By ETHAN BRONNER
JERUSALEM — Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak have turned into the odd couple of Israeli politics in whose hands sits the prospect of an attack on Iran. From opposite political traditions with distinct experiences and worldviews, the two have forged a tight bond, often excluding the rest of the Israeli leadership.
Related
U.S. War Game Sees Perils of Israeli Strike Against Iran (March 20, 2012)
Times Topics: Iran | Israel
World Twitter Logo.
Connect With Us on Twitter
Follow @nytimesworld for international breaking news and headlines.
Twitter List: Reporters and Editors
For Mr. Netanyahu, an Iranian nuclear weapon would be the 21st-century equivalent of the Nazi war machine and the Spanish Inquisition — the latest attempt to destroy the Jews. Preventing that is the mission of his life. For Mr. Barak, who spurns talk of a second Holocaust and fear for Israel’s existence, it is a challenge about strategy: “zones of immunity” and “red lines,” the operational details of an assault on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
“All leaders have kitchen cabinets, but Netanyahu and Barak have established a kitchenette of two,” remarked Nahum Barnea, a columnist for the Yediot Aharonot newspaper, in an interview. “They haven’t discussed Iran with the rest of the government in weeks and have convinced themselves there is only one way to deal with Iran — their way.”
A top Israeli official who works closely with both leaders and spoke on the condition of anonymity confirmed that the cabinet had not talked lately about Iran, but noted that detailed and long-standing preparation had gone into the possibility of a military strike. Of the two men, he said: “One views himself as a savior, the other lives for a good operation. They’re a strange pair who have come to appreciate each other. Together they control this issue.”
Mr. Netanyahu is the leader of the right-wing Likud Party and grew up in the revisionist Zionist tradition of maximizing territory, standing up aggressively to Israel’s opponents and rejecting the quasi socialism of David Ben-Gurion, the founding prime minister. Mr. Barak grew up on a collective farm deep within the heart of Labor Zionism, and after a long and decorated military career became chairman of the Labor Party. He served briefly as prime minister before losing popular support and an election to Ariel Sharon in 2001.
“On the surface they appear very different,” commented Daniel Ben-Simon, a left-leaning Labor Party member of Parliament who worked with Mr. Barak. “Netanyahu cannot disconnect Israel from the Holocaust. He sees himself as the prime minister of the Jewish people. Barak is the ultimate Israeli, the prince of Zionism. Many thought Barak would rein in Netanyahu on Iran. Instead he joined with him into a two-man show.”
While many here fear a catastrophe if Israel strikes at Iran, Mr. Barak and Mr. Netanyahu increasingly argue that there may be no other option. Their view is that given a choice between an Iran with nuclear weapons — which they say could use them against Israel directly or through proxies, as well as spur a regional arms race — and the consequences of an attack on Iran before it can go nuclear, the latter is far preferable. There will be a counterattack, they say; people will lose their lives and property will be destroyed. But they say it is the lesser of two evils.
“Rockets will fall on this building, but things would be far worse if Iran got the bomb,” said a top former official who has worked for both men, as he sat in a seaside Tel Aviv hotel lobby.
He added that Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Barak were “meeting one on one with certain cabinet ministers in order to shape a majority in the 14,” referring to the 14-member security cabinet.
They have known each other a long time and have developed a strong mutual dependence. Mr. Barak’s political career, which once seemed so promising, now relies heavily on his relationship with Mr. Netanyahu. And given Mr. Netanyahu’s limited military experience, without the backing of Mr. Barak, who is seen as a military mastermind, he would have trouble winning support for his policy.
Mr. Barak, 70, was a commander of Mr. Netanyahu, 62, in the elite Sayeret Matkal unit in which they both served in the early 1970s. Both have also grown relatively wealthy in recent years from speeches and consulting when not in government, and both feel they understand American politics especially well.
If they did decide to attack, they would need the backing of a majority of the security cabinet. Most estimates are that they would get that support, although the vote might be as close as 8 to 6. But by keeping the issue off the cabinet’s agenda for now, they could be counting on seeking an 11th-hour vote, when it would be harder for ministers to oppose the attack.
Fonte:The New York Times
________________
Assad Accepts Cease-Fire; Opponents Are Skeptical
By ANNE BARNARD and RICK GLADSTONE
Published: March 28, 2012
AL QAA, Lebanon — Seeking to project an image of responsibility and reason, President Bashar al-Assad of Syria formally accepted a United Nations envoy’s cease-fire proposal on Tuesday and conducted a televised walking tour through the shell-shocked city of Homs, a center of the year-old uprising against him.
Follow @nytimesworld for international breaking news and headlines.
Twitter List: Reporters and Editors
Enlarge This Image
Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, center, on Tuesday in the heavily damaged Baba Amr neighborhood of Homs, which he said would be rebuilt.
But his actions belied a new outbreak of bloodletting on the Syria-Lebanon border, where government troops clashed with rebels who had taken refuge there. And his political critics expressed strong skepticism that Mr. Assad, who has broken numerous pledges before in the Syrian conflict, would now honor a cease-fire with his opponents, whom he has described as terrorists and thugs.
Some of his fractious opponents outside the country, meeting in Istanbul to seek a common front, said late Tuesday they had agreed to reunite under the Syrian National Council, whose Paris-based leadership projects itself as the main umbrella group for exiled dissidents.
But the agreement left out representatives of Syria’s large Kurdish minority, who complained that their demands for special status in a post-Assad era were not being taken into account. News reports said the trade-off for even limited unity had been an agreement by the council’s leader, Burhan Ghalioun, to discuss restructuring the movement on Wednesday.
The exiles were meeting ahead of a gathering on Sunday in Istanbul of the so-called Friends of Syria including many Arab and Western governments seeking Mr. Assad’s ouster.
Anti-Assad groups inside Syria, meanwhile, reported that at least 57 people were killed in clashes throughout the country on Tuesday, including the area bordering this northern Lebanon village, although it was impossible to corroborate their claims. The United Nations raised its estimated tally of the dead in the conflict to more than 9,000, from 8,000 a few weeks ago.
While Kofi Annan, the special emissary for Syria and former United Nations secretary general, was announcing that Mr. Assad had agreed to his six-point proposal, Mr. Assad’s own emissary was visiting with President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, one of his few remaining defenders, who called the Syrian conflict a plot by the United States and its allies, including Israel and members of the Arab League, to colonize Syria.
“Today it has become clear to all that the arrogant powers try to harm Iran, Syria and the resistance movement, trying to save the Zionist regime under the slogan of human rights and caring for freedom,” Mr. Ahmadinejad told Faisal Maqdad, a special envoy of Mr. Assad’s, according to Iran’s state-run news media.
Iran’s official Islamic Republic News Agency made no mention of the Syrian president’s acceptance of the peace proposal by Mr. Annan, appointed as a special representative of both the United Nations and the Arab League. The United Nations Security Council unanimously endorsed Mr. Annan’s effort last week, putting new pressure on the Syrian president.
Mr. Assad, who has restricted foreign news coverage of the conflict and has seldom emerged publicly, paid a surprise visit to Homs, where his army has been locked in an on-again, off-again battle with elements of the insurgent Free Syrian Army and other antigovernment groups for weeks. The government proclaimed Homs safe in early March but last week resumed artillery and mortar barrages of recalcitrant neighborhoods.
Footage broadcast by Syrian state television showed Mr. Assad leading an entourage through the heavily damaged Baba Amr neighborhood, ordering expedited repairs and greeting clots of well-wishers. It was the first time he had visited the city since it was damaged in the fighting.
A voice is heard yelling: “We are with you till death!” Mr. Assad later tells a crowd of supporters, “We will all work together to rebuild Baba Amr, and it will be better than it used to be.”
Anti-Assad activists noted that his visit was not broadcast live and appeared to have been heavily edited and orchestrated. One activist, Abu Jaafar, reached by Skype in the Inshaat neighborhood of Homs, said the visit had been preceded by many tanks encircling Baba Amr, flyovers by at least four helicopters and “a lot of gunfire.”
Fonte:The New York Times
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário