister and IDF Chief of Staff Shaul Mofaz, who now heads the opposition (actually majority party by one seat) Kadima Party.
In addition, the newspaper Ha'aretz is waging an anti-war campaign. Particularly striking was a commentary by David Grossman published on Aug. 3, under the title, "As Netanyahu Pushes Israel Closer to War with Iran, Israelis Cannot Keep Silent." Grossman extends his challenge beyond the military to the Israeli public at large, asking why aren't there demonstrations at the prime minister's residence opposing another war launched by Israel? "How will we face ourselves and our children when we are asked why we kept silent?"
Even more pointed was a demonstration held Aug. 6, the anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima, in Tel Aviv, under the auspices of the Israeli peace organization Gush Shalom, which is headed by veteran peace spokesman and writer Uri Avnery; the explicit theme of the demonstration was "No to War with Iran!" The timing and tenor of the rally make clear that its organizers are well aware that the implications of an Israeli strike could lead directly to nuclear war.
The Obama Role
EIR's sources report that the intervention by the U.S. military leadership, with the sometime support of Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, in opposition to an Israeli strike, has been virtually non-stop. This is to be contrasted with the role of the White House, which is bending over backwards to provide Israel with all the equipment it needs for its ongoing "covert" war with Iran, and perhaps more.
But the Administration's blatant support for the terrorist offensive in Syria (see articles below), and refusal to collaborate with the peace efforts of China and Russia, are creating conditions where war tensions are spreading throughout the region, and could well get out of control. The solution, as LaRouche has emphasized, starts with getting the crazed Obama out of power, and that immediately.
 At the International Legal Forum in St. Petersburg on May 17, 2012, Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev warned:
"Such actions, which undermine state sovereignty, can easily lead to full-scale regional wars even—I am not trying to scare anyone here—with the use of nuclear weapons."