Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Iran Is the Terrorist 'Mother Regime'

Benjamin Netanyahu
Iran Is the Terrorist 'Mother Regime'
Israel's would-be prime minister says he was mocked for warning of the
Gaza rocket threat.
By BRET STEPHENS
Jerusalem
It's Sunday morning, and I've been trying for days to get an interview
with former -- and, if his poll numbers hold up through the Feb. 10
election, soon-to-be -- Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. But
it's a political season, and there's a war on, and my calls aren't
being returned. With nothing better to do, I go downstairs to the
hotel gym for a jog.
So who should be on the treadmill next to mine? Benjamin Netanyahu. We
chat for a few minutes, mostly about the cease-fire that the
government of outgoing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has just declared,
and I ask if he'd be willing to sit for an interview later in the day.
His answer is something between a "maybe" and a "yes." As a nod to the
customs of the country, I take that as a definite yes, so much the
better to press his aides to arrange the meeting.
When the interview finally happens, in the grand reception hall of the
old King David Hotel, it's close to one o'clock in the morning on
Monday. Mr. Netanyahu has come from a long dinner with visiting
European leaders -- French President Nicolas Sarkozy, British Prime
Minister Gordon Brown and German Chancellor Angela Merkel among them
-- and he is plainly exhausted, joking that he can't be held
responsible for anything he might say.
The crack is unnecessary. Rare for a leading Israeli political figure,
the 59-year-old Mr. Netanyahu is a phenomenally articulate man --
Obama-esque, one might even say -- not just in his native Hebrew, but
also in the unaccented English he acquired at a Philadelphia high
school and later as an architecture and management student at MIT.
True to form, near-lapidary sentences all but trip from his tongue.
Such as:
"I don't think Israel can accept an Iranian terror base next to its
major cities any more than the United States could accept an al Qaeda
base next to New York City."
Or: "If we accept the notion that terrorists will have immunity
because as they fire on civilians they hide behind civilians, then
this tactic will be legitimized and the terrorists will have their
greatest victory."
Or: "We grieve for every child, for every innocent civilian that's
killed either on our side or on the Palestinian side. The terrorists
celebrate such suffering, on our side because they openly say they
want to kill us, all of us, and on the Palestinian side because it
helps them foster this false symmetry, which is contrary to common
decency and international law."
And so on. The immediate question, of course, is the Israeli
government's unilateral cease-fire, followed hours later by Hamas's
declaration of a conditional, one-week cease-fire. Was the war a win?
A draw? Or did it accomplish nothing at all -- thereby handing Hamas
the "victory" it loudly claims for itself?
When Mr. Olmert announced Israel's cease-fire late Saturday night, he
could hardly keep a grin off his face. In his estimate, along with
that of his senior military brass, Israel had scored a clear win: It
had humiliated Hamas militarily; it had caused a political rift within
the group; it had taken relatively few casualties of its own; it had
focused international attention on the problem of the arms smuggling
beneath Gaza's border with Egypt. Most important, in the eyes of the
Olmert government, it had avoided the trap of reoccupying Gaza -- the
only means, it believed, of finally getting rid of Hamas.
Ordinary Israelis, however, seem less confident in the result, and Mr.
Netanyahu gives voice to their caution. He is quick to applaud the
"brilliant" performance of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) and the
"perseverance and strength" of Israeli civilians under Hamas's years-
long rocket barrages.
But, he adds, "we have to make sure that the radicals do not perceive
this as a victory," and it remains far from clear that they would be
wrong to see it as one. "Notwithstanding the blows to the Hamas, it's
still in Gaza, it's still ruling Gaza, and the Philadelphi corridor
[which runs along Gaza's border with Egypt] is still porous, and . . .
Hamas can smuggle new rockets unless it's closed, to fire at Israel in
the future."
So is Mr. Netanyahu's preference regime change in Gaza? "Well, that
would have been the optimal outcome," he says, adding that "the
minimal outcome would have been to seal Gaza" from the missiles and
munitions being smuggled into it. So far it's unclear that Israel has
achieved even that: A "Memorandum of Understanding" agreed to last
week by Israel, the U.S. and Egypt could be effective in stopping the
flow of arms, but that's assuming Cairo lives up to its
responsibilities.
"One would hope they would actually do it," says Mr. Netanyahu,
sounding less than optimistic. Within days, his doubts are confirmed
when the Associated Press produces video footage of masked Palestinian
smugglers moving through once-again operational tunnels.
Rather than looking for solutions from Egypt, however, Mr. Netanyahu's
gaze is intently fixed on Iran, a subject that consumes at least half
of the interview. Iran is the "mother regime" both of Hamas, against
which Israel has just fought a war, as well as of Hezbollah, against
which it fought its last war in 2006. Together, he says, they are more
than simply fingers of Tehran's influence on the shores of the
Mediterranean.
"The arming of Iran with nuclear weapons may portend an irreversible
process, because these regimes assume a kind of immortality," he says,
arguing that the threat of a nuclear Iran poses a much graver danger
to the world than the current economic crisis. "[This] will pose an
existential threat to Israel directly, but also could give a nuclear
umbrella to these terrorist bases."
How to stop that from happening? Mr. Netanyahu mentions that he has
met with Barack Obama both in Israel and Washington, and that the
question of Iran "loomed large in both conversations." I ask: Did Mr.
Obama seem to him appropriately sober-minded about the subject? "Very
much so, very much so," Mr. Netanyahu stresses. "He [Mr. Obama] spoke
of his plans to engage Iran in order to impress upon them that they
have to stop the nuclear program. What I said to him was, what counts
is not the method but the goal."
It's easy to believe that Mr. Netanyahu, of all people, must be
wishing President Obama well: If diplomacy with Iran fails and the
U.S. does not resort to military force, it would almost certainly fall
to Mr. Netanyahu to decide whether Israel will go it alone in a
strike. (In a separate interview earlier that day, a senior military
official assured me that a successful strike on Iran's nuclear
facilities is well within Israel's capabilities.)
On the other hand, a Prime Minister Netanyahu could easily tangle with
the Obama administration, particularly if it makes a big push -- as it
looks like it might with the appointment of former Senate Majority
Leader George Mitchell as the new special envoy to the region -- for
the resumption of comprehensive, "final status" peace negotiations.
There's already a history here: During his first term as prime
minister from 1996 to 1999, Mr. Netanyahu frequently clashed with the
administration of the man whose wife is now the secretary of state.
Mr. Netanyahu's own prescriptions for a settlement with the
Palestinians -- what he calls a "workable peace" -- differ markedly
from the approaches of the 1990s. He talks about "the development of
capable law enforcement and security capabilities" for the
Palestinians, adding that the new National Security Adviser Jim Jones
had worked on the problem for the Bush administration. He stresses the
need for rapid economic development in the West Bank, promising to
remove "all sorts of impediments to economic growth" faced by
Palestinians.
As for the political front, Mr. Netanyahu promises a gradual, "bottom-
up process that will facilitate political solutions, not replace
them."
"Most of the approaches to peace between Israel and the Palestinians,"
he says, "have been directed at trying to resolve the most complex
problems, like refugees and Jerusalem, which is akin to building the
pyramid from the top down. It's much better to build it layer by
layer, in a deliberate, purposeful pattern that changes the reality
for both Palestinians and Israelis."
Whether this approach will work remains to be seen: Palestinian
economic development was also a priority in the 1990s, until it became
clear that billions in foreign aid were being siphoned off by corrupt
Palestinian officials, and after various joint economic projects with
Israel were violently sabotaged.
But however Mr. Netanyahu's economic and security plans play out, he
makes it equally clear that he is prepared to go only so far to reach
an accommodation that will meet some of the current demands being made
of Israel -- not only by Palestinians, but by the Syrians, the Saudis,
and much of the rest of the "international community" as well. "We're
not going to redivide Jerusalem, or get off the Golan Heights, or go
back to the 1967 boundaries," he says. "We won't repeat the mistake
our [political opponents] made of unilateral retreats to merely vacate
territory that is then taken up by Hamas or Iran."
This brings Mr. Netanyahu to the political pitch he's making -- so far
successfully -- to Israelis ahead of next month's election. When
elections were held three years ago, bringing Mr. Olmert to power, "we
[his Likud Party] were mocked" for warning that Gaza would become
Hamastan, and that Hamastan would become a staging ground for missiles
fired at major Israeli cities such as Ashkelon and Ashdod.
"I think we've shown the ability to see the problems in advance," he
says. "Peace is purchased from strength. It's not purchased from
weakness or unilateral retreats. It just doesn't happen that way. That
perhaps is the greatest lesson that has been impressed on the mind of
the Israeli public in the last few years."
The polls seem to agree. As of Wednesday, an Israeli poll gives Likud
a 30-seat plurality in the next Knesset, ahead by eight of Foreign
Minister Tzipi Livni's Kadima party. Well behind both of them is the
left-leaning Labor Party of Defense Minister Ehud Barak (at about 15
seats), which in turn is running roughly even with Avigdor Lieberman's
right-wing Yisrael Beiteinu.
The dovish parties of yore, particularly Meretz, barely exist as
political entities anymore. Whether they'll ever be back will be a
testament, one way or another, to the kind of prime minister Mr.
Netanyahu will be this time around.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123275466964911679.html#
---
"sono stampate ancora" (Luca Logi / rodewalder)
cfr 
http://raionim.blogspot.com/2008/12/luca-logi-e-i-piselli.html

 Iran Is the Terrorist 'Mother Regime'
Israel's death toll last month: 1300
iranian death toll : 0