A Changing Middle East: An Insider 's Perspective / Danny Yatom

November 14, 2011
Maj. Gen. Yatom addressed the Middle East Forum in Philadelphia on November 14 about the implications of the current turmoil in the Middle East for Israel's national security and international relations.

Mr. Yatom commenced his talk by discussing Israeli perceptions of the Egyptian situation. Most Israelis viewed President Husni Mubarak as a moderate despite his maintaining a merely cold peace, since they believed that a cold peace was better than a hot war. The Arabs had no real experience with democracy and democratic practices, and elections could readily yield grave results as evidenced by Hamas's 2006 electoral victory. He therefore expected Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood to win the upcoming elections, a prognosis that has since been fully vindicated. In the meantime, Washington was seen throughout the region as a "broken reed" due to its betrayal of its allies.

Yatom felt that Israel ought to maintain its peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan at all costs and avoid any unnecessary tensions with the two countries. In that vein, Israel should put an offer on the table for the Palestinians so as to allow negotiations to resume, and should do so in collaboration with the U.S. administration. As for Syria, he believed that Basher Assad's regime was doomed, though he had no idea whether his successor would another Alawite, a Sunni moderate or a Sunni Islamist. Either way, Israel had to brace itself for all eventualities.

Yatom was deeply concerned by the shift of world attention from Tehran's nuclear buildup to the Arab uprisings. In his view, Iran had passed the point of no return and it was only a matter of time before it obtained nuclear weapons. As head of Mossad, he had warned the CIA as far back as 1997 about Tehran's nuclear ambitions but the agency had evinced no interest at that time. Thus far, sanctions have failed to stop Iran, leaving Israel with the agonizing decision whether to go it alone.

Yatom advocated the immediate imposition of crippling sanctions because an Iranian nuclear bomb would destabilize the Middle East and trigger an arms race, with the Saudis and the Turks, at the very least, likely to seek nuclear weapons. Should this option fail, it would be better to hit Iran rather than to allow it to obtain the bomb.

What would happen if Iran was struck by Israel or the United States? Yatom expected no world oil crisis since Iran produced only 4% of the world's oil. At the same time, he anticipated a barrage of rockets raining on Israel, estimating the attendant Israeli fatalities in the hundreds rather than the thousands. An Israeli response to such an attack should be fierce, yet he doubted whether the neighboring Arab countries would get involved in the conflict.

Summary written by MEF intern Stefan Kirschner.

Major General Danny Yatom has had a distinguished career serving his country both in the IDF and in the political arena. He served as head of the Israeli Central Command, and later, under Yitzhak Rabin was the prime minister's military secretary, involved in negotiations with Syria, Jordan and the Palestinians. Between 1996 and 1998 he served as head of the Mossad Intelligence Service, subsequently serving as chief of staff to Ehud Barak during his terms as Prime Minister and Defense Minister. He was elected to the 16th and 17th Knesset for the Labor Party.

The Middle East Forum


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.454 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4064 - Release Date: 12/06/11 22:40:00


More than ever before, Israel is seen as a ngeation of the charges against her. Today, thanks to the Islamic regimes being exposed, the targeting of Israel has been much stemmed and replaced with non-confusing anti-semitism. However, the problem lingers and will always do so. I am wondering if Israelis and Israel's supporters are on the correct path. I refer to terms such as ILLEGAL OCCUPATION', and how much credibility this has. If this is negated, then millions of negative blogs and articles will become obsolete. This is what Israel has to attend to and negate, as was done with the ZIONISM IS RACISM premise. As it stands, no matter how the anti-Israel syndrome is confronted, it won't help at all because we have the UN and the world always throwing the delegitimising of Israel slogan by the term ILLEGAL OCCUPATION. Are we targeting the wrong premises?

Post new comment

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

prevent automated spam submissions.
Enter the characters (without spaces) shown in the image.