Column One: Keeping Zionism's promise: "On the one hand, we have Netanyahu, who is clearly focused on preventing another Holocaust of Jewry. But on the other hand, we have Defense Minister Ehud Barak, who on Tuesday claimed that the absence of peace with the Palestinians – not Iran – is the greatest threat that Israel faces today. As he put it, “The lack of defined boundaries within Israel, and not an Iranian bomb, is the greatest threat to our future.”"
Caroline Glick at the Jerusalem Post writes that there is different opinions about which is worse a bomb from Iran or the World's opinion against Israel due to the Palestinian issue. She also discusses the problems in Malmö of fleeing Jews.
The problem with trying to alleviate the risk of nuclear proliferation in Iran is that bombing Iran will make Barak's worries greater. Israel seems positioned between the rock and the hard place.
The question is then of Kagan's idea of a higher probability for a regime change in Iran than that they stop their nuclear program is to wonder whether a regime change will improve the Palestinian issue by weakening the support to Hamas and Hizbollah? However, a regime change is probably easier talked about than accomplished.
The Iranian issue is otherwise heating up as Tony Blair during his questioning yesterday said that he thinks the risk we face with Iran today is greater than that with Iraq in 2003. His take on this issue must be considered important as he has travelled the Middle East for some years now as a Peace Envoy.
Amorteringskravet är symbolpolitik – artikel i UNT
19 timmar sedan