Astute observers may note the striking parallels between the ongoing Israeli-Hamas conflict and the Cuban Missile Crisis of October 1962: the coinciding dates, the looming threat of nuclear holocaust and the heightened military readiness, among others.
The apprehension of a looming WWIII, reminiscent of 1962, persists today. Reflecting on my days as a radio announcer during the Cuban Missile Crisis, diligently checking the AP teletype machine every 10-minutes as ordered by my boss, a survivor of the WWII Bataan Death March. As another aside, I would encourage anyone unfamiliar with the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis to watch Thirteen Days, a documovie (2020) starring Kevin Costner.
It's widely acknowledged, though not officially confirmed, that Israel commands a substantial nuclear arsenal, with estimates ranging up to 200 warheads. This robust nuclear capability underpins a strategy of deterrence, signaling readiness to employ these weapons if existential threats arise — a posture reminiscent of the position adopted by the U.S. Military's Joint Chiefs during the tense days of October 1962.
Referencing my career again, in 1968, I was War News Editor of the American Forces Vietnam Network in Saigon. There was a battle in the Mekong Delta, south of Saigon, during which a hamlet was destroyed by U.S. Forces in the Tet Offensive. A U.S. officer was quoted by the AP’s Peter Arnett as saying, “We had to destroy the village in order to save it.”
This recollection of the “scorched Earth” strategy during the Tet Offensive paves the way for discussing Israel's Samson Option. This option’s desired intent also is deterrence. Simply stated, if Israel becomes faced with an imminent existential threat, it is prepared to launch nukes. Had the villagers of Ben Tre, South Vietnam, possessed that capability, they may well have done the same.
Regardless of how Americans may “feel” about the current war, of this we may be certain: Israel will not allow itself to be annihilated.
Samson
The name is a reference to the ancient Biblical figure of Samson, an Israeli leader who pushed apart the pillars of a Philistine temple, bringing down the roof on himself and the thousands of Philistines who had captured him, as recounted in the Book of Judges (Judges 16:30). Essentially, the Samson Option theoretically describes Israel "bringing down the temple" upon itself and its enemies, were it about to be wiped out.
Reiterating, the Samson Option encapsulates Israel's stance on nuclear deterrence: a commitment to massive retaliation, if necessary, to thwart existential threats
The Samson Option has never been officially confirmed by the Israeli government; Israel has a policy of deliberate ambiguity regarding its nuclear capabilities. Israel neither confirms nor denies it possesses nuclear weapons, although it’s widely understood it maintains a substantial arsenal.
Some high-profile individuals, such as Martin van Creveld, a professor of military history at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, have alluded to the Samson Option, suggesting that the very existence of such a drastic measure would act as a deterrent against attacks on Israel.
The Samson Option has been the subject of considerable debate and criticism. While it may serve as a deterrent, it's also a deeply problematic and risky strategy because of the catastrophic implications of its use — not just for Israel and the Middle East, but potentially the whole world. Use of nuclear weapons in the Middle East (by any nation) could be a harbinger of WWIII.
Had Russian ships transporting missiles and other weaponry to Cuba in 1962run the American “embargo” (blockade), that outcome would likewise have ensured WWIII.
Seymour Hersh's 1991 book titled “The Samson Option,” delves into the development of Israel's nuclear capability, focusing on how the country cultivated its nuclear program as a last-resort option in the event of an existential threat. Here is a brief summary.
Key Points
Secrecy and Deception - Hersh outlines how Israel managed to keep its nuclear program under wraps for years, despite being under close international scrutiny.
International Collaboration - The book details Israel's collaborations with countries like France to develop its nuclear program, often in secret, even as it was officially denying the existence of any such program.
The Role of Individuals - Important figures in the Israeli government and military, such as David Ben-Gurion, Shimon Peres and others, are discussed in terms of their roles in making the nuclear program a reality.
Ambiguity as Policy - As I mentioned, Israel has never officially confirmed nor denied its nuclear capabilities, a policy of ambiguity that, according to Hersh, serves its interests by deterring potential aggressors without explicitly breaking international laws or norms.
Deterrent or Offensive - Hersh discusses the ethical and strategic implications of Israel having a nuclear arsenal. Is it purely for deterrence, or could it also potentially be used offensively? The Samson Option suggests a willingness to use these weapons in dire circumstances, raising complex ethical questions.
International Reactions - The book explores how other nations, particularly the United States, have reacted to rumors and evidence of Israel's nuclear capabilities, balancing political and strategic considerations. His thorough exploration travels back to the Lyndon Johnson presidency.
The Existential Question - At the heart of the Samson Option is the existential question for Israel - what lengths is it willing to go to in order to survive in a region where it has so many adversaries? We live in a world increasingly forgetful of the horrors that Jews experienced during WWII.
The geopolitical landscape can change rapidly and make topics that once seemed remote suddenly relevant. While the Samson Option is considered a last-resort scenario, its theoretical and strategic implications, while valuable for assessing broader issues in international relations, must be factored into today’s volatile Middle East calculus.
The parallels between today's geopolitical tensions and those of October 1962 are striking. As we consider the complexities and ramifications of the Israeli-Hamas conflict, two distinct, yet equally pivotal, analyses vis-à-vis 1962 are required to fully grasp the potential trajectory of unfolding events.
The first analysis is mundane and geopolitical. The U.S. could not permit nuclear missiles under an enemy’s control 90-miles from Miami. The Israeli-Hamas war provokes a second, less common spiritual analysis, which is equally important in my opinion. It appeals to the authority and stark prophecies contained in the Torah and Christian Bible.
I wrote about this second analysis in a previous article (linked below). Briefly, the Israeli-Hamas war could easily escalate into a regional conflict. If the escalation can be equated with the prophesied Gog-Magog War, then we can reasonably anticipate the Samson Option being used.
Then I will knock the bow out of your left hand, and cause the arrows to fall out of your right hand. You shall fall upon the mountains of Israel, you and all your troops and the peoples who are with you; I will give you to birds of prey of every sort and to the beasts of the field to be devoured. You shall fall on the open field; for I have spoken, says the Lord God.
Ezekiel 39:3-5
Samson has no relationship whatsoever with the jew they are all European. Folks should research historical facts. Before colonization all these countries were black until the ottomans started colonization.