Mediaboss Marketing

It may sound fantastic now,and was probably not really feasible even then.

But according to the Pentagons own Joint Chiefs of Staff, sometime in the mid-1980s, American military planners wanted Israel to take part in a war which would start in Iran and spread to the Eastern Mediterranean, where the Israel Air Force would be tasked with striking Soviet ships and othermilitaryunits.

Irans bizarre but worrying espionage campaign against Israel: LISTEN

This comes not from some scoop-seeking scholar, but from the horses mouth. David B. Crist,theJoint ChiefsSenior Historian specializing in Iran and its 43-year conflict with eight U.S. administrations, is a Reserve Marine Corps Lieutenant Colonel,with combat deployments in the Middle East and Special Forces background.

He has been privy to secret contingency plans,has observed Irans activities in the Gulf and beyond and appears to be IDF-friendly, having being associated with the pro-Israel Washington Institute.

Recently, Crist uploaded to the Joint Chiefs website an unusual,even dramatic presentationwith an understated title: "U.S. Central Command Campaign Planning Against The Soviet Union, 1979-87." It was originally shown to the current Commanding General of CENTCOM, Frank McKenzie, a fellow Marine, and his officers.

Military history centers are not academically oriented, though they aimto offerthe most thorough research. Their mission is to provide todays cadre with case studies of past events, in order to distill relevant lessons for immediate and future use in either the same places or in similar dimensions of warfare.And this presentation is no exception. It offers a window into U.S. military strategic thinking about taking on Iran today and what Israels role would be in such an operation.

These days, it is quite routine for the Israeli Navy to practice interoperability with theU.S.sBahrain-based Fifth Fleet and for the IDF to train withU.S.fighter squadrons in exercises such as last weeks Desert Falcon, as part of its military relationship with the U.S.s CENTCOM, which watches over the Gulf. But this was not the case in the last quarter-century before themillennium, and it was definitely not imagined by most to bea partnershippointed against Russia.

Defense collaboration (rather than simply assistance) between the Pentagon and Tel AvivsKiryadefenseHQ began following the Yom Kippur War, picked up steam after the Camp David accords - when Egypt, too, joined the American orbit and took off momentarily under President Ronald Reagan, with Defense Minister Ariel Sharon signed a strategic cooperation agreement with Secretary of Defense CasperWeinberger.

Thisunprecedenteddocument reflected a tug of war between Washington, wishing to paint its relationship with Israel as anti-Soviet rather than anti-Arab, and Jerusalem,with an opposite policy, fearful of alienating Moscow.

This agreement was almost immediately cancelled when Israel annexed the Golan Heights. It was revived andupgradedwhen Yitzhak Shamir, as prime minister, and Moshe Arens, as foreign minister, replaced Menachem Begin and Sharon.

Washington welcomed them, along with Ehud Barak, then head of militaryintelligence,and hisplanning colleague Menachem Einan, for are-launch of talks and the setting up of mechanisms, protocols and joint projects, including the rare provision of pre-positioning sites for U.S. munitions in Israel for immediate availability in case of emergency. There were apparently at least six such sites, numbered 51-56, with 54 described as a 500-bed hospital for war casualties.

Reading Crists account, it now turns out that some key American officials, most prominently Assistant Secretary of Defense Richard Armitage, had creative ideas for taking therenewedpartnership to the next level.

Armitage, Colin Powells closest friend and later Deputy Secretary of State, forged a warm bond with Barak and Major General Uri Simhoni, the Defense Attache (who passed away last month, several weeks after their buddy, Powell).And there was a specific mission that would confirm their collaboration.

The Soviets were always suspected of harboring a plot to invade Iran, perhaps with help from the inside by the Communist-leaning Tudeh party. But following the Soviet incursionintoneighboring Afghanistan,and Khomeinis taking power in Tehran, vowing to export the Islamic revolution, the old scenario was refreshed.

Now,theSovietsmotive would be to prevent the spread of Khomeinism to the USSRs Muslimrepublics and Afghanistan,and to stop "the fragmentation of the Iranian state caused by internal strife or defeat" in the (1980-88) Iran-Iraq War.The Soviets interest in some form of control over Iran sprang from two core reasons: The first, irridentist/territorial, wanting to swallow up northern Iraninto then-Soviet controlledAzerbaijan, andthe second strategic: To have Persian Gulf bases for their fleet.

The "Large-Scale Soviet Invasion Plan" Crist found in the files showed arrows drawn south from Armenia and the Caspian Sea towards the capital, Tehran indicating the large-scale movement of Soviet military forces and then on to Isfahan, Khuzestan and Bandar Abbas,on the Gulf,with the invading forces drawn from a pool of "24-29 Mechanized or Armor Divisions, one Airborne Division and 700-1000 strike aircraft."

U.S. counter-strategy, according to Col. Crist, was "to deter the Soviets from invasion" byowning the capacity "to deploy and sustain a credible force to the region, with the clear indication that a Soviet attack on a vital American interest would mean war with the United States. If a conflict begins, be prepared to attack and defeat any Soviet effort to control the oil of the Middle East."

Also, and this is where Israel comes in,the U.S. would aim to "widen the conflict beyond just the Middle East to other areas where the U.S. and our allies hold military advantage." The documents quoted are fromDefense SecretaryWeinberger toJoint ChiefsChairman David Jones, an Air Forcegeneral, and vice versa.

This sounds likethe script for alimited version of World War III,with nuclear weaponsincluded. If the plan didn't call for Strategic Air Command strikes inside the Soviet Union,it did foreseeat leasttactical nuclear strikes on the USSR and Iran,shelling, mine-layingmines and "demolition packs" explosive charge carried onan infantrymans back, saboteur-style, but in this casecontaininganuclearcharge.

The "1004" plan proposed a so-called "Horizontal Escalation," escalating geographically andsandwiching Iran from the north and south,whereby American forces would operate from Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt and a Saudi jumpboard into Iran.

The plan also envisages an intensive sabotage campaign, led by U.S. Special Forces working with the CIA, who would embrace "unconventional warfare to develop a resistance movement disrupting Soviet forces by blowing bridges and attacking their rear areas."

A further layer of U.S. allied militaries, frommoderate, pro-Western countries in the region, would "operate against Soviet client states, especially those with historic animosity" towards the U.S., such as Syria.

This, specifiesCrists documents, "would include Israel, who would insure the safety of the Suez Canal by striking Soviet forces in the Eastern Mediterranean."

While Israel was earlier drawn into dogfights with Soviet fighters over Egypt and struck transports bringing equipment to Syria, its leaders from Ben-Gurion to Eshkol and Golda to Dayan always commented thatthey hadno illusions regarding the IDFs ability to withstand a Soviet onslaught. But the American planners let their imagination run wild, and it had its uses for their Israeli counterparts.

"We went along with the simulation," recalled an Israeli defense official whohelda central role then, "because it helped foster a closer relationship with our professional opposite numbers, who up until that time were more reserved.

"Indeed, we looked at options stemming fromsuperpower conflict around Syria or Cyprus, with the possibility of our being drawn in and clashing with Sovietair ornaval units. It was a modular, multi-part scenario, potentially based around Iran as a flashpoint,but with other narratives as well. As is customary with military organizations, it is not a plan, per se, that is important, as itwouldinevitably have to adapt to circumstances, butit was an exercise inthe practice of planning, in this case together," Israelis and Americans.

This was the seed of what has by now blossomed into a forest. The Soviet Union disintegrated shortly thereafter, but Russia is back in force in Syria and Iran is a perennial headache, so while the plan unearthed by theJoint Chiefshistorian was never put to a test, it iscertainlytoo early to consign it to a museum display.

The Pentagons decision to give Crists seemingly confidential briefing wider distribution mayalso be a message of its own. It could beintended to orient moreU.S.officers towards the considerations and constraints involved ina potentialwar against Iran, withIsraels participation,or without it.In the reports own words, "[T]he geography has not changed. Any Iranian-centric conflict will confront the U.S.with similar challenges."

Conspiratorial mindswillalso see it as a signal aimeddirectlyat Tehran, translating mere saber-rattling rhetoric into concrete combat schemes,completewith assigned units and projected timelines.

Amir Oren, a veteran observer of Israeli, American and NATO military and political affairs, has written for Haaretz on defense and government for more than two decades. Twitter: @Rimanero

View post:
Americas wild 'World War III' plan for Iran, and Israels part in it - Haaretz