http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1149412.html

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States Military is set to arrive in Israel on Sunday for a meeting with the Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff to discuss the situation in Iran.

U.S. Admiral Mike Mullen will meet with IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi as well as Minister of Defense, Ehud Barak, and other senior IDF commanders to discuss other topics, including joint defense issues between Israel and the U.S. and mutual security concerns.

Admiral Mullen’s meetings follow remarks made by the U.S. on Thursday when they called Iran’s nuclear intentions “anything but peaceful.”

Iran’s nuclear ambitions continue to draw concerns from the United States and European allies who fear Iran is seeking the capability to build nuclear weapons. Iran has rebuffed diplomatic overtures to resolve the issue and is in defiance of UN Security Council demands that it suspend uranium enrichment.

“Should Iran continue down the wrongful course that it’s on there will be consequences,” State Department spokesman Philip J. Crowley said.

In addition to meetings with IDF personnel, Admiral Mullen also requested to meet with members from the IDF rescue delegation to Haiti and hear about their experience with rescue operations and field medical treatment

Jamal Dajani: Iran Opposition Unplugged.

//

Last June, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad proclaimed a “landslide” victory election triggering months of upheaval. Tehran and other cities have seen the largest street protests and rioting since the 1979 Iranian Revolution by supporters of reform candidates alleging voter fraud. For the past several weeks, Iranian opposition groups and various media outlets have been predicting a repeat of this past summer’s events during the 31st anniversary of the Islamic Revolution. The anniversary is the most important day in Iran’s political calendar.

Instead, the opposition turnout was dwarfed by huge crowds at the state-run celebrations in the center of Tehran waving Iranian flags and carrying placards declaring the “US and Britain the brothers of the devil”, and “Down with Israel.”

A triumphant Ahmadinejad declared that Iran was now a “nuclear state” and would soon triple its output of 20% enriched uranium.

“By God’s grace, it was reported that the first consignment of 20 per cent-enriched uranium was produced and put at the disposal of the scientists,” he addressed the cheering crowd who had gathered in Tehran Azadi square to mark the anniversary of the Islamic Revolution.

But as Iranian state-controlled television beamed images of rallies supporting the regime in different cities, several Western and Arab television networks were reporting clashes between protesters and security forces in Tehran, Mashhad, Esfahan, Ahvaz, Shiraz and Tabriz. Opposition news websites alleged that security forces opened fire on anti-government demonstrators north of Revolution Square in Tehran, killing at least one person. A video posted on YouTube showing an Iranian security official pummeling an unarmed demonstrator was rebroadcast on several media outlets without confirming whether the video was shot recently or during the June events.

News quickly spread on Twitter that “opposition leader Mehdi Karroubi was attacked by security forces as he neared the main route of the march in Tehran.” This was tweeted and retweeted hundreds of times. “His youngest son, Ali, was arrested,” another tweet followed.

If one followed the “hashtag” (#IranElection) on Twitter on Thursday, he or she would have had the impression that the “Velvet Revolution” was rekindled. Although this was the wishful thinking of many, it was far from the truth. What went wrong?

Despite weeks of calls to action, the opposition movement failed to derail the holiday’s agenda set by supporters of supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The Iranian government had spent weeks co-opting the opposition plans. Dozens of activists and journalists were arrested, along with individuals suspected of using social networking websites to encourage protests against the regime.

Following in the footsteps of China, Google and other internet service providers had been blocked in Iran. SMS messages were interrupted, and internet communication was brought to a halt. Three major international broadcasters operating in the region, the BBC, Deutsche Welle and Voice of America, have recently accused the Iranian regime of “deliberate electronic interference” in their broadcasts.

It seems that the balance in the Iranian uprising is shifting in the regime’s favor. This time Ahmadinejad was prepared… he succeeded in “unplugging” the opposition.

Trend News: Former CIA analyst: Tehran wants nuclear weapons for two key objectives.

U.S, Washington, Feb. 12 / Trend News N.Bogdanova /

Trend News interviewed Clare M. Lopez, Vice President of the Intelligence Summit and a Professor at the Centre for Counterintelligence and Security Studies (CI Centre), where she teaches courses on the Iranian Intelligence Services.

Ms. Lopez is a former CIA analyst, and previously produced Technical Threat Assessments for US Embassies at the State Department.

Trend News: Yesterday Iranian president announced that the country finished producing its first batch of 20-percent enriched uranium. Do you believe the nuclear program influences the internal policy of Iran?

Lopez: Iran’s nuclear weapons program is considered by its clerical rulers to be indispensable for both domestic and foreign policy. Internally, the mullahs believe that acquisition of a deliverable nuclear weapon would encourage national pride, but also convince dissidents and internal opponents that if the entire world could not stop Iran from getting the bomb, then their quest for liberty is also a hopeless one.

Externally, Tehran wants a nuclear weapons capability for two key objectives: geostrategic dominance, including adventuresome aggression, in the Persian Gulf and Middle East region; and, to seize leadership of the international Jihad movement away from the Sunnis. The idea is “Shi’a Rising”, Persian Empire reborn, and Shi’a at the forefront of the Islamic Jihad vs. the Western, non-Muslim world.

Q: Even if Iran finished producing its first batch of 20 percent enriched uranium, do you believe that they have special technologies to use it?

A: It is my conviction that Iran has already developed nuclear warheads and tested them in non-chain reaction, non-fission, trigger device testing, probably in deep underground sites. I don’t think there is any doubt whatsoever that Iran has mastered the full nuclear fuel cycle….moving to 20% enrichment is merely the latest challenge to the impotence of the international community.

Once a nation has mastered enrichment even to 4-5%, moving additional steps beyond that is merely an exercise in the re-calibration of the centrifuges. The hardest technological challenge comes at the beginning, learning how to build and install and calibrate centrifuges and to link them into cascades. Once that is mastered, the rest is actually much easier – also a quicker process to reach Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) at 90% or even Weapons Grade, which is 93% enriched. Finally, we are fools if we think that Natanz and Qom are Iran’s only two nuclear enrichment sites. We have no idea at what stage of enrichment the other clandestine sites are.

Q: Do you think that Iran’s nuclear program will stop under pressure of economic sanctions?

A: No, Iran’s nuclear weapons process will not stop for any reason whatsoever except actual credible threat to the survival of the regime itself. Sanctions are useless.

Q: On the whole, what is the possibility to stop Iran’s nuclear program with discounts? What is the role of US?

A: The only possibility to stop Iran from achieving a deliverable nuclear weapon in the very near future is forcible destruction of their known sites, and/or regime change. Regime change is possible by a number of conceivable methods: internal implosion (the founders of the revolution actually fighting among themselves); internal dissident movement, like the Green opposition, but this has a long, long way to go and is under severe repression; external attack by Israel, the U.S., and/or the international community.

It seems highly unlikely that the U.S. will lift a finger to either support or assist the internal dissidents because the Obama administration wants to preserve what it naively thinks to be a possibility of negotiating a nuclear deal with the mullahs. This will never succeed. The international community, especially the IAEA, UN, and Security Council are essentially impotent, in part because China and Russia do not see it in their national interest to stop Iran right now.

Only Israel retains the ability and will to act. I believe Israel will strike eventually when it perceives that its final red lines have been crossed, or when Iran is about to acquire a game-changing air-defense missile system (like the S-300 from Russia), or when it decides is the best moment to achieve tactical surprise. For Israel, this is an existential question.

U.S. successfully tests airborne laser on missile | Reuters.

WASHINGTON, Feb 12 (Reuters) – A U.S. high-powered airborne laser weapon shot down a ballistic missile in the first successful test of a futuristic directed energy weapon, the U.S. Missile Defense Agency said on Friday.

The agency said in a statement the test took place at 8:44 p.m. PST (11:44 p.m. EST) on Thursday /0444 GMT on Friday) at Point Mugu’s Naval Air Warfare Center-Weapons Division Sea Range off Ventura in central California.

“The Missile Defense Agency demonstrated the potential use of directed energy to defend against ballistic missiles when the Airborne Laser Testbed (ALTB) successfully destroyed a boosting ballistic missile” the agency said.

The high-powered Airborne Laser system is being developed by Boeing Co., (BA.N) the prime contractor, and the U.S. Missile Defense Agency.

Boeing produces the airframe, a modified 747 jumbo jet, while Northrop Grumman (NOC.N) supplies the higher-energy laser and Lockheed Martin (LMT.N) is developing the beam and fire control systems.

“This was the first directed energy lethal intercept demonstration against a liquid-fuel boosting ballistic missile target from an airborne platform,” the agency added.

The airborne laser weapon successfully underwent its first in-flight test against a target missile back in August. During that test, Boeing said the modified 747-400F aircraft took off from Edwards Air Force Base and used its infrared sensors to find a target missile launched from San Nicolas Island, California.

The plane’s battle management system issued engagement and target location instructions to the laser’s fire control system, which tracked the target and fired a test laser at the missile. Instruments on the missile verified the system had hit its mark, Boeing said.

The airborne laser weapon is aimed at deterring enemy missile attacks and providing the U.S. military with the ability to engage all classes of ballistic missiles at the speed of light while they are in the boost phase of flight.

“The revolutionary use of directed energy is very attractive for missile defense, with the potential to attack multiple targets at the speed of light, at a range of hundreds of kilometers (miles), and at a low cost per intercept attempt compared to current technologies,” the U.S. Missile Defense Agency said.

(Reporting by Jim Wolf and David Alexander, Editing by Sandra Maler)

The Ayatollahs are Asking for It » Publications » Family Security Matters.

February 12, 2010

Alan Caruba

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1149191.html

By Natasha Mozgovaya, Haaretz Correspondent and Haaretz Service

White House: Ahmadinejad has said many things, and many of them turn out to be untrue.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s announcement that the country has succeeded at creating higher levels of uranium enrichment shows its nuclear intentions are “anything but peaceful,” the U.S. State Department said Thursday. Ahmadinejad said scientists had succeeded at producing a batch of uranium enrichment at a much higher level that it had previously accomplished. The amount was sufficient for running in nuclear power reactors, but still well below the levels needed for weapons grade uranium. But Iran’s nuclear ambitions continue to draw concerns from the United States and European allies who fear Iran is seeking the capability to build nuclear weapons. Iran has rebuffed diplomatic overtures to resolve the issue and is in defiance of UN Security Council demands that it suspend uranium enrichment. “Should Iran continue down the wrongful course that it’s on there will be consequences,” State Department spokesman Philip J. Crowley said. Crowley also said he was skeptical as to the accuracy of Iran’s claims of nuclear enrichment capabilities. “I’m not a scientists but I think there are questions about what Iran’s true capability is,” Crowley said, adding that Iran has “been boasting number of things for a couple of years, but we are taking their words seriously. It seems as a violation of the UN Security Council resolution.” “It appears that they’ve attempted a nearly total information blockade – it’s an unprecedented attempt to intimidate their own people and it’s clear they fear their own people,” Crowley said. “I think we have strong indications that Iran has tried to restrict access to the Internet, and it’s not about what the outsiders are doing, but about the fundamental relationship between Iranian government and their people. Iranian people are continuing to protest for their rights. This continuing intimidation by the Iranian government is a great concern to us, and it shows the increasing bankruptcy of the Iranian regime. White House Spokesman Robert Gibbs also referred to Iran’s claims of its nuclear capabilities, saying the Iranian president Ahmadinejad had said “many things, and many of them turn out to be untrue.” “We do not believe they have the capability to enrich which they claim they have,” Gibbs added, saying the actions of Iran have led to the world to be more unified” by defying international obligations. The comments by U.S. officials came after earlier Thursday British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said the international community was moving closer to imposing sanctions on Iran because of its nuclear program. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced on Thursday that Iran was capable of enriching uranium to more than 80 percent purity, coming close to levels experts say would be needed for a nuclear bomb, although he said that was not the country’s intention. “I believe the mood around the world is now increasingly one where, patience not being inexhaustible, people are turning to look at the specific sanctions we can plan on Iran,” Brown told BBC. Officials: UN set to pass tighter Iran sanctions Senior United Nations officials told Haaretz that a Security Council resolution tightening the sanctions on Iran has become more likely, and that the resolution is probably going to be approved. Observers in both New York and Washington estimate that China will think twice about using its veto on a resolution after Russia recently threw its support behind a move against Iran. A veto could expose Beijing as isolated and out of touch with its fellow Security Council members. China could also abstain from voting and allow the decision to be made by a simple majority. However, the sources told Haaretz, the United States is still trying to obtain Chinese support for the sanctions. Ahead of its push for international sanctions at the UN, the U.S. sought on Wednesday to ratchet up pressure on Iran by imposing its own sanctions on elements of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps, which Western intelligence officials believe is spearheading Iran’s nuclear program. The Treasury Department said it was freezing the assets in U.S. jurisdictions of Revolutionary Guard Gen. Rostam Qasemi and four subsidiaries of a previously penalized construction firm he runs because of their alleged involvement in producing and spreading weapons of mass destruction. U.S. officials said the measures were intended as a model for wider action at the UN. “The United States is seeking to reach a consensus between the five permanent members of the UN Security Council on the sanctions issue,” one of the sources said. “This would allow it to present the five superpowers as a united coalition, which would increase the impact of the sanctions.” According to estimates in Washington and New York, a first American draft for the new resolution will be circulated among Security Council members in early March at the latest, and the vote will take place at the end of the month. “To be honest, nobody knows for certain at the moment what China is going to do,” a senior official in New York told Haaretz. “But at the end of the day, China is sensitive about its position as a superpower, and will not be able to ignore the position of other superpowers, including Russia, who support tightening the sanctions. It’s not going to go against them by undermining the resolution.” The New York Times on Wednesday quoted officials in the Obama administration who said the U.S. president has been applying the same persuasion tack with China he earlier successfully used with Russian president Medvedev. According to the daily, Obama has placed sanctions on Iran at the top of his priorities in recent contacts with Beijing. Experts, however, warned that the same tactics that brought success with Russia may not work with China. A scheduled White House visit by the Dalai Lama has infuriated the Chinese, as did a recent arms deal between the United States and Taiwan. The Americans had earlier planned to begin promoting the resolution in February. France, which supports a tough line on Iran, is this month’s president of the Security Council. “”This is a critical time for Iran’s relationship with the rest of the world.” Brown said the international community did not want to impose sanctions but would do so if Iran did not cooperate more fully over its nuclear plans

Regime Change Bruited as US Troops Train Secretly for Next Campaign

Barak Obama

The hottest intelligence item bandied about in top Western, Russian and Middle East circles is this:
For some weeks now, US-military chartered airliners and scheduled flights have been ferrying hundreds of US officers and soldiers in civilian dress between the Persian Gulf, the Far East and Thailand, in particular. They are bound for a spot of R & R. Most of the American soldiers flooding the holiday resorts and local bars around Bangkok are tightlipped about their next missions, but some have disclosed they were resting up from strenuous training ahead of one of the most grueling and lengthy operations US armed forces have ever undertaken: A military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities and its strategic and military infrastructures.
There were additional signs in the past two weeks that President Barack Obama was turning away from diplomatic engagement with Iran and towards the military option (which he never eschewed).
Is the apparent U-turn a zigzag with more to come?
In a surprise statement Tuesday, Feb. 9, Obama told reporters he had “bent over backwards” to engage Iran in constructive dialogue, but now that Tehran has moved to enrich uranium to the 20 percent level in defiance of the world powers, the US is moving fast forward to develop a “significant regime of sanctions.”
The Pentagon said the US wants a UN Security resolution within weeks, pointing out that Iran has defied five UN Security Council resolutions with sanctions banning enrichment.
At the same time, the US president is letting talks with Iran go another round, perhaps as a last throw of his engagement dice. Tuesday, he sent Turkish foreign minister Ahmet Davutolu to Tehran to engage Iranian leaders in another bid to bridge the gap, a mission that could also take some weeks.
Either way, Iran’s leaders have again won time to parlay for progress on their nuclear plans, free of heavy American pressure to mend their ways.

So which is it to be? A sanctions regime or regime change?

DEBKA-Net-Weekly intelligence sources report exclusively that three former Democratic administration officials acting as his informal envoys last week delivered messages which took their interlocutors aback – European and Middle Eastern alike. Make no mistake about President Obama’s apparent offer of more time for Tehran to accept the world powers’ enriched uranium offer of a swap, or his slow response to Iran’s advance notice that it would start enriching uranium to 20 percent on Feb. 9 – or even the unveiling of the advanced Kavoshgar-3 satellite carrier-cum-missile. Washington is only pretending to let Tehran get away with its escalating provocations. In reality, the White House has reached three decisions in principle:
1. Not to allow Iran to build or possess nuclear weapons;
2. To go to war to prevent this happening, having concluded, contrary to former predictions, that a military strike on Iran would be less fraught with danger than letting Iran acquire an N-bomb.
3. Diplomatic engagement having exhausted itself, regime change in Tehran is a real option.
According to our sources, Obama’s messengers did not specify whether US military action would persevere until regime change is achieved or that two separate operations for separate goals were contemplated.
Asked to substantiate his highly dramatic message, one of the envoys advised an interviewee to read an article written by Richard Haass, president of The Council on Foreign Relations, for Newsweek of January 22.
Haass was faithfully representing President Obama’s thinking and his next direction, said the envoy. Beyond this, he would not elaborate.

The coming NIE may box Obama in

Under the headline “Enough Is Enough,” Haass wrote: “I’ve changed my mind (about the engagement policy). The nuclear talks are going nowhere. The Iranians appear intent on developing the means to produce a nuclear weapon…
“Critics will say promoting regime change will encourage Iranian authorities to tar the opposition as pawns of the West. But the regime is already doing so. Outsiders should act to strengthen the opposition and to deepen rifts among the rulers. This process is underway, and while it will take time, it promises the first good chance in decades to bring about an Iran that, even if less than a model country, would nonetheless act considerably better at home and abroad. Even a realist should recognize that it’s an opportunity not to be missed.”
DEBKA-Net-Weekly‘s Washington and military sources note that the envoys are stressing that President Obama has already come down in favor of military action to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear arms in a bid to allay Middle East and Gulf Arab concerns. For their message to be believable and taken seriously – and not just as a non-binding expression of intent – the US envoys defined the circumstances that would prompt the offensive and the time frame for its launch, namely: Clear US intelligence affirmation that Iran was proceeding to assemble a nuclear weapon, i.e. some time this year or next.
On February 2, US intelligence chief Dennis Blair told the Senate: “Iran is keeping open the option of developing nuclear weapons but it remains unclear whether Tehran has the political will to do so.”
Our sources disclosed in last week’s issue (DEBKA-Net-Weekly 432) that Blair’s testimony was in fact the curtain-raiser for the administration’s new National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), a work in progress which deals primarily with Iran.
Should the new NIE determine from the evidence that the Iranian leadership has made up its mind to go for a nuclear weapon – or assembled its components – it will be time for Obama to decide finally if an American military strike is warranted.
The pace would be forced if Iran landed the shock of its first nuclear test, which some Iran-watchers tell DEBKA-Net-Weekly cannot be ruled out during the Islamic regime’s anniversary month.

Obama bids farewell to his Muslim outreach

Obama’s decision to aim for regime change in Tehran would be a policy reversal as radical as his resort to military action to thwart Iran’s nuclear ambitions. It would bury for good the outreach to the Muslim world heralded in his epic speech at Cairo University on June 4, 2009 and add the name of Barack Obama to the list of bygone US presidents, including George W. Bush, who viewed regime change as legitimate for achieving political goals and reshaping countries and world regions.
Since Obama’s Cairo speech, the meaning has been drained from his opening words: “I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition.”
Washington sources note that ten months later, the principles of justice and progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings have gone up in smoke. The speech sincerely meant to heal a historic breach has been swept away on the battlefields of Afghanistan, Pakistan and latterly Yemen, where American servicemen are fighting Islamic forces.
If the US exercises its military option against Iran too, the breach will widen further