After suggesting Israel declare its nuclear capability to deter Iran, recent events have changed my mind.
Some analysts now agree with the earlier argument (my ellipsis):
Openly declaring (Israel’s) nuclear weapons stockpile and laying out the conditions of their use in the event of an Iranian attack is an option worth considering, a report published by the Royal Institute for International Affairs (Chatham House) stated, “if it is conceded that diplomatic efforts are doomed to fail, yet the price of war is too high.”
Of all the options available to Israel to counter the Iranian nuclear threat, “the military option is the least desirable” as a strike against Iran “might push an already volatile Middle East into further hostilities, uniting anti-Western groups worldwide” against Israel and the US while “isolating moderate Muslim forces,” the report states.
But now we know the Mullahs have UN top cover.
So if Israel declares its deterrent, it’ll come under sustained assault from the UN as a genocide-in-waiting. And if the US elects an appeasing President and Congress in 2008, it may force Israel to bow to the pressure.
To avoid that risk, I’d keep quiet.