WarSclerotic

Iran gearing up for war leaving Saudi Arabia and Yemen looking worse off than Israel : RICHMARK SENTINEL.

While U.S. Secretary of Defence Robert Gates was expressing doubts Saturday that a deal to send Iran’s uranium abroad for enrichment was close, Iranian Defence Minister Ahmad Vahidi was opening two new missile production plants. This coming just three days after Iran had fired a rocket carrying live animals into space.

Notably also on the same day that Parliament speaker Ali Larijani was lambasting the West for trying to dupe Iran with a proposed nuclear fuel deal, calling it “a political swindle” designed to remove Iran’s enriched uranium” from the Islamic republic.

Yesterday his foreign minister Manouchehr Mottaki was advising the world that the agreement on uranium was close.

EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton also weighed in on Saturday by telling Iran that it had to formally respond to the UN atomic agency proposals in order to “build badly needed confidence”. She confirmed that years of talks with her predecessor Javier Solana and his colleagues took place against a backdrop of Iranian work that was continuing contrary to the rules of the safeguard system by which everyone is bound.

This in direct response to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who said in a television interview on Tuesday that Tehran would have “no problem” with the proposal.

Western powers,however suspect that the Iranian President is simply using delaying tactics to avoid further UN Security Council sanctions.

And so it goes on and on.

At the eleventh hour Iran promising cooperation but as soon as the parties suggest putting it down in writing they back off under some or other pretext. Russia and China invariably giving them an out.

The indications are that Iran will stop at nothing to achieve a nuclear capability in order to free up their military both at home and in the region.

In respect of the former, armed with a nuclear umbrella, they could remove any resistance to the Islamic Revolution while ignoring outside threats as so much hot air. Nobody is going to invade them.

In respect of the region the one player who can safely assume that Iran won’t be invading is Israel. Should they opt for a conventional war or a nuclear attack they would be inviting the end of Iran. Israel would respond tenfold.

That comfort is not available to Saudi Arabia, Yemen or even Iraq with Tehran sniffing around the neighbourhood. There is no doubting Iran’s support for rebels in Yemen, they’ve crossed the border into Iraq to measure the response in respect of disputed oilfields and warned the Saudis what will happen if they interfere with the problem in Yemen.

That is a random sample.

This from a country that is openly supporting militants across the region.

In respect of their missile capabilities the new plants will produce a ground-to-air missile dubbed the Qaem (Rising) and a surface-to-surface missile dubbed Toofan 5 (Storm).

The Qaem is designed to target helicopters at low and medium altitudes. It is a missile which can destroy targets in the air travelling at low speed and at low altitude, especially assault helicopters

Toofan 5 is one of the most advanced missiles. It has two warheads which can destroy tanks and other armoured vehicles. .

In December Iran tested the Sejil 2 (Lethal Stone) missile, describing it as a faster version of a medium-range missile that could allow it to strike arch-foe Israel.

The United States and its regional ally Israel have not ruled out a military option to stop Tehran’s controversial nuclear drive.

Tehran has in turn warned that it will target US bases in the region and block the strategic Gulf Strait of Hormuz waterway for oil tankers if its nuclear sites are attacked.

What is patently clear is that while striving for a nuclear capability Iran is simultaneously strengthening its ground and air forces making it a very definite threat in terms of invading its near neighbours.

If it was acting purely defensively then a nuclear deterrent coupled to existing military resources would be overwhelmingly sufficient to take care of any domestic bother.

This goes way beyond domestic use.

While the world might have been shocked by Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait nobody should be surprised the day Iranian forces cross their borders into neighbouring territory.

On that day perhaps the UN will have the sense to tell China and Russia to clean up their mess.

Al Jazeera English – Middle East – Iran: Uranium deal close.

Mottaki said  an exchange deal could be reached “in the not very distant future’ [AFP] A final deal on sending some Iranian uranium abroad for enrichment is close, Iran’s foreign minister has said. Speaking at the Munich Security Conference in Germany on Friday,  Manouchehr Mottaki said Iran sees good prospects for clinching such a deal. “With regard to discussions with the different parties, I personally believe that we have created conducive ground for such an exchange in the not very distant future,” Mottaki said. “Under the present conditions that we have reached, I think that we are approaching a final agreement that can be accepted by all parties.” Mottaki said it should be up to Tehran to set the amounts to be exchanged, based on its needs. A deal could represent a major breakthrough in the long-running dispute over Iran’s nuclear programme, but it was not clear whether Iran’s conditions would be acceptable to the United States and others. Nuclear bomb fears The uranium swap deal was first discussed last year between Iran and six world powers, which saw it as a way to ensure Tehran did not further enrich its uranium to a level that would be potentially usable in a nuclear bomb. But Tehran, which insists its nuclear programme has only peaceful intentions, had failed to respond positively to the proposal from the group – the US, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany – until this week. Mottaki said he would discuss the exchange on Saturday with Yukiya Amano, the new head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, on the fringes of the Munich conference.”We think all parties have shown their political will to fulfil this exchange,” he said, without naming specific countries. He added that the “Islamic republic of Iran has shown it is serious about doing this, and we have shown it at the highest level,” referring to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president. Ahmadinejad said in a television interview on Tuesday that Tehran would have “no problem” sending abroad its stocks of low-enriched uranium to be further purified into fuel. Iran needs nuclear fuel to power a UN-monitored research reactor in Tehran, but Western powers fear its uranium enrichment programme masks efforts to produce atomic weapons. To curb such fears, the International Atomic Energy Agency has proposed that Tehran ship uranium to Russia and France to be further purified into reactor fuel. Tehran agreed in principle to the offer during talks with world powers in October, but later appeared to reject the deal and said it preferred a gradual swap for fuel, preferably on Iranian soil.

MIDDLE EAST: Looming regional war involving Syria, Israel and Lebanon — or more hot air? | Babylon & Beyond | Los Angeles Times.

Israel and Syria have exchanged heated words in the last few days, leading many to wonder whether this new round of threats is leading up to a regional war, or is merely a bluffing contest to maintain the status quo that allows both governments to eschew domestic problems for the sake of state security.

“The Syrians cannot afford to go to war, and [Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor] Lieberman hit on a major stress point for them,” retired Lebanese general and military expert Elias Hanna told The Times. “This is critical for the Syrians, so maybe they are trying to tie themselves to Hezbollah and Iran in order to put obstacles for Israel to wage a war.”

But, he added, Israel cannot afford a three-front war against Hezbollah, Iran and Syria either.

On Friday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appeared to back away from statements made by  the notoriously bellicose Lieberman, in which the foreign minister warned Syrian President Bashar Assad that he and his family would “lose the regime” if war were to break out between Israel and Syria.

Syrian lawmaker Mohammad Naji Ottari hit back, saying Syria would respond to any provocation, while Netanyahu tried to calm things down by reiterating Israel’s willingness to negotiate directly with Syria.

The spat came a day after Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem called on Israel to “stop launching threats” against Gaza, southern Lebanon, Iran and Syria.

“Undoubtedly if we suppose that this war will break out … then I say that war will be all-out, whether it hits south Lebanon or Syria,” he was quoted saying by the Syrian Arab News Agency.

His comments have been interpreted by some to mean that Syria will intervene militarily should Israel launch a new war on south Lebanon. In the 2006 war between Israel and the militant group Hezbollah, Syria allegedly acted as a conduit for weapons to the group but did not interfere directly.

Rumors of Israeli military strikes against Iran and Hezbollah have gained currency after an informal deadline for nuclear negotiations with the Islamic Republic expired at the end of last year. Much ink has been spilled over whether Israel will hit Hezbollah before Iran, and if the Jewish state is willing to enter a multi-front war.

As-Safir and Al Akhbar, two Lebanese newspapers considered sympathetic to Hezbollah, ran editorials Friday questioning Israel’s motives and military preparedness.

Samir Karam, writing in As-Safir (in Arabic), criticized Israeli military strategy for failing to evolve with the conflict, citing a report by the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs on Israel’s qualitative military edge.

“[The study’s authors] want to make a fuss about ending the doctrine of qualitative military edge, while emphasizing that Israel still has this qualitative edge, despite developments that would destroy [this advantage],” Karam wrote. “What can Israel do to restore this qualitative edge, which [was damaged by] the resistance, not armies?”

In Al Akhbar (in Arabic), Saadallah Mazraani accused Israeli politicians of using political and military provocation to shift focus from reaching a two-state solution.

“Will Netanyahu and Lieberman’s political escalation translate to military escalation?” he asked, and if so, will it be in Gaza, Lebanon, Iran or Syria?

“But there is a risk: despite the natural tendency of Israeli leaders toward war and aggression, despite the presence of an extremist group in a position of unprecedented power in Israel, despite the fact that this group is supported by influential powers in the American administration. … Despite all this, despite the lure of official Arab complicity and Palestinian division … the facts on the ground do not make the Israeli adventure easy. … The war will not be limited, and the resistance will be wider and more effective.”

— Meris Lutz in Beirut

Photo: Metal cutouts of soldiers are seen in the Golan Heights, which Israel captured from Syria in 1967. Israel’s foreign minister has harshly warned Syria against drawing the Jewish state into another war, saying its army would be defeated and its regime would collapse in a future conflict. Credit: Ariel Schalit / Associated Press