Israel has been suffering at the hands of an almost non-existent ‘army’ since the ‘October 7’ line/ narrative was floated to the mainly western media to consolidate and extend the support of international power brokers.
by RAHMAT OMAR AND SHABODIEN ROOMANAY
As Israeli Occupation Forces pound ‘little’ Gaza and now also the West Bank, the slaughter and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians continues – not for the first time. It has been described as an ongoing genocide. Yet it seems that the aggressor is on the back foot in this one-sided ‘war’ on a defenceless people, who have been clamouring for their right to live in the land of their birth as human beings since 1948. Israel has been suffering at the hands of an almost non-existent ‘army’ since the ‘October 7’ line/ narrative was floated to the mainly western media to consolidate and extend the support of international power brokers (remember 9/11?).
The Israeli military machine, the world’s most sophisticated, backed by billions of dollars and the military and political support of major western governments, had hoped that by instigating and provoking Hamas to attack an illegal settlement the doors would be opened for a full-scale invasion of Gaza and elimination within weeks of the ‘terrorists, jihadists, animals, Islamists’. This has always been the objective of ‘Plan Dalet’ signed off in 1948 by David Ben Gurion which was to de-Arabise Palestine by all means and declare a full Zionist state. Until today they have not achieved this goal.
Now that the world has better access to the truth, it has learnt that the lies fed to and uncritically published/ amplified by a Western, mainly white-controlled media have been used as a cover to commit unbridled atrocities. Despite these violations of the rights of Palestinians and flouting of international law, Israel has been unable to achieve the objective of ‘Plan Dalet’. The options now have been substantially narrowed. So what are the options for Israel?
The Samson Option
The Samson Option is inspired by the biblical story of Samson which is said to have taken place in Gaza where Samson brought down the temple on himself and his enemies.
The term, coined by Seymour M Hersh, the Pulitzer Prize-winner, refers to Israel’s alleged policy of deploying a last-resort nuclear retaliation strike. His 1991 book, The Samson Option: Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal and American Foreign Policy, details the history of Israel’s nuclear weapons programme. It refers to Israel’s underground nuclear facility in the Negev Desert, where its technicians and scientists began manufacturing nuclear warheads in the late 1960s and reveals Israel’s rush toward nuclear status, its espionage activities and its collaboration with apartheid South Africa and Iran under the Shah.
Fully aware of the unrestrained impunity with which it has and continues to assault Palestinians, there is a chance that Israel might unleash its nuclear arsenal on the world. This policy is believed to serve as a deterrent against existential threats, essentially warning that Israel would use its nuclear arsenal if it faced annihilation, even at the cost of significant collateral damage to itself and the broader region.
Israel’s ‘Samson Option’ represents a dire, though often under-discussed, dimension of international relations – a strategy involving the potential use of nuclear weapons in response to an existential threat to the state. This doctrine, with its apocalyptic implications, remains largely ignored by the global business community, particularly multinational corporations that continue to give precedence to profits from their dealings with Israel. This corporate indifference is mirrored by the ‘unwavering support’ from the United States, the UK and the European Union, who are not only turning a blind eye to the potential for a catastrophic conflict but are increasingly seen as complicit in Israel’s strategies which risk leading the region towards the terror of the nuclear option.
This article explores the Samson Option in the context of Israel’s abominable actions against Palestinians and the role and the recalcitrance of Western powers and multinational corporations in the face of what many call an ongoing genocide in Palestine.
Israel’s nuclear capability, while officially undeclared, is an open secret in international relations. Estimates suggest that Israel possesses approximately 80 to 90 nuclear warheads, and its nuclear strategy, as implied by the Samson Option, suggests a willingness to deploy them in a doomsday scenario for the region. The mere existence of such a capability and policy has long been recognised as having catastrophic consequences for humanity and the potential for destabilisation, not only of states but also of society. Yet global actors – particularly multinational corporations and Western powers – continue to ignore its ramifications in this instance.
Their stance towards Israel stands in stark contrast to the stance towards Iraq when [false] allegations were made about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq under Saddam Hussein, formerly an ally of the US and UK. The US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 was based on this false intelligence and was part of a wider global ‘war against terror’. It had devastating consequences for Iraq and the whole region. The then Prime Minister of the UK, Tony Blair subsequently admitted that the West had ‘underestimated profoundly the forces that were at work in the region’ and ‘profoundly’ underestimated the chaos that would be unleashed’ in the wake of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. This experience has important lessons for the world.
Using nuclear weapons to settle conflicts in the Middle East and there is the possibility that Israel would resort to this option given its history of acting with absolute impunity, would be highly dangerous and counterproductive.
There are several key reasons why employing nuclear weapons would be catastrophic:
One would expect a massive humanitarian disaster. The use of nuclear weapons would result in a massive loss of life, causing indiscriminate destruction and suffering among civilians across the whole region. The immediate impact includes fatalities, severe injuries, and long-term health effects from radiation exposure.
Environmental devastation as a consequence of nuclear fallout, is now common knowledge. Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Chernobyl and the recent meltdown of the Fukushima reactors are cases in point. Nuclear explosions cause significant environmental damage, including radiation fallout that could spread across region, contaminating land, water, and air, and making areas uninhabitable for extended periods.
It is also important to understand that regional and global instability would be a direct consequence of exercising the nuclear option. The ‘invasion’ of Ukraine by Russia is a valid point to make. Many nations were immediately impacted by shortages of gas, wheat, maize and many other key products across the world. Using nuclear weapons could destabilise not just the Middle East but the entire world. It would likely provoke widespread condemnation, escalate tensions, and could even lead to a broader conflict involving other nuclear-armed states. This could trigger a global nuclear arms race, as other countries might feel compelled to develop or expand their own nuclear arsenals.
Another outcome would be political and diplomatic fallout. Such an action would isolate Israel diplomatically, as it would be seen as a violation of international law, specifically the rules governing the use of force and the principles of proportionality and distinction. It would undermine any remaining peace processes and make diplomatic solutions far more difficult.
The possible use of nuclear weapons by Israel raises profound ethical questions, as it involves the deliberate targeting of civilians and the use of disproportionate force. The moral implications of causing such widespread and long-term suffering are considerable. The world cannot ignore unpredictable/unforeseeable consequences as the outcomes of using nuclear weapons are highly unpredictable. Retaliation, regional conflicts escalating into global wars, or triggering other nuclear-armed states to use their arsenals are all possible scenarios.
Then too, there is the question of the violation of international norms and treaties. The use of nuclear weapons would be a direct violation of the United Nations Charter and other international agreements aimed at the non-proliferation and disarmament of nuclear weapons. But then, as the world has seen, Israel treats international law and treaties as a pebble in the shoe. A minor irritation.
Supporting Israel in its current drive to expel all Palestinians, will have dire consequences. The doomsday, ‘Samson Option’ is a likelihood. An Israeli cabinet minister is reported to have suggested in November 2023 during Israel’s ground invasion of Gaza that one of Israel’s options could be to drop a nuclear bomb on the Gaza Strip. That minister was removed from the cabinet without any legal action. The purpose seems to be to communicate that Israel has nuclear capability and is willing to use it if required.
No one believed that in this day and age we would have a front row seat watching as Israel slaughters more than 60000 Palestinians and destroys any semblance of an infrastructure – a catastrophe which is unfolding before our eyes with continuing support from Western powers. All this plays out as punishment for Palestinians who have dared to assert their right to reclaim what is theirs. And it plays out in broad daylight as the happy clappers in the West continue to parrot the questionable claim that Israel is pursuing these dangerous strategies because ‘Israel has a right to defend itself’.
