On the 5th of March, news considering Israel to hit Iran, were circulated. The article was published in Jerusalem Post, by Hilary Leila Krieger. In her article Krieger stated that " Israel is seriously considering taking unilateral military action to stop Iran from acquiring nucleer weapons...". The information was gathered from a report by US political figures and experts released recently. http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1236103158937&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Furthermore, on 4th of December, 2008, the article by Sheera Frankel, flared up with the title of " Israel ' prepared to attack' Iran Nucleer Plants". In this article, Frankel stated that Israel was planning an attack to Iran without U.S. support. It is also commented in the article that an attack to Iran by Israel alone couldn't cover all the nucleer facilities where were located deep in "underground" and "scattered across several sites".http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5284173.ece
On the other hand, Iranian based news agencies, related to the news circulated regarding to Israeli attack to Iran, are commented that there was no possibility of such an action from Israel. IRNA, celebrated news agency of Iran, published that Israel couldn't act alone regarding such an operation and achieve destroying Iran's nucleer facilities.
A possibility of such an unilateral operation is controversial. At the treshold of negotiations with Iran and the U.S.A, these news and comments are far from encouragement for Iran considering negotiations behalf of nucleer program. These are rather encouragement for Iran to produce nucleer weapons. In this report released by the American politicians and experts about Israel's unilateral operation, U.S guarantees to furnish Israel with missiles in order to hit nucleer facilities of Iran.
It is definately easy for Israel to hit one or two of Iran's nucleer bases, though the consequences of this kind of unilateral operation would be severe. Probably, Israel would consider all of the possibilities after this " long planned" operation from A to Z. Although, the reality of this operation is inaccurate, this would lead the world into a new conflict and aggression.
Iran has mutual defence treaties with Syria, Russia and China. Through Shangai Cooperation Organization, Iran also has same kind of cooperation treaties with her neigbouring countries. In addition to these, Iran has great influence on Hezbollah and Hamas (even though Hamas is a sunni organization).
Hezbollah has already renewed its threats to Israel from South of Lebanon. Despite the presence of UNIFIL and Lebanese Armed Forces in Southern Lebanon, the region is under Hezbollah control. After June 2006, Second Lebanon war with Israel, Ehud Olmert himself emphasized the increased forces of Hezbollah. Hezbollah, neither accepted nor denied, has anti air missiles their own. Hamas, however was weakened by Israeli operation, would regain its strength by the funds pouring from several Arab countries. Iran's and Hezbollah's support for Hamas is a well known fact.
Syria is another hostile country to Israel; due to Golan Heights issue. Syria is a host country for all kinds of terrorists from Hezbollah to PKK. Through Beqaa Valley, Syria also is the safest crossing point from Iran to Lebanon. Even though there is a possibility of peace treaty between Israel and Syria, Syria would back Iran in this issue. Syria and Iran has close ties for almost 29 years. This allience cannot be put aside.
As it is stated above, Israel is surrounded by hostile states. When Israel considers to act alone, it means Israel has to face with the consequences alone. Such an operation is doomed to fail in the long term. Furthermore, it makes the Middle East less safer place than before the operation. It is inevitable for the majority of the Middle Eastern states to be drawn into conflict if this operation happens. I believe Israeli officials and military could calculate the consequences better before taking action.
_1.jpg)