Soapbox:

Barking wars

By Gamal Salamah

---

Last week, The New York Times quoted US officials saying that Israel carried out large-scale military drills in June, hinting that the drills were in preparation for a possible strike against Iranian nuclear facilities. Meanwhile, Mohamed El-Baradei, chief of the International Atomic Energy Agency, threatened to quit if Iran is attacked, and warned that a military solution could transform the entire region into a ball of fire.

I cannot bet on El-Baradei having to quit his job any time soon. Despite Israel's repeated threats and US fiery rhetoric, a military strike against Iran is out of the question, at least for now. For domestic as well as international reasons, the current US administration is in no position to embark on such an adventure. And it knows that pushing Iran too far would make life much worse for thousands of US troops stationed in Iraq, practically next door to Iran.

Israel, too, is bluffing. For all its bravado, Olmert's government cannot make such a monumental decision. A prime minister who is under investigation should be grateful to keep his coalition together. Granted, Israel has done crazier things before, but this is a totally different ballgame.

Israel likes its wars short and limited. A strike against Iran is bound to escalate into a regional conflict of an unpredictable course and outcome. Israel simply lacks the geographic depth or demographic weight to survive such a prospect, and it knows it. Commenting on the Iranian controversy, Yediot Aharonot said that the dog that barks doesn't bite. As much as the US and Israel want to humiliate Iran, a full-fledged strike is unthinkable. For now, barking alone will have to do.

This week's Soapbox speaker is head of the political science department at the Suez Canal University.