I sought out Martin Kramer in Jerusalem because I knew he would give me an analysis well outside-the-box on Iranian nuclear weapons. He's a scholar, not a politician or pundit. And while he certainly has his opinions, he doesn't conveniently fit into anyone's ideological box.
I was not disappointed, and I don't think you will be either. What he has to say is different from anything you've read from anyone in the media, including me.
MJT: I assume you read Jeffrey Goldberg's article in The Atlantic this summer. He asked dozens of Israeli decision-makers and analysts if they think Israel will strike Iran's nuclear weapons facilities, and the concensus seems to be that the odds are greater than fifty percent that it will happen before the middle of summer in 2011. What do you think?
Martin Kramer: It's in Israel's interest to convince the world that the decision-makers are leaning in that direction. The idea is to prompt somebody else to take action, in particular the Obama administration. So there's a debate about whether or not Jeffrey has been spun.
MJT: Yes, and he mentioned that himself.
Martin Kramer: The whole purpose of spinning Jeffrey Goldberg--assuming that's what happened--was to prod the United States into taking a more forward position. Americans are taking a forward position already, but the idea here would be to multiply the effect.
But I don't know. I haven't spoken to all the people Jeffrey talked to, and there are a lot of variables that we don't know yet. The timeline is open to question. The intelligence is also being debated. So while I wouldn't put a percentage on it, plans are definitely on the table. If the Unites States doesn't act, the moment will come when a decision will have to be made. We don't know what the arguments will be or in which ways the calculations will shift between now and then. Israel has the option, though, and it's on the table. I wouldn't say the odds are greater than fifty percent, but it's a credible option.
MJT: What do you think Iran would actually do with a nuclear bomb?
An interesting interview in that it (1) reveals that the prospect of a nuclear Iran has concentrated Israeli assets (eg. duplicate command centers) away from Tel Aviv and in the vicinity of Jerusalem, making a Palestinian-Israeli settlement less likely, and (2) underlines, I think plausibly, that Iran's real interest is control of the Persian Gulf and not getting dragged into proxy fights with Israel by Hezbollah and Hamas. Neither point has received the attention it should in the American press so far as I am aware.
The interview does not reconcile the apparent inconsistency in the first two points (If a nuclear Iran is more focused on control of the Persian Gulf, shouldn't Israel have less need to harden its position on Jerusalem and the West Bank?). More importantly, in arguing that America should take out Iran's nuclear capability, it presumes that the US can do so effectively not just once but as many times thereafter as needed. Martin Kramer concedes that Obama may not act but the deeper question is whether America has a permanent interest in dominating the Gulf in this way or could do so.
Quite apart from Iran, there is a wider picture affecting American calculations involving the utility of open-ended ground wars in southwest Asia and the growing naval challenge that China will pose. Clearly the United States could maintain a naval presence in the Arabian Sea for some years after it withdraws ground forces (win or lose) from current conflicts. But there are limits to what we may be willing and able to do on the ground in the Middle East, and mounting security concerns elsewhere will place competing demands on our fleet and air force.
But Michael Totten has done a service by interviewing Mr. Kramer, whose views are candid and different. I would like to know Mr. Kramer's views about the prospects for the Indian navy replacing us in the region, maybe in a decade or so, and for an Arab nuclear capability matching an Iranian one in the same timeframe if the Saudis get help from Pakistan and Egypt. Has Israel given thought to these possibilities for a post-American region?