Over the course of the past year, Israel and Iran have supposedly engaged in a bout of rhetorical brinkmanship involving the further nuclear development on-going in Iran. Iran has stated that its nuclear program is of a peaceful nature and is confined to the pursuit of nuclear energy and medicine. Israel has claimed that Iran is attempting to weaponise this program in order to threaten its existence. During this period, media throughout the United States and the United Kingdom as well as the European Union have disseminated Israel's 'fears' in wide format. On July 1st 2012, the European Union will halt all existing and new petroleum and petroleum products contracts to Iran in an attempt, it is claimed, to retard Iran's development of nuclear material in weaponised form as it appears from the Israeli ideological quarter. To date, Israel has provided no evidence of any such attempt at weaponisation. Despite this, the European Union 'economic sanction' will go ahead.
Israel has throughout claimed that it would attempt to destroy Iran's nuclear development program by bombing indiscriminately from the air a number of nuclear facilities irrespective of the contaminant risk that would emerge.
Zionism1 is a political doctrine theorized in 'The Jewish State'2 by the journalist Theodor Herzl3 in 1896. The work was inspired by the nationalist European movements which had brought about the unification of Germany and the Italian Risorgimento. In 'The Jewish State', Herzl expounded the creation of a formal homeland for the Jewish diaspora in an attempt to avoid anti-Semitism which at the time had chiefly manifested in the Russian pogroms and the Dreyfus Affair - a French scandal involving the prosecution and imprisonment of a Jewish French artillery officer, Captain Alfred Dreyfus. Hertzl had reported on the scandal and was a one of a number of Jewish journalists affected by the apparent anti-Semitism which the scandal had revealed. Not all Jews shared this view.
Over the course of the next 4 decades, 'The Jewish State' became a pole around which Jews in the European diaspora collected in order to realise a return to Zion, a mythical land of the ancient kingdom of Israel. Herzl's supporters and advocates took on the moniker of 'Zionists' and from this, the state of Israel was eventually borne.
In the modern period, Zionism has taken on a number of political and ideological rhythms including policy as practised by a range of left and right leaning political parties, along with a number of political and ideological movements throughout the diaspora.
Zionism is a one dimensional politic relating both to the creation of Israel, and its continued existence in nationalist form. While Israel continues to elect government of a nationalist type using the political mannequin of Zionism, almost all policy that is derived is inevitably clothed in the language of its own creation. Subsequently, any and all threats that are faced by Israel, in whatever manner they may arise, are determined by Zionists as being of an existential nature. Alongside the narrative of the 'Holocaust' and the ethnic cleansing of European Jewry in the pan-European conflict of 1939-1945, most tactical or strategic threats to Israel are generally presented by adherents to Zionism as anti-Semitic or existential.
Israel [Medinat Yisra'el]4 is a very small contested state in the eastern Mediterranean region occupying a swathe of land from Lebanon in the north, Egypt to the south-west, Jordon to the south-east and Syria to the east. It has a current population of around 7.2 Million spread over an area of around 20,000 square kilometres. At present, Israel occupies militarily and by politically charged settlement the Golan Heights (Syria) 1,150 sq km, the West Bank 5,879 sq km, the Gaza Strip 379 sq km and Greater Jerusalem 70 sq km.
These territories were seized in the 1967 conflict [Six-Day War]5 between Israel, Egypt, Jordon and Syria and was subsequently condemned during meeting 1382 of the United Nations Security Council Resolution 2426 which passed unanimously on November 22nd 1967 a motion denouncing the territorial seizure by Israel. The primary terms of the resolution 242 are (i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict; and (ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.
Throughout its history since its inception in 1948, Israel has evoked persistent criticism internationally over its territorial ambitions as a result of its encouragement of the international diaspora to settle territory in and around the Israeli kernel through fabricated conflict and political/religious persecution of the Arabic populace toward territorial expansion. To this end Israel has garnered, through violent and political force, relations with western European and American nations in order to fund and militarily equip its political establishment with the resources it requires to further its wider territorial goals.
Israel has a heavy reliance on exported agricultural goods such as citrus fruits, grapes, vegetables, cotton, beef, potatoes and wheat. It has considerable livestock production capability for domestic consumption and has a growing industrial sector. Due to its arid environment, water retention is problematic as is near chronic pollution.
The Islamic Republic of Iran [Jomhuri-ye Eslami-ye Iran]7 is the largest nation state in the near east Asian region with a population of almost 74 Million. It sits north of the Gulf of Oman and maintains borders with Pakistan, Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, Turkey, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates [UAE]. It also neighbours Russia and Kazakhstan across the Caspian Sea. Iran's total geographic area is around 1,648,000 sq kilometres. Iran is supplicant to the former Persian Empire and enjoys very significant political and economic influence throughout Asia and much of the rest of the world due primarily to its large-scale petrochemical and gas extraction sectors. Iran has a healthy export climate which has been established in various form for most of the historic modern period.
Due to its geographic size, native energy reserves and its continental position, Iran is considered geo-strategically important by most other larger nations including the United States, Russia, China, India and the European block.
Iran's topography is generally extremely hostile across its steppe plateau with perilous desert and mountain ranges.
Iran operates a formal foreign policy backed by a very large potential massed military of up to 1.1 Million operable service personnel around a deterrent foreign policy provision. Over the past 20 year period, Iran has developed its military arsenal considerably and now enjoys sophisticated weapons technology able to repel any and all near neighbours and most other nations around the world. It has competent air, sea and land provision and is able to effectively 'stand-off' a whole range of potential threats to its security.
Tri-partite political rhetoric.
In 1979, The Islamic Republic of Iran undertook the 'Iranian Revolution'8 in which the former regime of the Shah of Iran was successfully deposed and cast into flight from the country. This began a period in which Iran was successfully able to steer a political course between the traditional bi-polar political divisional and adversarial politic of left versus right. In place of the traditional method of government as a counterweighted Socialist/Capitalist order, Iran was able to articulate an independent position which its enjoys to this day. This was made possible by the appearance of the clerical regime of the 'mullahs' which triggered Iran's departure from a supplicant political regime, into a cloched political regime able to exact complete control over its political affairs by enveloping it within a national overseer.
In this way, Iran has been one of only a few nations on earth that have been able to outstretch the confines of the adversarial political model of left versus right, in order to acquire a controlled politic with which to effect absolutist determination.
Iran, due to its revolutionary model politic and secondary arrangement, has chosen not to formally recognise the contested state of Israel and exhibits persistent animosity toward the United States, which it considers both to be malformed 'Capitalist' states with limited history or experience on the international stage. Iran's rhetoric toward both the United States and Israel tends toward sleight-handedness and casual dyspepsia.
Israel is governed by a political totem that can only be described as crudely formed nationalism9 in the form of ideological Zionism. For Israel so soon after its initial invocation, political malformation is revealed in the form of a Zionist movement which infests every part of its political make-up. In terms of both its adversarial houses of left and right, Zionism forms the bulk of its real-politik giving it very limited leeway in every aspect of its political domestic and foreign policy.
In real terms, Israel is unable to form any political pole or provision that is not stridently nationalist in origin and practical approach. This scarcity of options defines and severely limits its foreign and domestic policy in all aspects and naturally leaves it very heavily dependent on consensus in the international community which it derives almost exclusively from its immediate history and experiences during the pan-European conflict of 1939-1945. Here, the 'Holocaust' provides the impetus for that international consensus but effectively imprisons it within a generational context which naturally passes as the people pass. Having built a nation on the existentiality of the 'Holocaust' and its deniers and defenders, the state of Israel's life is bonded and finite in the post-war era. This informs every part of its rhetoric toward other nations.
In many aspects the United States, also being a historically underdeveloped entity, has seen its modern political policy enactments derived not from its own immediate needs, but driven by the needs of its allies and strategic partners. Ten years after it began its foreign policy of military targeting of the non-state actor, it now finds its foreign policy curiously presented as almost identical to the foreign policy of Israel. Excessive dependency on 'media fabrication', heavy dependency of the narrative of ethnic proscription, nationalist rhetoric in endless populist format and a near total lack of international consensus and legibility. United States foreign policy, now initiates the foreign policy of Israel to such a degree, that the two are almost indivisible.
As a result, tri-partite political rhetoric has formed between the nations of Iran and the United States and the far smaller contested state of Israel. In the post war environment immediately following the pan-European conflict of 1939-1945, this rhetoric is now showing the significant effects of a passing generation of post war survivors and the appearance of a new generation of hardier pragmatists void of their parents and grand-parents difficulties.
The nuclear complex.
Nuclear provision, whether it be for the production of energy or the production of weapons, is an extremely expensive and time consuming pursuit which for most of the developed world is economically inviable. The pursuit of nuclear provision involves four separate areas of labour.
In the first part a nuclear program requires the mining and processing of uranium ores, uranium conversion and isotopic enrichment along with nuclear fuel fabrication in order to build the raw components of a program. In the second part the construction of facilities and a controlled secure environment within which to continue development and manage and store the raw components. In the third part a testing regime to modify and control nuclear components followed by in the fourth part a program to mitigate the accumulated radioactive waste and transboundary pollution which inevitably results. In the modern age, biosphere pollution is by far the greatest environmental hazard faced due to open air testing of weapons, nuclear accidents and practices undertaken during the nuclear industries infancy.
Where nuclear program development is toward peaceful energy production, isotopic enrichment is an abrupt process which does not need to be developed or chained to any extensive degree except in the field of medical nuclear science. A nuclear reaction does not require extensive enrichment.
Where a nuclear program is intended toward weaponised status such that nuclear weapons can be produced, isotopic enrichment is an involved and lengthy chained process required in order to bring about the adequate standard of enrichment for weaponised use.
In both endeavours, security is a critical component of nuclear development. In the case of nuclear power production, security of the nuclear reactor must be undertaken to protect the populace and environment from radionuclide contamination and in the case of weapons development, security of the chain must be undertaken to prevent loss, misadventure, misuse, accidental discharge, transboundary contamination along with correct and accurate reporting of weapons stocks to other nuclear states.
In order for a nuclear aspirant state to successfully develop a comprehensive nuclear program, it must be able to extract sufficient uranium ores, be able to process and convert those ores, must be able to carry out chained isotopic enrichment to a detailed degree and must be able to provide a secure environment to develop, test and dispose of radionuclide material within an environment which facilitates the protection of the domestic populace from contamination. Finally, it must be able to illustrate to a compelling degree, a security apparatus capable of keeping nuclear material and components within a controlled environment. In this regard, the general security situation a state finds itself in will ultimately determine that states success in maintaining its nuclear program over time.
Nuclear proliferation10 is a term or phrase used to articulate the spread pattern of nuclear combustible material in weaponised form throughout a geographic region. The phrase can be used to describe static weapons deployed by a nation or confederacy within a specific region, or mobile weapons deployed in order to extend the regional power of a nuclear state outside of its domestic territory. Nations commonly considered to have nuclear material in weaponised form are the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, Pakistan and India. Each of these nations has been able to show clear evidence of the possession of nuclear weapons on the international stage.
Due to the security implications of states possessing nuclear weapons, proliferation of these weapons is subject to a substantial global political momentum in order to regulate and control the production, storage and deployment of these weapons. As a result, states possessing nuclear weapons have a structured bi-directional capacity to report to each other weapons numbers and storage locations in order to alleviate potential political conflict. Nuclear proliferation forms much of the basis of international diplomacy between nuclear armed states primarily to avoid conventional non-nuclear conflict.
At the present time, there is considerable international debate regarding Iran and Israel's capacity to develop, produce, store and maintain nuclear material in weaponised form to such an extent that either one power is able to project regional power through a nuclear weapons posture.
Iran's nuclear program.
Iran's nuclear program is stated to be for the purpose of domestic energy production11 through nuclear reactors situated within Iran's sovereign boundaries at a first stage principle and is not considered to be an attempt at second stage weaponisation of nuclear material. It has a number of sites stationed inside its territory as a result of a joint enterprise between it and the United States which began in the 1950's as part of the 'atoms for peace'12 initiative. In total, Iran has 18 nuclear facilities13 on its territory involving research, testing and enrichment activities. On 9th February 2010, Iran stated that it was a nuclear state14.
Iran possesses the ability to mine, extract, process and convert uranium ores along with an isotopic enrichment capability. It has the capability to maintain security of its extraction program which is sufficiently distant from the local populace to prevent radionuclide contamination. It has sufficient economic prowess able to fund this development and is able to generate, secure and distribute power from the development of its nuclear program toward energy production. Its total capability should it be turned toward the development of nuclear weapons, can yield subject to the required isotopic enrichment activity, nuclear weapons of a combustible type. Iran also has sufficient capability to mobilise any possible weapons but does not possess the ability to mobilise those weapons in intercontinental form to such a degree that a global nuclear posture of any type can be maintained.
Israel's nuclear program.
The territory of Israel does not at present, nor in the past, contain any site able to yield sufficient quantities of uranium ore15 to produce the required quantity of material to process, convert, enrich or fabricate nuclear weapons.
To date and over the entire course of Israel's supposed nuclear weapons program, Israel has failed to test any known explosive device either of a surface, air, space, underwater or underground type. No known radionuclide fallout involving radionuclide elements with a half-life of more than four years has been detected at any point during its claimed weapons development program which would be required in the composition of radioactive fallout as seen during a nuclear explosion.
There has been no known detection of any of the three groups of radionuclide elements emanating from nuclear explosions including nuclear fission products [FP's], radionuclides induced by explosion neutrons [IR's], transuranium radionuclides [TR's] or heavy nuclei which are formed from nuclear reactions during the course of the nuclear explosion16. These elements are constituent parts expected to be seen as a result of a nuclear explosion. Transuranium radionuclides [TR's], the largest contributor to environmental contamination, can also contain Plutonium in nuclear devices where Pu is used as a nuclear explosive in the course of the explosion. Where this occurs, plutonium isotopes are always found in various ratio's as a post explosive contaminant.
Such a failure to acquire sufficient uranium ore and to successfully test any resultant weapon dictates that Israel's 'apparent' nuclear posture17 is wholly derived from rhetoric and its ability to manufacture sufficient 'consensus' in media form. In broad terms, it is highly unlikely that the international community would tolerate a unilateral 'rogue' state to operate in the nuclear arena absent any participation within the proliferation environment. Were Israel to actually possess nuclear material in weaponised form, and were it to attempt to maintain that provision within its current rhetoric, the international community would certainly be compelled to act to abbreviate the situation.
The precept that Israel is a nuclear state to the degree that it possesses sufficient capacity to render nuclear material in combustible weaponised form is highly unlikely. This is derived not so much on its inability to mine and enrich the required quantities of uranium ore, or to undertake isotopic enrichment to the standard required for weapons production, but on its failure to meet the required security standard to keep any such weapons secure. In addition to the resources needed to manage a program of its own, which in obvious form clearly outstretches its economic carrying capacity as well as its resource capacity, Israel does not possess a ballistic delivery system capable of maintaining a nuclear posture across all geo-political fronts. In order to maintain a posture of that type, Israel would need to maintain a continentally deployable arsenal of first, second and last strike weapons capable of being deployed across the entire circumference of the globe.
It is a sad fact of life that in the nuclear 'club of nations', all antagonists are strategically compelled to range and target their weapons equally against all other members of the club, in order to field all available responses - to meet the potential of a perpetually changing world. Were any nuclear armed state to engage in brinkmanship leading to an actual deployment of its weapons, it would require by default the capacity to address all other antagonists as and when they would appear during the overall exchange.
It is here that further notice should be taken of Israel's actual situation regarding nuclear posture: Israel's total land area is just 20,000 sq km. In modern terms, Israel is unable to withstand even a single air-bursted nuclear weapon over its territory without experiencing immediate, catastrophic and near total national annihilation.
Israel maintains its current nuclear program rhetoric under the auspices of 'ambiguity' or 'nuclear opacity', initially formed in 1969 between the United States and Israel as a means to provide Israel with the mechanism required to manage its recent acquisitions after the Six-Day War. Israel neither claims nor denies in official form a nuclear weapons program. This is often referred to as the 'Samson Option'. Samson is a mythical figure in Hebrew tenet and was a judge of the ancient Israelites possessing supernatural strength contracted to him by God.
Israel is not a member state of the International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEI] and claims that it has the right to maintain any such theoretical nuclear program outside the official framework of the international community therefore absolving itself of responsibility under the terms of the Non-Proliferation Treaty [NPT].
Due to Israel's inability to extract, process and convert uranium ore in meaningful quantity, its failure to carry out isotopic enrichment to a required standard, and its failure to carry out any known successful test of a nuclear explosive device together with lack of evidence concerning a viable delivery system, it is not necessary to further speculate on Israel's 'apparent' nuclear weapons provision.
Israel and nationalist rhetoric.
For many around the world in the post 9/11 period, significant synchronicity exists between the polemic of the United States in its wars in the middle-East, and in the foreign policy polemic of Israel as it continues its attempt to cling to the occupied adjunct territories. This synchronicity exists in compelling political form as Zionist nationalism through a bi-partite narrative engaged in between domestic US Israeli nationalists and their US supporters. The resultant media narrative which emanates from the US is often presented as though it is derived from formal government policy.
The contested Israeli state presents as a Parliamentary democracy with 6 administrative divisions, 31 municipalities, 115 local councils and 49 regional councils. The principle location of Israel's legislative house is in Jerusalem but due to Israel's contested nature, most diplomatic missions are headquartered in Tel Aviv.
Politically, Israel's composition is broadly nationalist in origin centred around the ideological pole of Zionism. By placing its general politic into a nationalist caste, Israel is unable to escape the pull of its initial 'creator' and experiences general failure of its political intentions on the international stage. This is substantially aggravated in areas in which Israel's occupation of the adjunct territories is seen as territorial expansion leading to the ill treatment of the indigenous population.
The Israeli nationalist Zionist movement due to Israel's size and influence, has been overly concerned with fabricating support politically and militarily from larger nations around the world with a strong emphasis on exploitation of the trans-Atlantic alliance between the United Kingdom and the United States. To this end, Israel maintains and funds Zionist movements in both countries and encourages a strong tendency toward lobbying of political interests within this arena. Israel is therefore able to maintain political and military support along with funding subsidies from both nations. In service to this arrangement, Israel has a tendency toward identifying threats to its existence which are often exaggerated on the international stage and are almost always of an existential nature. This existentiality is a trading device linked directly toward its immediate history and experiences in the pan-European conflict of 1939-1945 supplemented by the adoption of ideological Zionism at the apex of its political composition.
Zionism is nationhood politicised and so intermediate threats that appear are without exception, threats to its national existence and therefore linked directly to Israel's 'right to exist'. Supplementary to this is connected conceptual 'Holocaust', the right of the Jewish people to exist, and therefore a merging of narratives around an existential pole. Even moderate or minor threats are then inflated into existential problems.
Israel, nationalist rhetoric and nuclear proliferation.
The recent rhetoric18,19 instigated by Israel and articulated toward its primary regional antithesis Iran has revolved around the precept that Iran is imminently capable or intending to weaponise its nuclear provision. This precept has been articulated in the United States and Europe to such a degree that actualised methodology has migrated into substance20 with the imposition of economic sanctions directed toward Iran. On July 1st 2012, the European Union will end existing contracts with Iran for the export of petroleum and petroleum products. New contracts are also included within the framework of the sanctions regime.
In synchronicity with this regime of sanctions, the Israeli government have also attempted, but failed, to bring about military action in order to retard Iran's supposed weaponisation program with the threat of military strikes against selected targets within Iran itself. During this period of bellicosity, Israel has been solely reliant on attempting to manufacture complicity toward military action within the United States. This program has also failed. The clear and obvious differences between Israel's capacity to manage any such attack and Iran's ability to 'stand-off' any such attack are persuasively revealed in Israel's complete dependence on 'voices within America' to articulate these demands. For many, Israel is not capable of maintaining any such action without becoming subject to catastrophic structural, political and ontological damage.
Steps to nuclear proliferation: Stuxnet.
The Stuxnet virus21 was a remote rootkit type virus specifically engineered primarily to infect and modify software deployed in equipment constructed by the Siemans corporation. The virus is claimed to be infectious through computer modules designed to facilitate re-engineering of on-board software components, e.i toolkit development environments. The Stuxnet virus first emerged in rhetorical form in 2010 as a malware program infecting industrial systems.
In late 2010, the virus was reported to be particularly active in Iran with many estimates citing up to 60% of worldwide infections having taken place in systems deployed in Iran. The Stuxnet virus has since been widely credited to state actors due to its apparent complexity chief among them the United States and Israel.
Stuxnet, being primarily a migrateable assembly-language component can cause infections to industrial systems through their controlled session managers which requires active and standard software configuration. Where a custom software configuration exists, for instance in order to inject a non-component security layer into a process, the virus is ineffective. This is due to computer viruses requiring a degree of systems standardisation to be in place in order to be effective.
The Stuxnet virus, and specifically the dissemination of its existence, constitutes in the larger part organised rhetoric in order to first suggest that Iran has a component to its nuclear program which should invite suspicion, and second to suggest that Israel and its parent the United States have the technical capacity to remotely renovate this capacity from outside Iran.
While the Iranian's have certainly attempted to accelerate this rhetoric by acceding to its purpose, it should be noted that an opportunity has clearly been taken by Iran to entertain the notion that its nuclear program has been slowed or disrupted, thereby smothering its actual progression.
Steps to nuclear proliferation: Assassination.
On 10th April 2012, Iran stated that it had arrested22 a number of armed belligerents inside Iran responsible for the killing of four scientists involved in Iran's nuclear program. The operation was announced three days before a scheduled conference to take place in Istanbul, Turkey to discuss the impending conflict regarding Iran's nuclear program. The four scientists had been subject to a sustained campaign of assassinations undertaken by, Iran claims, an Israeli military unit. The scientists so far killed are as follows:
Israel, Zionism and nuclear weapons proliferation.
In order to understand recent events surrounding Iran's nuclear program, it is necessary to understand what Israel itself is attempting to gain by attaching itself to this program, and further attaching itself to the United States government.
It is clear and understood in the international community that Iran has an advanced nuclear program involving the pursuit of peaceful energy production in order to provide for its domestic needs. This is supplemented by a possible income stream from the sale of its domestic nuclear energy production to its neighbours in the form of a stable electricity stream. While many around the world are concerned with the disruptive effects of competition over fossil fuels and the conflicts they bring, Iran too is also concerned about the stability of its regime given its resource rich status in terms of petroleum and gas industries. It should be noted that Iran is flanked to the east by Afghanistan and to the west by Iraq, both scenes of devastation brought about by competition for control of gas and oil. Under this moniker, Iran has a clear purpose in the development of stable energy production in order to release its domestic fossil fuel resources for worldwide consumption, thus alleviating the potential for conflict developing among 'other' consumerist nations as they compete for resources.
However, the pursuit of nuclear energy also brings with it the capacity for further isotopic enrichment which in turn leads to the possibility of weapons production. Here, Israel has clearly stated time and time again that its primary grievance is one of strategic fear. If Iran were to develop a nuclear weapons capability, Israel would be immediately smothered by a near neighbour over which it would have little or no tactical control. Even worse, it would no longer have leverage over the US, British or European states due to their hesitance to 'engage' with a nuclear state. In short order, Israel would find its entire regional influence in a state of relapse without any means of recovery. In this type of arena, Israel's 'apparent' nuclear posture would be irredeemably uncovered like an open injury.
The strategic consequences for Israel in the event that Iran could develop a nuclear weapons component would be glittering. Almost immediately it would require an 'off the shelf' nuclear component to replace its ageing 'rhetorical Samson' and would seek that component from the United States. Its Modus Operandi would be existential citing Iran's refusal to accept its sovereignty. Here, Israel is clearly attempting to build a narrative of weapons proliferation in Iran in order to bring about its own subsidised weapons proliferation courtesy of the United States.
Israel, along with its Zionist compatriots primarily encamped in the United States, is currently articulating a narrative of nuclear proliferation which it is attempting to lay neatly at the feet of its giant neighbour Iran. At present, there is no evidence in existence that Iran is attempting to weaponise its nuclear program, and in political and geo-political form, it is highly unlikely that it would have any economic or military reason to do so.
As a result, Israel in the form of its Zionist politic, has taken the provisional steps toward a narrative of proliferation of nuclear weapons in the Middle-Eastern region and has further attempted once again to de-stabilise regional stability toward a military confrontation involving foreign states. This narrative involves threats of violence, internal and external disruption of its own and its neighbours political systems along with farming and maintaining severe misinformation across all media environments. The Zionist politic both inside and outside Israel, has again articulated an existential threat this time involving a serious and disturbing attempt to introduce a catastrophic element in weaponised form into a region that is already experiencing severe disruption and political hardship.
Israel has attempted this narrative in order to motivate its empty nuclear weapons rhetoric into an actual nuclear weapons posture. Were Israel to successfully bring about a state of conflict in its region, nuclear weapons production in Iran would start in earnest. Were it to successfully alight from its current situation into a nuclear posture at the US's expense, nuclear weapons production in Iran would start in earnest. In its current rhetoric and its current political stance, Israel cannot help but push Iran toward a disruptive and worrying course of action that would wrench what slither of current stability exists in the region from its footing, and cast it into flames.
At every approach to this particular junction, Israel's nationalist posture in the form of strident nationalist Zionism...must constitute the first and only casualty.