The Iranian Threat

Watching Iranian President Ahmadinejad gallivant through hapless Lebanon called to mind the biting Hebrew saying, dating back to the first-century Rabbi Shimon Bar-Yohai, that “the work of the righteous is done for them by others.” The implication that Jews should not worry about practical matters but focus instead on fulfilling God’s desires prehaps originated as an otherworldly response to the failure of the Jewish revolt against the Romans. In our day it is used sarcastically in Israel to deride self-righteous political leaders who make irresponsible use of public resources to further their own interests. It also comes into play when someone foolishly provides the justification for the very positions he opposes. Ahmadinejad illustrated the principle when he declared to a Hezbollah rally in Lebanon: “The world should know that Zionists will perish.” Israel’s low-key response indicates a preference to let his extreme rhetoric make Israel’s case.

Some, though, remain unpersuaded. International Herald Tribune columnist Roger Cohen suggests Ahmadinejad is “all hat and no cattle,” that he is “odious” but not “dangerous,” Although the logical connection between hats and cattle seems as incoherent as the discounting of the Iranian threat. There is a long tradition of Americans learning the lessons of the last war only to misapply them to the next. Obsessed with the failure to prevent the rise of Nazism in the 1930s, a generation of Americans got the country into the debacle of Vietnam. Two generations later, America invaded Iraq in search of weapons of mass destruction that did not turn up. That traumatic war, in turn, leads some contemporary analysts to deny that Iran presents any credible threat. 

Perhaps Ahmadinejad’s visit to Lebanon may give them second thoughts. It reminds the world that he is president of a theologically motivated dictatorship that rules over 71 million people. On behalf of the “Supreme Leader” Ali Khamenei, he heads a brutally repressive regime that uses force to achieve its political goals. If it had peaceful intentions, why would Iran, a country so blessed with oil, take on the heavy international political and economic costs of proceeding with its nuclear program? Why would it create and sustain its Lebanese puppet Hezbollah, effectively a well-armed and trained subsidiary of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, so far from home? Is it not possible that the Iranian government means what it says?

Critics of the so-called “alarmist” view of Iran point out that some Israelis have been predicting an Iranian bomb since 1999. Israeli miscalculations cannot be ruled out, but another explanation is that Israelis, and others in the international community, have been working very hard, with some success, to delay the Iranian nuclear program.

Cohen calls Ahmadinejad ”the bogeyman from Central Casting.” But the path of sobriety is not to discount threats but rather to think practically how to counter the danger. 

Thus Israeli must respond to Ahmadinejad’s jaunt through Lebanon, first, by preparing to counter the threat. Wisdom dictates assuming the worst while hoping for the best. 

Second—and most important in the long term—is continuing to build our state without allowing the dangers it faces to dishearten us. We are doing this quite well. Israel surprised researchers recently, and no doubt gave acid reflux to its enemies, when its people turned out to be the eighth happiest population of any of the countries on Earth. 

At least for the moment, we do well to continue to let Ahmadinejad handle our public relations. This wasn’t exactly what Rabbi Shimon Bar-Yohai had in mind when he uttered his doctrine so long ago—or perhaps it was.

First published at http://bit.ly/Tn7Rs0