>Although almost certainly unintended, your suggestion would allow
>Israel to retain its nuclear weapons monopoly in the Mideast. I
>agree it could not be bullied into nuclear disarmament even if the
>US were ever inclined to play that role, which of course it is not.
>
>This is precisely why the Iranians are seeking a nuclear capability,
>much as the USSR did to counter to the US nuclear monopoly in the
>aftermath of World War II.
>
>The threat of "mutually assured destruction" did set limits to US
>military aggression in China, Vietnam, Cuba and elsewhere. An
>Iranian bomb would place a similar restraint on Israel's
>unchallenged military supremacy in the region. The Israelis, for
>example, would be more much cautious about invading Lebanon or Gaza
>on the flimsiest of pretexts given the risk of an escalating
>uncontrollable confrontation with a nuclear-armed Iran. There would
>no longer be arrogant loose talk about air strikes on targets inside
>Iran, as there is now, if the Iranians succeed in developing the
>capacity to threaten retaliation with nuclear-tipped missiles.
>
>This strategic geopolitical calculation is of course what underlies
>Israel's efforts to halt Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons - not,
>as Israeli propaganda has it, the existential fear of an unprovoked
>nuclear attack on Tel Aviv by suicidal mad mullahs in Iran.
Speaking of Israel, I watched an interesting current affairs story last night. Here's a news report: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-02-13/israel-censors-reports-on-australian-prisoner-x-case/4515664
Yeah, the problem with your theory is, firstly, Iran having a bomb would, according to your analysis, make the geopolitics of the middle-east more stable, Which would be bad news for many people. A ghastly outcome.
But what you forget is that the US/Soviet cold war only produced restraint because of the enormous risk of a nuclear war which would destroy the whole world. And don't forget how very very close it came to that a couple of times. That's not a risk worth taking.
That news story I posted above hints at another path. Because it seems to demonstrate that the Israeli state is perhaps more afraid of being subject to close scrutiny, than it is afraid of military action. You don't bring down your enemy by attacking his strengths, but by exploiting his weaknesses.
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas