Op-Ed: Rattle the sabers - Iran test fires missiles after threat to Israel, U.S. interests

If ever a “dialog” created itself, the Iranian missile story would be the classic instance. The military maneuvering, however, is real enough. As the missiles fired today, US and British warships were reported to be “in range” of the launch sites.

The Iranian Shahab 3 missile, one of which was test fired, is the problem here. It’s claimed to have the ability to hit Israel, which would trigger a regional war. However, whether Iran has any real sustainable strike capacity isn’t clear. There’s no indication that Iran has any nuclear weapons operational, either. Nor is it credible that Iran would be prepared to enter into a conventional conflict against NATO-standard forces. So from a military perspective, this doesn’t really mean much. Diplomatically, however, it’s yet another curtain raiser for yet another round of verbosity. The New York Times explains the tortuous logic in the current phase of this situation:

“Israel has no desire for conflict or hostilities with Iran,” Mark Regev, a spokesman for Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, said. “But the Iranian nuclear program and the Iranian ballistic missile program must be of grave concern to the entire international community.”

The confrontation has drawn in the world’s industrialized nations in the Group of 8, meeting in Japan, whose leaders urged Iran to suspend uranium enrichment. Iran displayed its military capability just a day after the United States and the Czech Republic signed an accord to allow the Pentagon to deploy part of its contentious antiballistic missile shield, which Washington maintains is designed to protect in part against Iranian missiles.

The other missiles fired were tactical, not able to hit much but neighboring countries and theoretically fleet units, although an actual hit would be pretty miraculous. That hasn’t stopped the threats, of course:

The missile tests followed remarks by a senior Iranian official who was quoted Tuesday as warning the United States against attacking Iran.

“In case that they commit such foolishness, Tel Aviv and the U.S. fleet in the Persian Gulf would be the first targets to burst into flames receiving Iran’s crushing response,” said Ali Shirazi, a representative of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, according to the Iranian news agency.

As military bulldust, this is well on a par with most of history’s famous last words. There’s only one way to deliver on that threat against a non-existent problem. As propaganda, it’s another part of the pan Middle East popularity contest to be more anti-Israel and anti-American than anyone else. Nothing more or less than normal. Meanwhile the uranium enrichment continues. Brinkmanship is the art of going close to the edge without going over it. It’s very much a matter of opinion whether this qualifies as brinkmanship or a sublime ability to ignore the probable results of the uranium program. Iran’s international support is marginal, to say the least. Nobody has much to gain by supporting Iran in the face of the global position. I hate to say this, but if this starts World War 3, it might be for no better reason than someone trying to score a point.