Conflict in the Middle East

Nuclear Iran, anxious Israel


See article

Readers' comments



Putting aside all legitimate criticism of Israel's behaviour towards the Palestinians, when addressing its right to have acquired nuclear weapons one must remember this:
The generation which established Israel's nuclear abilities is the same generation that survived the Holocaust. This is a generation that saw about 50% of its people - a peaceful civilian minority - burned in the death camps. This is equivalent to 150m Americans, 42m Germans or 31m British. If anybody in this crazy world of the 1960's had the right to hold nuclear weapons - it is them.


The discussion focuses on Iran vs. Israel. The greater implication is that would let Iran,with nuclear threat displace Saudi (with oil control) as "leader" of the Muslim world


It seems that Iran is to be on thin ice with the middle east and quite possibly the U.S. soon as well. Seems that Saudi Arabia and other middle eastern countries are worried about the possible development of nuclear weapons in Iran. Iran is basically an outcast in the middle east since the surrounding muslim countries are Sunni’s whereas Iran is mainly all Shi’a. Israel now seems to have nuclear weapons of their own which doesn’t really help the world either. Iran probably seems to feel the need to get weapons since they see that Israel has some now too. From all this it seems Iran will get them soon if they don’t have some weapons already and the rest of the world will have to be prepared for that.


I agreed with almost everything The Economist said in this article; in that same vain, Iran really needs to be careful at this point. Becoming a new nuclear power in the world is a big deal, but especially for a state in a situation such as that of is bound to put itself between a rock and a hard place. Similarly, Israel needs to be careful in deciding whether or not to act out towards its soon-to-be-nuclear neighbor. The consequences that would come with either side attacking the other seem too great for either side to truly take action. Besides, the whole world knows the destruction brought by the use of nuclear weapons, so I feel as though other powers will try to step in before something goes awry. The U.S. will be behind Israel; my only question is whether or not the UN will get involved before/after any action?


The building of nuclear arms never means a good thing. It does not matter who fires them first, if they get fired, catastrophe will strike. Israel, who is not in great terms with Iran, should be extremely scared if Iran is on the verge of creating a nuclear bomb. They should take action in order to stop them before it is too late. The difficult part is, however, how can they stop them? Unless they completely destroy every nuclear plant and all designs on how to make nuclear weapons, then they will only delay the process. It might be a smarter idea to keep Iran in every treaty that says they will not use nuclear weapons. Although, always a possible threat, if Iran never fires a nuclear bomb then it should not be that much of a deal. If Israel was to invade Iran it could only cause problems, and potentially, even a war. Israel should be very careful, especially since they say that they "do not have nuclear weapons".

Tarik Jamali Phillip

I do believe that Iran should be bombed by Israel. We are not sure if they have nuclear weapons. Yes, they are building weapons, but we are not sure if they have any already. What if they have weapons? Bombing them could cause another world war, that could send the world into a catastrophic stage. Honesty, the US does not need to be pulled into another war, especially over nuclear power. What confuses me is why Iran cannot make nuclear power. North Korea has nuclear power. Matter of fact, the US is the only country to have used nuclear power. I do believe that Israel should go through a more peaceful way of getting Iran to not acquire nuclear weapons. I think that this can be done in a more underground way through the young people. Getting the young Iranians to get more involved in the political system and stopping their country from creating weapons is the best way to stop Iran. With Iran being so distracted by a revolution in their country, they won't have time to make weapons.


If Iran were to gain all nuclear power to its full potential, world security would shift uncontrollably. If Iran were to have all the power, world peace would be greatly threatened. As greater armaments are placed into the Iranians with radical views, their confidence in their abilities to wipe out anyone they disagree with are unstoppable. Placing resources in the hands of terrorists should deepen world INsecurity to the point where something needs to be done. The possibility for them to retaliate at any moment possible, is influence in itself that there needs to be a force to stop them and make a change.


Iran loves causing distress and complications. It is the heart of the nation. Countries, especially Israel, should understand that attacking Iran may, in fact, stop their nuclear production, but not forever. It will only slow them and piss them off more so. Then the nations will have to deal not only with counter attacks but also Iran building nukes, a second time around. The best thing that can be done is Russia and China cut Iran off, and yes this may hurt these two countries, but if they haven't noticed they are not suffering compared to the state of other nations these days.


Although there is no out right proof that Iran has been making nuclear weaponry, is the world really in any position to want to challenge it? Usually if a country is under suspicion of making nuclear weapons in the past, its been true. Its not surprising that Iran has chosen this time to make the weapons either. Israel is and should be nervous if they are in possession of nuclear weaponry, along with many other countries that could be targeted. Like this article said, many countries should see this as a possible threat to their own country. Once made no one could really know where the first, or last, one will go.


If the title was "Nuclear Israel, anxious Iran", it would actually describe the real world


If Iran doesn't yet have a bomb, a surefire way to make absolutely certain they will have a bomb is a preemptive military strike against Iran. Well it may sometimes be better to know than to not know, perhaps it is better still not to intimidate Iran into making a bomb that absolutely no evidence shows they currently have.


Iran having nuclear weapons is a huge threat to everyone near by and the US. However, what are we to expect? Every growing nation with a sense of high technology is going to be able to make nuclear weapons. If we have them then why wouldn't the rest of the world be able to make them. The only hope now is that Iran will keep them just for protection and not use them to launch an attack and begin a nuclear war.


The US and Japan know the pain of that nuclear weapons can cause. The UN should have stepped in a long time against Iran have nuclear power. Some say it's not fair that they cant have the power, but some states should just not be allowed to have nuclear power. If I lived in Israel I would be seriously upset. It is about time we just put a end to Iran's nuclear program. If nuclear weapons got in the hands of terrorist group things could turn bad real quick.


Action from either party would result in huge ramifications for the entire world. Israel is backed by the USA, who is a member of NATO. If Iran attacks Israel, huge military consequences - perhaps on the scale of world warfare - await.


From my point of view, I do not agree with the author’s last statement, that “Israel must be persuaded that striking Iran would be far more dangerous than living with its nuclear ambitions.” I believe he has not understood the real leitmotif behind the current Israeli-Palestinian conflict: A religious one; which would lead to collaboration between Gaza, Southern Lebanon and Iran. (Though he does mention the nature of the authorities in Iran). I very much doubt the real danger of a nuclear attack against Israel for the nature of the consequences that Iran would face, however what is certain is that if these weapons are developed, Israel would lose a large percent of its leverage in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and would be forced to hand out much more concessions than being asked of at the moment. At this moment I believe that one of the dilemmas Netanyahu’s government is facing is whether to risk future and uncertain economic consequences or take action in the short term to keep its political leverage in the area, with the military losses this will entail for the population.


Iran is not isolated, it controls its own backyard, in Iraq and Afghanistan thanks to America. Having nuclear weapons does not mean they will use them, Iran knows Israel has the capability to destroy every one of her major cities.

I would be more concerned about Pakistan, whoever let them have nukes...


Given that the Saudis say they are deeply concerned about Iran's enriching uranium to 20%, should the US (and UK) not respond to Iran's recent offer to cease production of the 20% U?

And let's remember the US very foolishly blocked Iran's application to buy the necessary 20% U and in effect forced Iran to enrich to 20%.

Fahrettin Tahir

Israel and Iran

Personally I have sympathies for the worries Israelis have about Iran having nuclear bombs.

However I also have sympathies with Iran which feels a need to protect itself. Iran spent most of the 20th century as a semi colony of the west which was stealing their oil.

The west helped Saddam to bleed Iran killing millions.

They need a strong defence to protect their country.

Nuclear armed North Korea lives in peace. Iraq and Libya after giving up their nuclear programmes were invaded, the leaders murdered. Reading the western press it is clear that Iran is hated no less.

So the issue should not only be seen as an Israel related problem, but a consequence of the conflict between the Christian World and Islamic World.

Even Turkey, loyal ally of the WEst is being subjected to a secessionist war of the PKK. A war which would not happen without western determination to break all major Islamic powers.

The government of Iran should deescalate their unnecessary conflict with Israel and then go ahead and the build the bombs they need to defend their ancient country.

Garvagh in reply to Fahrettin Tahir

North Korea probably will give up its nukes. And that programme is totally unnecessary for purposes of "defence" in any event.

Gaddafi blundered so badly as almost to defy belief, and brought about the western military intervention (which many western diplomats tried to avoid).

guest-iwslola in reply to Fahrettin Tahir

Iran's current government does not represent the Iranian people, nor its ancient history, which they have reduced to an islamicized version. The mullahs and revolutionary guards have usurped all of the country's wealth from its natural resources and private sector, while the Iranian people live in dire economic conditions and its freedom-seeking dissidents, human rights lawyers, etc endure horrific abuses and summary executions are on the rise in the past year.

While it's correct that Iran's oil was the subject of Western tug-of-war from the 1950's-70's, it is completely incorrect to justify a fanatical regime's pursuit of nuclear weapons. It is, however, the legacy of Carter's support of the mullahs pre-79 that has resulted in the current conundrum faced by the region and the entire West.


A nuclear armed Iran is the greatest threat to world peace there is. It will just a matter of time before their leaders, which have no qualms about murdering their own, will turn on Israel. The only question is- if that is the first mushroom cloud, where will the last one go off?

Garaboncias in reply to Garvagh

" It is absurd to believe Iran would wish to destroy Jerusalem in any evet."

Really? There are many who find that statement rather absurd. Empirical knowledge bears them out. What is the quoted statement based on? Divine intuition?

annabetancourt in reply to Garaboncias

@Garaboncias. Plz use common sense. How Iran can think of destroying Jerusalem if they know they will face retaliation destroying their all cities? please read the history, if nothing else, nuclear capability has been the best deterence. Nuclear Iran will balance the middle east which US and Israel do not want.

Garaboncias in reply to annabetancourt

The premise of your of your assertion is that people behave rationally. Precisely because I have read - and keep reading - history , and discuss it regularly with professional historians and serious students of history, I do not find your assertion being born out by, well, history. I wish to remind you that Iran, and her present rulers, have done something that not even Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan did during WW2, namely, invade our embassy and take our diplomats hostages. Even Japan and Germany respected diplomatic immunity, and those two countries did not play nicely, at all. Yet, you assert that Iran, and her present rulers, are using common sense and guided by rationality. You also assert that they have, all of a sudden, found compassion/concern for their own people. The same rulers who sent wave after wave of children across mine fields during the Iraq-Iran war - to clear them of mines by getting blown up - with plastic keys around their necks (to open the gates of haven) blessed by the Ayatollah Khomeini himself. The same people who suppressed the demonstrations rather brutally in Iran when people expressed their anger at having stolen the elections. These are the people who use common sense and are guided by rational thoughts, you claim. Then, you assert that a nuclear Iran would be beneficial for the well-being of the Middle East. I do not know you, so I am not certain whether you were joking; trying to bait me; or just have no idea what on earth you are talking about. No matter. This is a free forum, and you can post anything the "Web Masters of TE" will allow. But that alone will not ensure that, what you write will be taken seriously. I answered because you addressed me directly. I was raised that way: one answers when addressed directly. Judging from your anti-American and anti-Israeli bias, I surmise it would be futile to reason with you in a rational manner regarding the dangers an Iran with nuclear weapons would pose not only to the Middle East, but to the better part of the world.
Have a nice day and good luck to you.

P.S. Reading history is not enough. You also have to understand what you read...

Moran ya Simba in reply to Garaboncias


I absolutely agree. Decision-makers are fallible like everyone else. Not least when under extreme pressure, such as a nuclear stand-off. And with nuclear weapons, there is no room for mistakes.

The only question I would really like to have more information on, is HOW effective an attack could "reasonably" be expected to be. But of course, war is the ultimate version of gambling. Incomplete knowledge and and a priori uncertainties are indissectible elements of combat.


Israel has diligently prevented its neighbours from even acquiring nuclear reactors for peaceful purposes. It violated international law by bombing the Iraqi French-built Osirak nuclear reactor still under construction in 1981 in an unprovoked raid even though the reactor was going to be used, according to the French and Iraqi governments, for peaceful scientific purposes. Israel also bombed what intelligence reports allege was a North Korean nuclear reactor under construction in Syria in 2007. Israel’s Mossad has also been linked to the assassination of numerous Egyptian, Iraqi, and Iranian nuclear scientists over the decades. Israel continues to refuse to join the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and refuses to allow members of the International Atomic Energy Commission to inspect its Dimona reactor.


Israel’s protector, the United States, is the only country on Earth that has ever deliberately used nuclear bombs against civilian populations and continues to defend this decision 66 years after this genocidal act, and inculcates its population, in its school curricula and in the media, to defend it. The United States has also made certain that Israel’s nuclear arsenal would not ever be discussed at the UN Security Council despite persistent proposals over the decades to discuss it. Indeed, the United States insistence on keeping Israel’s nuclear capability an open "secret" is engineered, among other things, to keep United States aid to Israel flowing, especially as a key legal condition of receiving such aid is for recipient countries to be signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which Israel refuses to sign.

kevinahcc20 in reply to Kursato


The US nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved more Japanese lives by far than they took. The most credible estimates predicted 1 million Allied and 3+ million Japanese casualties during an Allied assault on the Japanese homeland. For the US to possess the means to end WWII in the Pacific in a matter of days and not use the bombs would have been the immoral decision.

jvictor1789 in reply to Kursato

kursato, you have exposed a great number of well known inconvenient truths,and you are quite right. But you fail to mention a few inconvenient truths that turn the debate upside down:

1-Both the governments and the average citizens of all the Arab states(plus Persian Iran) that surround Israel would, if they were militarily powerful enough, certainly conquer(they would say re-conquer)Israel and either ship the Jews out (to where?) or turn a blind eye to exterminate them.

2- Those Arab neighbors have incomparably larger populations and size than Israel.

3- Only military superiority on the part of Israel prevents this very certain outcome from happening.

Komarov in reply to Kursato

No, Kursato, I do not think the Zionists are really anti-Moslem. Remember that the Palestinians were the first majority-Jewish nation and, from 200 AD, probably the first majority-Christian nation. They stayed majority-Christian for over a thousand years.

guest-iwlnnwj in reply to Kursato

Dear Sir,
As an Israeli, I confess, we must be very bad...
But I think Iran consists a very severe threat against the Sunni Arab World. Do you really believe that Saudi Arabia is threatened by Israel with or without an atomic bomb? How about Bahrain? Egypt? Jordan?
The reason I raise this question is the exchange of information I have with friends among the Arab World. They tell me they are even more intimidated by nuclear Iran than us. I also understand that Russia (yes) worries from Iran intervention in its Shiite neighbors, even before possessing a nuclear bomb. Imagine what will happen afterwards.


Latest blog posts - All times are GMT
Alibaba's IPO: Shocked, shocked!
Schumpeter -51 mins ago
World Cup predictions: Scoring ourselves
Graphic detail July 12th, 19:03
Car technology: Turbocharged
Schumpeter July 12th, 9:00


Products and events



