Modelling Israeli insignificance & Indian importance

Haaretz carried a very interesting article for all those political scientists with a thorough belief in modelling the real world. But, don't let it scare you, because all those Middle East junkies worldwide should pay attention as well: even India comes into the picture!

Tel Aviv University's Institute for National Security Studies hosted this elaborate wargame that saw participation from senior Israeli policymakers and experts acting as the major players. Unsurprisingly, they all stuck to their prior policy positions. Iran stood by its right to produce uranium for peaceful purposes as long as regime stability was unchallenged, the US in the end grudgingly accepted Tehran's ambitions without resorting to violence and the Israeli's felt ever more estranged from their American ally.

Even after an Israeli commando raid on one of the nuclear installations in Iran, the political dynamics didn't fundamentally change even though Haaretz reported "brief brinksmanship" after this attack. Israeli options were running out, it kept pressing its main ally in Washington to escalate the threat of violence against Iran. However, the US failed to deliver on these Israeli requests.

One of the final options Israel could explore in splendid isolation was the possibility of pressuring India to sever its business ties with Tehran. A measure that would surely shock Iran, potentially to such an extent that the Islamic Republic would reconsider its nuclear ambitions. As it happened, this option wouldn't work either. A nuclear Iran thus became an inevitability.

Model games like these are great thought experiments, but in the real world the MacMillan observation is still of unwavering importance.

What has this game involving Israel, Iran and the US taught us?

• Ceteris paribus (intransigent leadership in Iran and Israel) Iran will develop a nuclear capability.
• The Middle East extends as far as New Delhi today, even though most observers don't even list Iran as a Middle Eastern country. Fascinating stuff!

Question to readers: Is this actually proof that having a bomb does make for regional superpower status?

Osama Bin Laden's children are hiding in Iran!

Another proof of the fact that (some, definitely not all) UK newspapers rank among the best in world.

The Times of London reported that the family of Osama Bin Laden are in hiding near Tehran. I recently read Steve Coll's brilliant account of the bin Laden family history. Two things I learned from this book is that the bin Laden family is an extremely complex one to Western eyes and that Osama has been an outcast for years. Thus, it would be completely unjustified to say that Osama's sons should be on a "wanted dead or alive" billboard; don't judge the child by the sins of their father!

Now turning to the political dimension: What should we make of the fact that the Sunni sons of bin Laden have found refuge in Shi'a Iran?

Richard Beeston is offering some hypotheses for why Tehran would have granted the bin Ladens a refuge (albeit under virtual house arrest). The most plausible of these seems that the bin Ladens could serve as a bargaining chip in contacts with almost every relevant actor in the region.

An important point in the Times report is that AQ has not yet committed acts of terrorism against Iranian interests, whereas AQ doctrine doesn't seem too fond of Shi'a theology. This is in stark contrast to Sunni regimes who have become victim to AQ terrorism, like Jordan, Morocco and Saudi Arabia.

I just wonder how will this play out inside Iran? Will the orthodox Shi'a clerics scold the regime for harbouring Sunni troublemakers?