WarSclerotic

Israelis ponder the perils of hitting Iran – UPI.com.

Iran: The last resort | Columnists | Jerusalem Post.

As 2009 draws to a close and the second decade of the 21st century looms before us, there is no greater danger facing the world than the prospect of a nuclear Iran.

As the events of recent weeks have made abundantly clear, sanctions and diplomacy have utterly failed to stop Teheran’s march down the road to an atomic arsenal. The ayatollahs have gleefully ignored repeated warnings from the West, and stubbornly insisted on proceeding apace toward nuclear proficiency.

We can no longer continue to ignore this reality. Our future and everything we hold dear is at stake. The danger is simply too great, and the threat is too real. As frightening as it sounds, Israel must give serious consideration to bombing Iran before it is too late.

MAKE NO mistake. If a halt is not put to Iran’s efforts, we will soon wake up to discover the would-be Hitler of Persia with his finger on the button, threatening Israel and the world with nuclear blackmail and destruction.

What the Nazi leader could only dream of accomplishing more than half a century ago, will soon be within reach of his Iranian disciple. Indeed, the clock is already winding down and we are nearing the end of the game, as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s scientists prepare to cross the threshold and storm past the nuclear goal line.

Speaking before the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on Monday, Defense Minister Ehud Barak gave a chilling account of just how close Iran is to meeting its nefarious goal. By early 2010, he said, the mullahs will have the technology to build a nuclear bomb, and they will be able to produce one within a year. That means that sometime in the next few weeks or months, Teheran will reach the technological point of no return, beyond which lies a future clouded in darkness and uncertainty.And so, less than 1,000 miles east of Jerusalem, a new Auschwitz is steadily being prepared as the world dithers over what to do.

MONTHS AGO, Washington and its allies set a year-end deadline for Iran to accept a deal drawn up by the UN under which their uranium would be enriched abroad. But even this proved unacceptable to the hard-liners in Teheran, who are not exactly quaking in their boots at the prospect of additional economic penalties.

In a speech delivered last Tuesday, Ahmadinejad made clear that he remains unmoved by warnings from the West. The international community, he said, can give Iran “as many deadlines as they want, we don’t care.”

And why should they? The UN Security Council has already imposed three sets of sanctions on Iran with little to show for it. Does anyone really think that yet another round of injunctions and hand-wringing will do the trick?

In fact, just a few days ago, reports surfaced in the press that Iran was once again actively seeking to violate existing UN resolutions by trying to import 1,350 tons of purified uranium ore from Kazakhstan to further bolster its enrichment program.

This is just one more sign that the West’s efforts to freeze Teheran’s nuclear program have come up short.

MOREOVER, THE Iranians continue to improve their strategic missile capability, heightening the peril should they succeed in constructing a nuclear warhead. In mid-December Iran test-fired its latest missile, the Sajjil-2, a sophisticated solid-fuel rocket that is more advanced and more accurate than its predecessors. With a range of 1,200 miles, or nearly 2,000 kilometers, it can hit anywhere in Israel and even reach parts of Europe.

Iran’s defense minister boasted on state television that the Sajjil-2 can be fired more quickly and reaches its target faster, which makes it harder to intercept or shoot down. Since it is a solid-fuel rocket, it can be prepped in advance and hidden in silos, thereby decreasing its vulnerability to a preemptive attack.

And lest there be any doubt about the ayatollahs’ real intentions, the Times of London reported two weeks ago that Western intelligence agencies have obtained an internal Iranian document detailing plans for neutron initiators. These are the triggers which set off nuclear explosions, and they have no other use.

TAKEN TOGETHER, all these pieces combine to form a frighteningly unambiguous picture: Iran is terrifyingly close to becoming a nuclear power. With each passing day, this nightmare scenario moves one step closer to fruition.

And so we must look ourselves directly in the mirror and ask a simple yet very pointed question: Are we really prepared to allow the tyrant of Teheran to threaten our very existence?

An atomic Iran would transform the strategic dynamic of the Middle East, strengthen radical and fundamentalist forces and spark a region-wide nuclear arms race. It would raise the specter of terrorist groups allied to Teheran, such as Hamas and Hizbullah, getting their hands on the most devastating of weapons.

And we all know how Iran’s leaders have repeatedly and brazenly vowed to exterminate the Jewish state and wipe us off the map.

The alarm bells are ringing and the danger is near. Iran can and must be stopped, and military force may be the only way to do so. Six decades ago, the world watched in silence as the Germans tossed us into Hitler’s ovens and turned six million Jews into ashes. We cannot assume they will act any differently if Iran seeks to do the same.

So we dare not tarry. There is little room left for delay. If the world fails to act, the option of last resort may be our only choice.

The Yeshiva World » Are the War Drums Beating?

Despite continued messages of calm from senior government ministers, there is increased discussion surrounding the distribution of gas masks, bomb shelters and the existential threat faced from Iran, as Tehran continues towards their march to nuclear independence.

In addition, Defense Minister Ehud Barak told a Knesset Foreign Affairs & Defense Committee session this week that Hizbullah has over 40,000 rockets, adding that Hamas today is stronger and better equipped than it was prior to Operation Cast Lead.

The Security Cabinet convened on Wednesday to discuss pertinent issues, including preparing the homefront for war. They also discussed the situation in the north regarding bomb shelters and other aspects of area preparedness.

Just yesterday, Tuesday, YWN-Israel reported the IDF wrapped up a major training exercise in the north, assessing the military’s capabilities in the event of a major attack from Hizbullah and Syria, involving convention and chemical missile attacks.

Israel recalls all diplomats for conference | FTO.

Israel Says Iran Close to Nuclear Capability | Voice of America

Israel also alarmed by Iran’s recent test firing of its longest-range missile, previous threats by Iran’s president

Robert Berger | Jerusalem 28 December 2009

Photo: AP

ISNA photo claims to show launch of Sejil 2 missile, 16 Dec 2009

Israel’s Defense Minister Ehud Barak says Iran is moving quickly toward the “point of no return.”  Speaking behind closed doors to the parliamentary Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, Barak said Iran will have the technology to build a nuclear bomb by early next year and could produce one in 2011.

Cabinet Minister Yuval Steinitz is a former chairman of the committee.

“Iran is trying to gain nuclear weapons.  And if nothing serious, nothing dramatic will be done by the West, it will get there in a year or two,” he said.

Iran says its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, but Steinitz says Israel has proof that the Islamic Republic is building the atom bomb.

“There are good, I would say even excellent evidence and intelligence showing that this is the case.  And this is crystal clear to all Western intelligence services,” he added.

Israel is alarmed by Iran’s recent test firing of its longest-range missile and previous threats by its president to wipe the Jewish state “off the map.”  So Israeli leaders are calling for tougher international sanctions on Iran before it is too late.

But Israel has warned time and again that if diplomacy fails, it might launch a pre-emptive strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Comprehensive Home Front Command Exercise in the North.

The Home Front Command held a comprehensive exercise in the North. Photo: Itamar Hassan, IDF Spokesperson

The Home Front Command held a comprehensive exercise in the North. Photo: Itamar Hassan, IDF Spokesperson

The Home Front Command trained correct procedures during missile firing and other threats in the North of Israel

Nadav Deutscher

An attempted abduction of IDF soldiers on the northern border, fire opened on IDF forces, the Israeli Air Force hit terrorist targets in response, rockets fired from Lebanon onto Israeli territory, the Syrian military joined the battles and fired missiles, thousands of civilians were forced to stay in bomb shelters – all of this did not really happen, but took place during a comprehensive training exercise held by the Home Front Command last week in the North of Israel.

“It is a routine exercise, and we hold exercises like this quite a lot with the objective of testing and practicing a specific model each time,” explains Maj. Gen. Yair Golan, the GOC of the Home Front Command, after the successful completion of the five day long exercise. During this exercise, the Home Front Command tested nuclear rocket artillery for the first time in its history. In addition, in an unprecedented effort to simulate real life situations, the forces participating in the exercise were not told about the exact course of events before the exercise, so that they had to react spontaneously to the threats and complications during the exercise.

The Valleys District of the Home Front Command dealt with most of the missiles fired during the large exercise. Its commander, Col. (res.) Arik Tal is very satisfied: “This is the first time that we didn’t receive any information about the exercise beforehand. And still, the soldiers learned fast during the exercise, and after a test and an error everything went very well. I definitely see the exercise as very successful.”

The exercise also tested for the first time the use of scouts which report on the location of fallen missiles and rockets. After a nuclear missile hit, the scouts informed the relevant forces. Col. Anouar Sa’ad, the commander of the Home Front Command Northern Department says: “We understand that because of the weaponry arsenal in the hands of the enemy, we need to supervise the area better. Civilians can’t report on the location of a missile properly. The scouts, who locate the missile and send the forces to the correct place, can make the process a lot more efficient.”

International News | US eyes more targeted sanctions against Tehran.

Washington worries broad sanctions could hurt Iran protesters

A protester holds a sign reading: Iran is put to fire and blood, during a protest in Paris

WASHINGTON (Reuters)

The United States and its allies are weighing focused sanctions against Iran’s leadership rather than broad-based penalties that they fear could harm the protest movement, officials and diplomats said.

Increasingly frustrated by Iranian defiance over its nuclear program, the Obama administration has been crafting a “menu” of sanctions that could be imposed by the United Nations or in concert by the United States and its European allies.

U.S. officials, congressional aides and Western diplomats said the administration has grown increasingly cool to broad-based sanctions targeting the oil sector with the aim of destabilizing the Iranian economy.

Such measures, while favored by a growing number of U.S. lawmakers, would not only be a hard sell in the U.N. Security Council and Europe, but could have unintended consequences like undercutting Iranian public support for the opposition movement, officials and diplomats said. “This is not about trying to bring Iran to its economic knees. It is about stopping the nuclear weapons program,” said a Western diplomat. Broad-based sanctions aimed at destabilizing the overall economy “would just feed into Iranian paranoia” about the West, according to the diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity. Eight people were killed in anti-government protests on Sunday, and Iran has expanded its crackdown on the groups, arresting at least 20 opposition figures.

“Iron fist of brutality” ” This is not about trying to bring Iran to its economic knees. It is about stopping the nuclear weapons program “ A Western diplomat U.S. President Barack Obama has condemned what he said was the “iron fist of brutality” used to quell the protests and demanded the immediate release of detainees. Iran has rebuffed the West’s year-end deadline to accept an enrichment fuel deal aimed at calming international fears it is trying to build nuclear weapons. A senior Obama administration official said Washington had given up hope of a breakthrough with Iran by Jan. 1, and played down the prospect of Western powers taking concrete steps against Tehran immediately after the deadline passes. The official said discussions over what sanctions to impose were unlikely to begin in earnest within the U.N. Security Council before mid-January. Negotiations could take several months. Support for tougher sanctions against Iran has increased in the U.S. Congress, but Obama administration officials have privately told leading lawmakers that the White House does not at this time support legislation that would curb Iranian imports of gasoline and other refined oil products. State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said the administration wanted to “ensure that any legislation that emerges preserves the necessary flexibility to pursue the president’s policy.”

Garnering world support Iranian President Ahmadinejad said that the nuclear rights of his country were not negotiable Diplomats said Washington knows that there is little chance of garnering international support for sweeping economic penalties aimed at the broader economy, citing resistance from Russia and China for far more modest penalties. The targeted sanctions being considered by the White House include expanding travel and other restrictions for individuals and institutions with close ties to the leadership and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, officials said. Some European states favor more sanctions targeting the country’s financial and insurance sector, diplomats said. Officials and experts said the sanctions debate was prompted by the resilience of the opposition protests, which began when a June presidential election returned hard-liner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to power. “Up until now, the (U.S.) administration thought of sanctions only in the context of altering the Iranian government’s nuclear calculations. I think they’re now thinking a lot harder about what types of punitive measures would be helpful and hurtful to the cause of democratic reform in Iran,” said Karim Sadjadpour, an expert with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Imposing targeted sanctions against the Revolutionary Guard makes sense because it “potentially kills several birds with one stone,” he said, referring to the Guard’s oversight of the country’s nuclear program, its contacts with militant groups across the region and its role reining in the protests. “If the Obama administration can deprive them of the ability to sign billion-dollar deals with multinational corporations and turn them into an international pariah, I don’t think many tears will be shed for them among the Iranian opposition,” Sadjadpour added.

Tehran’s Effort to Import 1,350 Tons of Purified Uranium Ore from Kazakhstan Violates U.N. Sanctions

via Report: Iran Trying to Smuggle Raw Uranium – CBS News.

(AP) Iran is close to clinching a deal to clandestinely import 1,350 tons of purified uranium ore from Kazakhstan, according to an intelligence report obtained by The Associated Press on Tuesday. Diplomats said the assessment was heightening international concern about Tehran’s nuclear activities.

Such a purified uranium ore deal would be significant because Tehran appears to be running out of the material, which it needs to feed its uranium enrichment program.

The report was drawn up by a member nation of the International Atomic Energy agency and provided to the AP on condition of that the country not be identified because of the confidential nature of the information.

Such imports are banned by the U.N. Security Council.

In New York, Burkina Faso’s U.N. Ambassador Michel Kafando, a co-chair of the Security Council’s Iran sanctions committee, referred questions Tuesday about a potential deal between Iran and Kazakhstan to his sanctions adviser, Zongo Saidou.

Saidou told the AP that, as far as he knew, none of the U.N.’s member nations have alerted the committee about any such allegations. “We don’t have any official information yet regarding this kind of exchange between the two countries,” Saidou said. “I don’t have any information; I don’t have any proof.”

A senior U.N. official said the agency was aware of the intelligence report’s assessment but could not yet draw conclusions. He demanded anonymity for discussing confidential information. A Western diplomat from a member of the IAEA’s 35-nation board said the report was causing “concern” among countries that have seen it and generating “intelligence chatter.” The diplomat also requested anonymity for discussing intelligence information.

A two-page summary of the report obtained by the AP said deal could be completed within weeks. It said Tehran was willing to pay $450 million, or close to 315 million euros, for the shipment.

The price is high because of the secret nature of the deal and due to Iran’s commitment to keep secret the elements supplying the material,” said the summary. An official of the country that drew up the report said “elements” referred to state employees acting on their own without approval of the Kazakh government.

After-hours calls put in to offices of Kazatomprom, the Kazak state uranium company, in Kazakhstan and Moscow, were not answered Tuesday. Iranian nuclear officials also did not pick up their telephones.

Purified ore, or uranium oxide, is processed into a uranium gas, which is then spun and re-spun to varying degrees of enrichment. Low enriched uranium is used for nuclear fuel, and upper-end high enriched uranium for nuclear weapons.

Iran is under three sets of U.N. Security Council sanctions for refusing to freeze its enrichment program and related activities that could be used to make nuclear weapons.

Tehran denies such aspirations, saying it wants to enrich only to fuel an envisaged network of power reactors.

Omid Memarian: Obama’s Iran Dilemma: Human Rights or Nuclear Negotiations? – Huffington Post

It took more than six months for the White House to “strongly condemn” the excessive use of force against the protesters in Tehran, and God knows how long itlong it will take President Obama to conclude that compromising universal values, including human rights, at the expense of erratic negotiations with the Iranian government. It will not change the behavior of the Iranian government although it will undermine America’s moral authority.

However, President Obama has been forced into a nuanced foreign policy dilemma due to Iran’s disappointing response to the 5+1 nuclear offer, and its reckless behavior towards the Iranian people after the disputed June 12 elections.

Iran’s nuclear ambitions are a matter of international security, which President Obama has chosen to deal with through diplomacy and negotiations. His cautious reaction to Iran’s post election unrest demonstrated a hesitance in order to prevent endangering the ongoing negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program. But the Iran with which Obama tried to promote dialogue during his 2008 presidential campaign is now not the same Iran that feared an imminent attack by the United States during the George Bush era.

Iranian leadership in 2009 now faces a decisive legitimacy crisis within the country. For the Iranian leaders, the issue of regime survival is more crucial than any international relations breakthrough. Particularly with the new generation of leaders in Tehran, mainly Ahmadinejad and the Revolutionary Guard commanders, who are local politicians who barely identify with international politics and lack a clear perception of Iran’s national interests.

On the contrary, unlike Obama who might be very reluctant to pick any other path except negotiations to deal with Iran, particularly as a Noble Peace Laureate, many in charge in Tehran look for the opposite. In fact, with the continuous bloody domestic upheaval in Iran, negotiation with the United States, particularly if it follows any compromise from the Iranian side, may lead the regime to the verge of collapse.

Any international crisis, such as the possibility of attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities or even the attack itself, for the Iranian leaders is assurance of survival; mainly because they will use it as an excuse to suppress their opponents more than ever and rally people behind the flag to defend the country.

Whether the Obama administration strongly condemns the use of excessive force in response to the human rights violations in Iran or chooses silence for the sake of maintaining nuclear negotiations the leaders in Tehran do not care.

It’s very likely that the Iranian government will double or triple its efforts to develop its nuclear program in order to reach the “irreversible point”, although Ahmadinejad has repeatedly said that Iran has already reached it.

It’s also very likely that hard-line leaders who run the show in Tehran will continue to intensify the crackdown on the opposition and that this past bloody Sunday might be just the beginning. The assassination of Mousavi’s nephew was an attempt by the Iranian government to signal the opposition leaders to give up. The arrest of Noble Peace Laureate, Shirin Ebadi’s sister on Monday was another attempt to pressure Iran’s most outspoken human rights defender. The increase in targeted killings and arbitrary arrests indicate that the Iranian government is determined to stop people at any cost, rather than listening to them or compromising.

Why this unrelenting tactic? The answer is simple: six months ago people were questioning the result of the presidential elections, but now they are challenging the Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei. Unlike the Shah who had the option to flee Iran to the United States with a warm welcome by the west, today’s Iranian leaders are not safely welcomed anywhere in the world. They are fighting down a dead-end street and that makes it very hard to imagine that they will give up.

The United States should strongly condemn the reckless behavior of the government in Tehran and outwardly support the struggle for human rights, justice, and democracy — not a particular side. We should not forget that Iran is one of the few countries in the Middle East, along with Turkey, Lebanon and Israel, where a free and fair election can prevent Islamic fundamentalists from coming to power. In fact, Iran is the closest country to a vibrant democracy than most of the dictatorships that have good relationships with the West.

President Obama should learn that the problem with the Iranian government is not its nuclear program or support of “terrorism” and “terrorist groups”. It’s the character of the Islamic Republic that makes it nearly impossible to rely on any results that come out of any negotiations with the Islamic government in Tehran.

For the people in the Middle East, history is not just stories of the past. They live history. Now the United States will have to decide which side of history it wants to stand on.

Israel can’t launch strike against Iran on its own – Haaretz – Israel News.

The year 2010 will be the year of Iran. Granted, we have said the same thing every year since 2005. But stopping the Iranian nuclear program will continue to top Israel’s priorities during the year that begins in two days’ time. The major powers are expected to announce soon that diplomacy has failed to persuade Tehran to freeze its nuclear project. And Western intelligence services believe the Iranians have already accumulated enough enriched uranium to build a nuclear bomb or two.

In the meantime, Israel is striving to develop a military option. Judging by certain leaks and remarks emanating from Jerusalem, the use of force seems to be a real possibility. Such preparations are necessary: The Israel Defense Forces must have a military plan in case other measures fail. The defense establishment needs to improve its protection of the home front, which would be hit by thousands of rockets and missiles even in the event of a limited war with Hezbollah or Hamas.

Military preparations are also essential to prod the United States and Europe to exert maximum pressure on the Islamic Republic. This will not happen unless Western states come to believe that Israel Air Force planes are starting to rev up their engines.

	Advertisement

This date with destiny has caused some Israeli leaders to adopt a messianic tone. Some even see a tempting opportunity to change the wider strategic reality in the region. Yet opinions are divided: Air force pilots, as they have stated on several occasions, are confident in their own abilities should the order to strike be given, but senior defense officials are describing their primary mission as preventing any foolish acts in the coming year. The IDF General Staff, as it did during the Gaza offensive, is likely to behave as an operational subcontractor, content merely to present the government with various military scenarios and their possible implications.

It must be stated plainly: Israel does not have independent strike capability against Iran – not in the broad sense of the term. The air force is capable of delivering a certain amount of explosives to a given target and bringing most of its aircraft back home intact. But it is doubtful whether Israel can allow itself to act against the wishes of the United States – to stand alone against an Iranian response and begin an open-ended operation against a nation of 70 million people.

An attack must be the last resort, not just another option placed on the table. It is best to disabuse ourselves of illusions about our ability to dictate a new Mideast order. That is the lesson learned, in blood, by Menachem Begin and Ariel Sharon in Lebanon in 1982 and by George W. Bush in Iraq in 2003.

This week, new protests erupted against the Iranian regime. It is difficult to predict whether the demonstrations will ultimately topple the government or simply strengthen it, along with the Revolutionary Guards. Maj. Gen. (Res.) Aharon Ze’evi-Farkash, formerly the head of Military Intelligence, recently compared the two most significant developments in Iran – the demonstrations and the nuclear program – to two trucks: “Both of them moved up a gear in the past six months, but it is unclear which will reach its destination first. The regime is losing its legitimacy with so much blood spilled on the streets. Israel must now show caution and patience.”

Over the past year, the Obama administration has provided the world with ample reason to criticize it for its naivete, its overblown confidence in the power of the spoken word to tear down walls and its impotence on North Korea. On the Iranian front, however, it has acted exactly as it should. Its pursuit of dialogue has pushed Tehran into an uncomfortable corner, created unanticipated common ground between the United States and Russia and could even lead to harsh sanctions against Iran.

What Israel needs now is a responsible adult, one who knows how to pull the emergency lever should the need arise. If such an adult cannot be found in Jerusalem, we must hope there is one sitting in the White House.