What if the Iranians start killing scientists?
The next phase of the assassination war is liable to turn international scientific conferences into arenas of assassination.
By Avner CohenIsrael's official response to news of the assassination last week of Iranian nuclear scientist Mustafa Ahmadi Roshan was a deafening silence. The unofficial response was a wink. The day before, Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz, grinning slightly, spoke about "unnatural events" that were delaying Iran's nuclear program. The Israeli self-congratulation was obvious.
The Israeli public did not question the wisdom of assassinating the Iranian scientists. In Israeli culture, which sanctifies security, such questions are seen as treason. If the hit was successful - the scientist was eliminated and the assassins disappeared - you don't ask questions.
But U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton insisted on calling a spade a spade: She categorically denied all U.S. involvement in the latest assassination and even declared that the United States emphatically opposed the assassination of scientists. Her announcement was received with shock and even dismay in Israel. Where is the wisdom in making this kind of public statement, some asked; and in any event, it's hypocritical in light of the fact that President Barack Obama has killed more terrorists using unmanned aerial vehicles than his predecessors.
In order to understand the American criticism of the hits on the scientists, one must ask the questions that Israelis avoid: Do such killings do real damage to Iran's nuclear program? What could be the negative results of the assassination policy? Is it right to create a situation in which scientists (first nuclear scientists and then perhaps scientists in general and senior officials ) become pawns in a war of assassinations and counter-assassinations?
Regarding efficacy, we know that Iran's nuclear program, based in Natanz, is an enormous project employing hundreds of scientists and thousand of technicians. It is hard to imagine that taking out a single scientist, however skilled and high-ranking, could damage the entire project enough to cause a significant delay. The project has long since passed the point where the fate of any one individual could affect it.
Not only will killing individuals fail to significantly delay the project or cause its leaders to dial back their political and strategic goals, it will almost certainly have the opposite effect: It will only add to Iran's determination to carry on. And to keep their scientists from becoming demoralized, the Iranians will do everything possible to make good on their promise of revenge.
If there are assassinations on one side, it must be assumed that there will be assassination attempts on the other side too. If Iranian scientists are not immune, then neither are scientists from the countries suspected of carrying out the assassinations. While Iranian officials had previously pointedly refrained from accusing any particular country, within hours of the attack this time, the government in Tehran and the Iranian media named Israel and the United States as the responsible parties, and promised revenge.
Israel may have rejoiced at the news of the hit, but let's consider how senior members of Israel's scientific community, especially the nuclear scientists, would view the assassination of scientists on the faculties of well-known academic institutions. (Most of the senior scientists in Iran's nuclear program also have academic posts. ) They would probably have reservations about the wisdom of expanding the shadow war to the scientific community.
Anyone who legitimizes the assassination of scientists in Tehran jeopardizes the personal security of scientists on the other side. The next phase of the assassination war is liable to turn international scientific conferences into arenas of assassination.
It is entirely possible that the damage caused by the assassinations far outweigh the benefits they bring.
The writer is a professor at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, at California's Monterey Institute of International Studies, and author of "The Worst-Kept Secret: Israel's Bargain with the Bomb."
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
As long as we don't start killing Iranian journalists you a safe.
Israel will cry TERRORISM! TERRORISM!
It is hard to condemn terrorism when engaging in terrorism.. The bombings in Iran are terrorism.
So, Mark, would you have opposed the assasination of scientists working on Nazi Germany's atomic bomb?
What's the aim of assassinating this Iranian scientist? Are both aims equal and the same? Or it simply doesn't matter because of our understandable gut and moral reaction to an extra-judicial murder?
Irresponsible journalism !
Then I suppose you will not have take the trouble to become an Ambassador or US Senate or Congress member.
Just for your info U.S. Senators are in fact members of Congress. Congress is comprised of the House of Representatives and the Senate/
This is one of the defensive measures the Israelis have to resort to in order to survive from day to day . Never trust a wild lion. Sooner or latter when Iran has the bomb ,nobody will come to the rescue of Israel.
The US has a policy of no assassination of civilians. They do assassinate terrorist combatants and their senders since they participate in a "war". If the US did assassinate the Iranian scientist, this would have been a foolish departure from policy, because killing scientists is just too easy, especially scientists in democracies. I hope it isn't true, but if the Iranians are correct, the authorizing US official should pay the price.
We must have missed that metamorphosis: Iran is now a "democracy"?
Assassination is usually a bad policy because the bullet (or bomb) is an equalizer. It is easy for Iran to send some tourist who will assassinate some Israeli academic nuclear physicist. Such people don't have state protection, their real protection is the ease at which similar revenge actions can happen.
Without a shred of evidence that Israel/Mossad was behind this assassination I will go forward under the assumption that this was an internal Iranian matter and the struggle between the current Iranian President and the reining Ayatolla.
Is there any shred of evidence that this was an internal Iranian matter? Evidence matters, but as my History teacher once said: "The guilty is often, but not always, the one who profits most from the crime". And to suggest that the struggle between the President and the Ayatolla led to the assassination of an Iranian scientist does show some lack of knowledge about current Iranian affairs.
one dead scientist may lead to the death of another ahh thats goodnews may be scientist afraid of been kill will refuse to work on nuclear facillities or any wmd project
First, if you take one mind out of the game, it might be the one that will think about the solution to the next major issue that they have in the project. Not everyone can solve anything... And yes, everything is fair in love and war. No one, from no side, got immunity.
I'm sure Israeli scientists, those innocent civilians beside them and the scientists' children asleep in their beds thank you for that sentiment.