Israel's Deputy Prime Minister Moshe (Bogie) Ya'alon: "If the question is a bomb or to bomb answer is clear: to bomb".

Israel's Deputy Prime Minister Moshe (Bogie) Ya'alon: "If the question is a bomb or to bomb answer is clear: to bomb".(Imra).[Dr. Aaron Lerner - IMRA: Unfortunately, an English translation of the complete interview is not freely available on the Haaretz website. Ya'alon explains in this interview why Israel may have to bomb Iran and addresses the assertion that such a move would only delay Iran by a few years. The second half of the interview is a powerful presentation of his rejection of "land for peace" as unrealistic with the Palestinians as well as rejection of the claim that time is working against Israel. The following is an excerpt of an independent translation of the article: "Better to pay the heavy price of war than allow Iran nuclear weapons capability. It is crystal clear to me" The hourglass of confrontation with Iran continues to diminish. Minister of Strategic Affairs and Deputy Prime Minister Moshe (Bogie) Ya'alon spares no words to explain how he knows the horrors of war and does not rush. Still, he takes very seriously the possibility of a regional conflagration, and within months - not years. ...Ari Shavit Haaretz Magazine section 06/16/2012 17:05 http://www.haaretz.co.il/magazine/1.1731171
Q: Moshe Ya'alon, is a war might break out this year?

A: ...for the righteous, their work is done by others. But obviously we are preparing for any eventuality. If I am not for me, who will be.

Q: If you must now provide comprehensive intelligence assessment, would you say the probability that war will break out next year is remote, low, medium or high?

A. Likelihood of an attack initiated by Israel is low. I do not see an Arab coalition armed from head to toe parked on our borders - not this year or next year or in the foreseeable future. Despite the trend of Islamization in the Middle East, we enjoy security and peace of relations across borders. But the challenge Number one is the Iranian challenge. if someone will attack Iran, it is clear that it will work against us. if someone, anyone, decides to act militarily against Iran's nuclear program, there is a high probability that Iran will respond against us and shoot missiles at Israel. It is also likely that Hezbollah and Islamic elements in the Gaza Strip will work against us....

Q: ...on the Iranian issue we are close to the moment of truth.

A: Absolutely. When I was head of intelligence in the '90s, Iran had one kilogram of enriched uranium. Today it has 6,300 kg of uranium enriched up to 3.5% and 150 kg of uranium enriched to 20%. When I was COS in the 2000s, Iran had several hundred centrifuges, many of which were not functioning. Today in Natanz, and Qom 10,000 centrifuges, enriching about eight kilograms of uranium per day. Since the beginning of the term of this government to the present the number of centrifuges in Iran almost doubled and the amount of enriched uranium increased by six. The significance of this data is that Iran already has enough enriched uranium to produce five nuclear bombs. If it is not curbed, within a year it will have enough enriched uranium for seven - eight nuclear bombs. In addition, the Iranians apparently have weapons systems which they hide from the international monitoring mechanism. Iranians also have 400 missiles of various types covering the territory of Israel and even reaching some parts of Europe. These missiles were built to carry nuclear warheads. So the picture is clear. Five years ago, even three years ago, Iran was not close to the nuclear threshold. Today Iran is at the edge of the nuclear threshold... 

Q: But to produce a nuclear bomb Iran need enriched uranium to 90% or more. Now it is not there yet.

A: It's true. But ...it has the ability to enrich uranium to over 90% within two months - three. ...in six months from the decision to act it could possesses at least one primitive - dirty bomb.

Q: If so, maybe it's too late. Iran won the battle and we lost and we must accept that soon Iran will have nuclear weapons.

A: Absolutely not. ... We can not and must not accept Western Iranian nuclear bomb. what I say is not just rhetoric or propaganda. nuclear Iran is a real threat to world peace.

Q: But you yourself told me that the Iranians had crossed most of the red lines. They swept across the point of no - return. Is the result that we already face the cruel dilemma of a bomb or to bomb?

A: We're not there. I hope that we get there. The international community can still act firmly and decisively. There may be other developments too. But if the question is a bomb or to bomb answer is clear: to bomb". 

Q: The answer is obvious to you but not obvious to me. We survived the Cold War. Also survived Pakistan's nuclear program and North Korea. Israel is attributed to a strategic capability that can create decisive deterrence against Iran. Is it not fair to say that just as Europe lived in the past with the Soviet bomb we could live in the future with the Shiite bomb?

A: No and no. First answer to your question is that if Iran becomes nuclear, four - five other countries in the Middle East can become nuclear. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, Jordan and other Arab states say that if Iran has the bomb also they need the bomb. The result will be a nuclear Middle East. A nuclear Middle East would not be stable...Nuclearization of Iran would lead to nuclear chaos.
The second answer to your question is a nuclear umbrella would allow Iran to achieve regional hegemony. When they find themselves under an umbrella like that, the Gulf States will be asking themselves who they prefer: distant Washington or nearby Tehran. I believe they will choose nearby Tehran. Nuclear Iran could dominate the Persian Gulf energy sources and a very large share of world oil supplies. There would be far-reaching international implications. But a nuclear Iran would also challenge Israel and cause a series of harsh conventional conflicts within our borders. This would have serious consequences in terms of the State of Israel. The third answer to the third to your question is that one day the Iranian regime might use its nuclear capability it. That does not mean that the day after they have a bomb they send it on a plane or a missile and drop it on a western city. But there is a danger of using nuclear weapons by proxy. Terrorist organization with a dirty bomb could bring it into New York Harbor or the Port of London or the Port of Haifa. I also do not exclude the possibility of a direct nuclear weapons attack with missile. The risk is indeed low but it exists. This extreme scenario is not impossible.

Q: But the Iranians are rational. Use of nuclear weapons is an irrational act. Like the Soviets, they'll never do that.

A: A Western observer takes the fantastic aspirations of the Iranian leadership with a grin. "What do they think, they will convert us to Islam?" The surprising answer is yes. They think they will convert us. The current regime in Tehran wants it that in the long run the Western world will become Muslim. Therefore we need to understand their rationale is completely different from our rationality. Concepts are different and the considerations are different. They are in no way like the former Soviet Union. They are even like Pakistan or North Korea. If Iran enjoys a nuclear umbrella and the sense of the power of nuclear power we do not know how it will work. It is impossible to contain a nuclear Iran and achieve stability under such circumstances. The consequences of a nuclear Iran are intolerable.

Q: The bombing will have unbearable implications. Regional war, religious war, thousands dead....

A: Those who experienced war as I have do not want war....But the question is what choice we have. What the alternative is to war. I told you once and tell you again: if it is a bomb or bombing, for me it's bombing. True, bombing would have a price. We must not underestimate the price and must not exaggerate it. We should assume that Israel will be attacked by Iranian missiles and that many will be intercepted by our Arrow system. We assume that Hezbollah will join in and shoot at us thousands of rockets. There will also be rockets fired from the Gaza Strip. The likelihood that Syria will enter the fray is low but also this possibility this should taken into account. I'm not saying it's easy. It's not easy. But when you put all this against the alternative of a nuclear Iran it is not even a dilemma. Better to pay the heavy price of war than allow Iran a nuclear weapons capability. To me it crystal clear. "

Q: How many casualties will we have? Hundreds? Thousands?

A: I can not estimate the number of dead...But we must be prepared to pay the price required to prevent Iran from being nuclear. Again: I wish that we never reach it. I wish it will be done by others. From an Iranian perspective, Israel is merely Little Satan and the United States is the Great Satan. But as I told you - If I am not for myself who is for me?

Q: Does the fact that we are in an election year in the United States affect Washington's policy toward Iran?

A: I'll tell you how the Iranians see it. Iranians believe that the West is very sensitive to oil prices and therefore deterred from coming to a confrontation with them. Are ...This sensitivity is particularly high in the United States and therefore before November 2012 they believe nothing will happen. So the Iranians are convinced that during this year sanctions will be carefully applied and not an American military option. They also estimate that in this sensitive time the U.S. will prevent an Israeli attack. This situation is certainly tragic. It makes the Iranians feel no real pressure. ... 

Q: But at the end, to act, Israel needs an American green light. In the foreseeable future there will not be an American green light. So the whole thing as we have talked about in the last hours is science fiction. Could not happen.

A. The United States never gave a green light or red light. If it did it would take responsibility - one way or another. Right now there is yellow light with different shades. Americans know how to clarify whether the yellow is closer to red or closer to green. But as the President United States said, Israel has a right to defend itself by itself. He expressed a consistent U.S. policy. That at the end the decision, if a decision is made, is an independent Israeli decision...

Q: And yet the world and do not really believe in you. The feeling is that Israel cries wolf, is playing a sophisticated game of "hold me back".


A: There is one thing that tells you in English because it is very important that speakers of English understand it: We are not bluffing. If political and economic pressure fails and other alternatives exhaust themselves and Iran continues to race toward the bomb, it will require decisions. 


Q: There is a danger the Iranian crisis will culminate in the coming year? 


A: Once we talked about a decade. Then we talked about for years. Now we're talking about months. ... 


Q: Beautiful. But you and your government is so connected to the reality of the Middle East that you have caused a strategic crisis in relations with Turkey. 


A: The change in trend in Turkish foreign policy towards us started already in 2004. It's not a result of our actions but a decision of Recep Tayyip Erdogan to gradually change Ataturk's secular republic into a Muslim power. Professor Bernard Lewis, for example, estimated that within a decade or two of Iran will become Turkey and Turkey will be Iran. Long before this government was elected, Erdogan attacked wildly on none other than Shimon Peres at Davos. So enough with the self-accusation. We are not responsible for everything bad that happens. The hand of Erdogan was in the Marmara. We know it. And yet, after the flotilla we tried to restore the relationship and we were ready to express regret that the people were killed. Erdogan wasn't really interested, but wanted to make political capital areas by humiliating the Jews. We would not agree to that. 


Q: But all they wanted we a state apology. Isn't the policy do not be right, be smart. 


A: You bring me back to the Ashkenazim. Ashkenazim tend to underestimate the issue of respect. They do not understand that respect in the Middle East is a strategic asset. Those who wants to live quietly in this area must transmit power and deterrence and to stand on his dignity. 


Q: The Damascus regime understands this issue well and defended its honor by killing thousands of innocent civilians. You are not worried sick about chaos in Syria will cause that chemical weapons will leak out? 


A: Currently we see a good control of the Syrians stocks of chemical weapons. But any sensible person should prepare for the future.... Read the full story here.