Former Director-General of the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission Brig. Gen. (ret.) Uzi Eilam's interview with Dr. Ronen Bergman in Yedioth Ahronoth raised two claims: the first that former Prime Minister Menachem Begin erred when he ordered the bombing of the Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq 33 years ago, and the second that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is "using the Iranian threat to score political points." In Eilam's opinion, Iran is still at least a decade away from being able to produce a nuclear bomb. Eilam, an engineer by training, must be given credit for his contribution to national security. He has received a special citation for his service with the Paratroopers' Brigade, he headed the Atomic Energy Commission from 1976 to 1985, and later went on to head the Administration for the Development of Weapons and Technological Infrastructure for 12 years. While heading the Atomic Energy Commission, Eilam had opposed bombing the Iraqi reactor. It was the height of the 1981 election campaign and Begin, who feared he would lose the elections, quoted Hillel to Eilam, saying, "If I am not for myself, who is for me-" -- meaning that a Shimon Peres-led government would not bomb the reactor. Peres, on his part, was vocal about his objections to the operation. In the decades that have passed, it has become clear that the 1981 strike was a great strategic achievement. A decade on, it stopped Saddam Hussein in his tracks when he threatened to invade Persian Gulf states and possibly Saudi Arabia. Years later, Ehud Barak asked a senior American official if the United States would have gone to war against a nuclear Iraq, and was told that would have been unlikely. With the exception of Peres and Eilam, every Israeli Jew has lauded Begin for ordering the strike. It is impossible that the two are oblivious to how crucial the strike was, especially knowing what Hussein did to restore his nuclear capabilities. Why is it then, that this distinguished defense official is unable to simply admit he was wrong? If you cannot do so when you are 80, when can you- Eilam's argument about Netanyahu is equally puzzling. Say that Netanyahu's warning had caused public anxiety. Say that three years ago, both Netanyahu and Barak said it would be best to strike Iran to hinder its nuclear program. And say there was ample opposition to such a move, by officials such as Eilam, former Shin Bet security agency chief Yuval Diskin, former Mossad director Meir Dagan and others -- what is the point Eilam is trying to make by saying Netanyahu is seeking to use the issue for political gain? The diplomatic commotion that followed Netanyahu and Barak's statements at the time led to international sanctions against Iran, while several mysterious incidents took place on the ground and significantly hindered the ayatollah's nuclear ambitions. It was that diplomatic commotion that raised concerns that Israel might be serious about mounting a unilateral strike to neutralize the threat and prompted some nations that were seeking to prevent a blue-and-white military operation to impose diplomatic and economic pressure on Iran, which forced it to negotiate with the West and reduce -- albeit not nearly enough -- its pursuit of nuclear abilities. So even if this was only a partial achievement that bought us just a few more years -- it is still valuable. Even if it is not enough -- it is still a lot. Asked why Netanyahu would opt for such policy, Eilam said he was "not one for psychological analysis, his or ours." At least he got something right.
