Experts: Military conflict between Iran and Israel is beneficial, but fraught with danger for Arab countries

Azerbaijan, Baku - Some Arab countries are interested in a military clash between Iran and Israel, but at the same time, are concerned about its consequences, which can take a devastating scale, experts say.

"A number of Arab countries listed in the publications of WikiLeaks not only support a military scenario, but provoke it, considering military conflict between Iran and Israel optimal for themselves, because it would weaken both of these historical rivals of the Arab world," the president of the Institute for Middle East Studies Yevgeny Satanovsky wrote to Trend in an e-mail.
Roughly 250,000 secret diplomatic telegrams and letters sent from U.S. diplomatic missions in various countries to the U.S. State Department were transferred via WikiLeaks to the New York Times, Guardian, Spiegel, and several other influential media outlets.

Of these, particularly the Arab world is deeply concerned about the situation in Iran. So, the King of Saudi Arabia has repeatedly called on U.S. to attack on Iran to stop its nuclear program. According to documents, in April 2008, the ambassador of Saudi Arabia in Washington at a meeting with Pentagon officials once again announced this request, stating: "You [Americans] should cut the head off the snake."

According to published documents, Iran is regarded in Egypt, UAE, Jordan as "evil" and "permanent" threat.

According to Satanovsky, "the scenario of war of the Shiite with Jews is ideal for conservative Sunni orthodoxy, sympathizing with al-Qaeda, although it can not build direct open communications with the Israelis about this and works through diplomatic channels, including through the United States."

But the Arab world was not, is not and will not be unified in fact or formally, with the exception of formal unity in supporting the "rights of the Palestinian people", the Russian expert said.
With regards to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's reaction to WikiLeaks publications on Iran, then, according to Satanovsky, it is obvious that his words [Netanyahu] correspond exactly to reality, and publications discovered the "open secret".

Nuclear-armed Iran poses a grave threat to Israel, the Middle East peace and humanity, Netanyahu said Monday, adding that "now the Middle Eastern leaders are talking openly what has long been spoken in secret."

Israeli prime minister believes that in case of attack from Iran, Israel will be "the first but not the last target of attack".

One of the documents posted on WikiLeaks quoted Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak that the strike on Iranian nuclear facilities makes sense only until the end of 2010. After 2010, "any military solution could lead to unacceptable collateral damage", said Israeli minister.

A military attack on Iran, mentioned in the recent controversial publications of WikiLeaks, would entail catastrophic consequences for all countries, including countries of the region, American expert Vladimir Sokor told Trend.

"One has only to think about oil prices, the blockade of the Persian Gulf, an influx of refugees from Iran and continuous hostility of Iran against those whom it would consider responsible for such an attack," said Sokor, fellow of Jamestown Foundation (Washington).

According to him, Saudi Arabia is not an important player in the international arena, and similar statements from her show about the immaturity of the Government.

According to him, Saudi Arabia is not an important player in the international arena, and similar statements by it show the immaturity of the country's government.

"There is much speculation about a possible attack on Iran, though the biggest opponent to attack is the Pentagon, he said. - The U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of U.S. Armed Forces, Admiral Mike Mullen are ardent opponents of the military solution to the Iranian problem" .


Sokor is not sure that Israel is serious when it threatens to attack Iran. He thinks the purpose of such threats is mainly to scare the American and Western European governments and to force them to introduce economic sanctions against Iran in order to avoid the attack.

"This becomes a diplomatic tactics of Israel, which it is also using in Washington and Washington, in turn, is using in Europe," Sokor said. "The logical chain of thinking is: Israel threatens to attack, Washington states that we must pass sanctions and then Washington goes to West Europeans saying: if you don't want Israel to attack Iran then support us to introduce sanctions in the UN Security Council (UNSC)."

Until now, Israeli threats to attack Iran looked mostly like a political gesture designed to support economic sanctions against Iran in the UNSC, he said.

"Such threats are not really credible. But they are harmful because they can legitimize the idea of attack on Iran and make this question a topic of custom discussion," Sokor added.

Sokor believes but the most negative consequences of such threats - an obstacle to political dialogue between Israel and Iran.

"Relations between Israel and Iran, of course, cannot be changed as long as they threaten each other. Iran and Israel were allies during the Shah's rule in Iran. So, there is no historical reason why Israel and Iran should be permanent enemies," Sokor noted.

Iran has no diplomatic relations with Israel and refuses to recognize it as a state. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speaks regularly about the prompt breakup of Israel.

Iranian expert who lives in London Alirza Nourizadeh agrees that Arab states of the Persian Gulf consider Iran's nuclear program a source of grave danger for the region, as they believe that Iran may use the resulting nuclear weapons against them.

"If Iran develops nuclear weapons, to avoid attacks on it by the U.S. and Israel would be impossible, despite that the U.S. and Israel do not want to use military force against Iran, Nourizadeh, head of the Iranian-Arab Research Center, told Trend in a telephone conversation from London.
According to him, the Gulf States fear the outbreak of war in their countries in case of an attack on Iran.

However, an Iranian expert on Middle East and the Iranian-Arab relations Hassan Hanizade believes that Netanyahu's statements were untrue because, in spite of the differences between Iran and Arab countries on political issues, there is no ground for hostile attitude of the Arab countries towards Iran.
"The position of Arab towards Iran is different from the point of view of the peoples of these countries, Hanizade told Trend by telephone from Tehran. - In the fight with Israel, Iran was the model for the Arab world. In case of any attack on Iran, it will cause the reaction of Arab and Muslim nations that will pose a problem for the leaders of these countries. "

About the concerns of the Gulf countries over Iran's nuclear program, Hanizade noted that at present such Arab countries as Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, plan to produce nuclear energy for use for civilian purposes, so they can not blame other nations in their peaceful nuclear activities.