WILL THE WEST DEFEND ITSELF?
By Avi Davis

Iran's test of its Shehab 3 ballistic missile last week has been labeled the greatest threat to Israel's existence in its 60 year history. That may well be true. But a more accurate assessment would be that the long range missiles pose a greater threat to Western civilization than any since the defeat of the Third Reich in 1945. The Shehab 3, along with its ballistic cousins the Shehab 3ER and BM-25, with a maximum range of 2,500 kilometers, can strike deep into the heart of Europe, precipitating a nuclear exchange that could drive the entire continent back into the Dark Ages – with the collapse of governmental infrastructure, the outbreak of multiple diseases and the contamination of Europe's food supply.

Naturally, few are taking any threat to Europe seriously since it is only Israel that has been singled out as the focus of the Mullah's genocidal plan. But there should be no mistaking the words of the Iranian test commander as the missiles took flight:

“In the name of Allah, the compassionate, the merciful. O Messenger of Allah! O Messenger of Allah! O Messenger of Allah!"|

These words are identical to the last recorded earthly utterances by the hijackers of United Flight 93, on September 11, 2001. For the Iranians, the conflict with the West, of which Israel is only the most irritating symbol, represents a religious struggle that will only end when one annihilates the other, even if that means mutually assured destruction. A 1400 year old tradition of Muslim conquest and destruction is now been subsumed under the mantle of Iranian leadership. Not since the height of the Ottoman Empire, has the Muslim world been sufficiently emboldened to launch a military threat to the West. But now, with the military hardware and nuclear technology of the West in their own hands, they believe they may have reached parity with their old adversaries. The announced plan to destroy Israel is only a stepping stone on the road to a wider jihadist campaign. Europe lies athwart the road to conquest of the West and the Iranians are well aware that their greatest adversary in America will not be destroyed unless Europe goes first.

But that is not the only threat Europe faces. For the first time since the conclusion of the Cold War, Russia is talking about aiming nuclear warheads at Europe. Discussions are underway for the possible deployment of ballistic missiles to Kaliningrad, a Russian enclave between the European Union countries of Lithuania and Poland. Kaliningrad has been nuclear-free since America and Russia agreed to scale back their nuclear arsenals at the end of the Cold War. A Russian parliamentary committee visited the enclave 10 days ago to examine how a new generation of nuclear missiles could be based there. Although this is largely regarded in the West as a bluff from the hard line government of President Dmitry Medvedev, it should be understood that Russia, unlike Iran, actually possesses nuclear weapons and CAN deploy them at will. The threat, no matter what the perceived gamesmanship of the Russian leadeship, must be taken seriously.

What is Europe doing about this situation and how are they coordinating with Israel and the United States to contain the twin Iranian and Russian threats?

The answer is very little. This became clear at conference on missile defense held in the first week of July in Prague.

The conference, staged by the French Association of Aviation and Astronautics, was organized to explore the option of building a U.S. radar tracking facility on Czech soil after NATO gave the project a cautious endorsement at its recent summit in Bucharest. Located in central Europe, the Czech Republic is ideally placed to ascertain the trajectory of incoming missiles from Iran, Pakistan or North Korea. But the project faces stiff resistance in the Czech parliament, which is required to ratify the NATO decision, from Greens and opposition parties who do not believe in a Iranian threat to their country, or to any other European state for that matter.

Reuter's reporter, Rob Cameron, believes their deep seated suspicion of the American presence in Europe and an unwillingness to accept the American anti-missile defense system, as nothing more than another attempt to dominate Europe, which will imperil the construction of the radar station. In taking a straw poll of shopkeepers around the Foreign Ministry's Cernin Palace he quoted several people as saying:

“I’m against it. I don’t think it’s a good idea. And I’m absolutely against the idea
of American soldiers being here – it’s absolutely out of the question.”

and

“I’m against all forms of warfare, against all weapons. The arms race is just a bad thing. I don’t care what the Americans say about it being a defensive system – they’re just building up more weapons and creating a new Cold War.”

These words could have poured from the lips of a great majority of European inhabitants today. Oblivious to the prospect of war, the Europeans are acting much as their forbears did in the 1930s – assuming that those with warlike, genocidal agendas have no intention of harming them, while those who repeatedly sound the alarm of an impending catastrophe, are relegated to the category of warmongers and misfits.

However, such radical pacifism will not save Europe. As U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. Henry Obering III, director of the U.S. Missile Defense Agency, asked at a conference last February in Washington D.C. on missile defense: “They’re already flying missiles that exceed what they would need in a fight with Israel. Why? Why do they continue this progression in terms of range of missiles?”

The synchronicity of the developing conflicts between Iran, Russia and the West might not be an accident. Is it possible that some kind of strategic alliance will develop between Russia and Iran (and perhaps North Korea as well), much like the the Non-Aggression Pact between Russia and Germany in 1939, wherein modern day Russia uses its nuclear clout to weaken European defenses while allowing Iran to force European countries to cede valuable shipping rights and immunity from censure for attacking Israeli and U.S. interests – all in exchange for protection from an Iranian nuclear attack?

Or, as Obering posits, “perhaps, in as little as seven years from now, a nuclear-armed Iran could shut off oil shipments in the Persian Gulf, while Al-Qaeda militants seize freighters off Europe, arming them with nuclear-tipped Scud missiles to punish the West for invasion of Muslim holy lands.”

Whatever the scenario, it should be clear that we stand at a time in history when the future of our own civilization depends on the firm and assertive resolve of our political leaders. If Iranian and Russian aggression is not met with unified action now by the democracies, we only invite their further determination to exploit our weaknesses. And that, as we learned 70 years ago, is a recipe for catstrophe.

The Western Word - An International Weekly Digest   7-18-2008