The images of the Iranian drones diving on houses in Kiev on the mission of the new global devil are much more than the Israeli propaganda could have dreamed of. Together with the harsh oppressive images of women coming from Iran, they are more effective than any blackening campaign that Israel could lead.
Descending into the heart of the city and exploding: dramatic documentation of the drone attack on Kyiv
Iran denies: we did not supply drones to Russia for the fighting in Ukraine
Today you don’t have to explain to anyone which side Iran is on, who are its allies and who it will supply weapons to when it has more money. The Israeli temptation to ride the wave and take advantage of the opportunity for an extensive information system against the Iranians is great, but in Israel they prefer, right now, to remain silent. Let the facts speak for themselves.
The world now sees who Iran is and what the weapons it builds are used for, and Israel’s entry into the world discourse will immediately return it to a discussion framework that the world already knows well and is tired of: Israel vs. Iran. It’s a discussion where there will always be faces here and there, and right now the facts in themselves are strong enough. They don’t need a push.
Israel feared, and rightly so, that any entry into the global discourse on the issue of Ukraine would immediately raise the question: What is Israel doing about it? The Ukrainians were quick to recognize the opportunity and attacked Israel with a demand for assistance. They want everything: an arrow, David’s slingshot, an Iron Dome, a laser shield, radars. For weeks Defense Minister Benny Gantz has been trying to arrange a phone call with his Ukrainian (Jewish) counterpart to wish him a Happy New Year. The conversation, but from the moment the Iranian drones appeared in the sky of Kyiv, the Ukrainian was already on the line. Gantz had to return his face blank.
Many good Israelis believe that we must adopt the required moral position and give Ukraine what it wants. The heart of every man of conscience will incline towards the noble position of helping a people struggling for its freedom against tyranny. But there are a number of reasons, no less moral, that stand against it:
1. It is unpleasant to say, but we cannot trust the Ukrainians to know how to protect our sensitive technologies. Regardless of their murderous part in our nation’s history, Israel cannot entrust Ukraine, in its current state, with technologies on which our lives depend. Certainly not when it is fighting against an ally of Iran.
2. Israel does not have redundant air defense systems, and it does not have Iron Dome batteries lying on the shelf. Every air defense battery and every interceptor delivered to Ukraine will be subtracted from our defense capabilities. At the end of the day – we are much more threatened by Iranian missiles and drones than Ukraine.
3. Russia is our neighbor to the north, and it allows us, as of now, to act against Iranian establishment in Syria and against transfers of advanced weapons to Hezbollah (Israel did not really stop the attacks in Syria, as my colleagues believe, wait a few days and see). The transfer of active weapons systems, even if defensive, to Ukraine, may change the delicate status quo we have established with the Russians in Syria and lead to a Russian response. With all the sympathy for the residents of Kherson and Mykolaiv – our first moral obligation is to the lives of the fighters we send to attack in Syria.
Ukraine is not alone. Behind her stands the entire Western world, led by the great United States. For America, Ukraine is the first opportunity, since the Cold War, to conduct a campaign against the Russians using a messenger, a proxy, without a hair falling from the head of an American soldier. The Americans and the Europeans are equipping Ukraine with the best military technologies in order to drain the blood of the Russians.
The Israeli choice to take a more moderate position is contrary to our nature, of being the one who jumps in the head. But the war in Ukraine is a global event, and we, despite our impressive technology and our desire to stand out, should not be at the forefront of the event.
The world according to Biden
If you want to get a better sense of us and our place in the world – you should read the US National Security Strategy (NSS), which President Biden published last week. Like the personality of its author, the strategy is dim, confused, full of good intentions but also full of contradictions. The East High school appears in it as the fourth most important challenge in the world for the USA.
Biden sees the world as a competition between democracies and autocracies, primarily China, which in his eyes is the only one that claims to reshape the world order and accumulates the diverse strengths needed to implement it. Russia is seen as a “threat to world order”, but one that can be contained.
As expected, Biden believes that world order should be based on coalitions and alliances, and the use of military force should be limited only to cases of protecting American forces (for those who still believed that the US would use military force against Iran or Russia). In the event that Russia uses nuclear force, the document hints Because the US will respond with military force, not nuclear, but such that it will signal to Russia and the world that a line has been crossed that must not be crossed.
The bright spot for us in Biden’s hopeless document is the mention of Israel as the stable ally and the only one mentioned in the context of the Middle East. Biden repeats the ironclad commitment of the US to Israel’s security, and as a lip service casually mentions his commitment to the “two-state” solution.
He sees Iran as the third state threat to the US, after China and Russia, and reiterates his commitment to preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. The document was written before the Iranian involvement in the war in Ukraine was revealed, and probably before the hijab protest, but Biden remains committed to a diplomatic solution of the nuclear issue. In Israel, they believe that these developments make the prospect of a nuclear deal with Iran, which is once again seen as part of the global axis of evil, far away.
In modesty, I think otherwise: Iran needs an agreement that will rehabilitate it economically, and perhaps calm its internal unrest, and the US would be happy to remove the Iranian issue from its busy agenda, even in the face of a wretched administration like the Ayatollah’s administration – and hence there are conditions for the agreement. Officially, Israel is opposed to returning to the bad nuclear agreement of 2015, but as Defense Minister Gantz hinted this week – if Iran starts enriching uranium to the level of 90% – Israel may find itself standing alone. If that moment comes – we will still wish for the US to return to the nuclear agreement
The writer is the military commentator of News 13.