Archive for April 2010

Barak: IDF has its eyes on all threats, near and far – Haaretz – Israel News

April 13, 2010

Defense Minister Ehud Barak
(Tomer Appelbaum)

|

// //

Last update – 18:29 13/04/2010
Barak: IDF has its eyes on all threats, near and far
By Amos Harel, Haaretz Correspondent

Defense Minister Ehud Barak said Tuesday that Israel was closely following the Hezbollah militant group’s rearmament, responding to reports that Syria has recently shipped ballistic missiles of the Scud type to the Lebanon-based guerillas.

“The rearmament [in Lebanon] looks to be in callous violation of the Security Council resolution,” Barak said, referring to the agreement which brought an end to a month-long war between Israel and Hezbollah in 2006.

“We have been saying our piece for some time now ? we have no plans to attack Lebanon, and we recommend and hope that everyone will preserve the quiet,” Barak added. “But the entry of systems like this that disturb the balance endangers stability and quiet.”

Earlier Tuesday, Barak told Israel Air Force soldiers at a base in the north that the Israel Defense Forces was preparing to face threats from both near and far.

“We have the pilots, the ground crews and the best planes in the world,” Barak declared. “Our air force is the supporting pillar of our operational capabilities against threats from both near and far.”

“The IDF is trained and ready, with its eyes open in every direction,” Barak told the soldiers. “With this strength and deterrence, Israel must try to find every opportunity to reach peace with its neighbors.”


Tehran: If Iran is attacked, nuclear devices will go off in American cities

April 13, 2010

DEBKAfile, Political Analysis, Espionage, Terrorism, Security.

DEBKAfile Special Report April 13, 2010, 6:53 PM (GMT+02:00)

Tags: Barack Obama Iran nuclear

Iran threatens US with nuclear terror

This warning, along with an announcement that Iran would join the world’s nuclear club within a month, raised the pitch of Iranian anti-US rhetoric to a new high Tuesday, April 13, as 47 world leaders gathered in Washington for President Barack Obama’s Nuclear Security Summit. The statement published by Kayhan said: “If the US strikes Iran with nuclear weapons, there are elements which will respond with nuclear blasts in the centers of America’s main cities.” For the first time, debkafile‘s military sources report, Tehran indicated the possibility of passing nuclear devices to terrorists capable of striking inside the United States.


Without specifying whether those elements would be Iranian or others, Tehran aimed at the heart of the Nuclear Security Summit by threatening US cities with nuclear terror.


debkafile‘s Iranians sources report that Tehran is playing brinkmanship to demonstrate that the Washington summit, from which Iran and North Korea were excluded, failed before it began, because terrorist elements capable of striking inside the US had already acquired nuclear devices for that purpose.
Although Iran has yet to attain operational nuclear arms, our military sources believe it does possess the makings of primitive nuclear devices or “dirty bombs.”

In an interview ahead of the summit, President Obama warned: “If there was ever a detonation in New York City, or London, or Johannesburg, the ramifications… would be devastating.”
In another shot at the summit, Behzad Soltani, deputy director of Iran’s Atomic Commission, announced Tuesday: “Iran will join the world nuclear club within a month in a bid to deter possible attacks on the country.” He added: “No country would even think about attacking Iran once it is in the club.”

The Iranian official’s boast was run by the Fars news agency, published by Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps.

Behzadi further pointed to the construction of 360 MW nuclear power plant and a 40 MW research reactor in Iran’s central city of Arak, claiming the projects were 70 percent complete.
This plant is generally believed to have been built to enable Iran to produce weapons-grade plutonium as an alternative weapons fuel to highly-enriched uranium and material for radioactive weapons.
Sunday, April 11, debkafile reported that Iran is making much better progress than Western and Israeli intelligence estimates have held toward completing the Arak heavy water reactor.

Along with the strides made in its nuclear manufacturing capacity, Tehran’s anti-US rhetoric has grown more strident in the past week. Thursday, April 8, Iran’s Armed Forces Chief of Staff Maj.Gen. Hassan Firouzabadi said if the United States made any military moves on the Islamic Republic “none of the American troops in the region would go back home alive.”
debkafile‘s military sources report the presence of app. 220,000 US soldiers in the countries around Iran, including Gulf bases and waters, Iraq and Afghanistan. The Iranian general was reacting to US defense secretary Robert Gates’ warning that Washington’s policy decision to limit the use of nuclear arms if attacked did not apply to Iran and North Korea.

Israel accuses Syria of arming Hezbollah

April 13, 2010
*

Israel accuses both Syria and Iran of supplying arms to the Shiite Muslim Hezbollah

JERUSALEM — Israeli President Shimon Peres on Tuesday accused Syria of supplying Scud missiles to the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah while publicly talking peace.

“Syria claims it wants peace while at the same time it delivers Scuds to Hezbollah whose only goal is to threaten the state of Israel,” Peres told public radio.

According to Arab media and specialised think-tanks, Syria has been sending some of its arsenal of Scud missiles to Lebanon, an allegation denied by Damascus.

“Syria believes it need do nothing more than let itself be courted by the world, while saying one thing and doing the opposite,” Peres, whose post is largely ceremonial, said amid Israeli media reports of rising tensions.

He made the comments just hours before flying to Paris, where he is expected to discuss the issue with French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

Israel’s Deputy Defence Minister Matan Vilnai declined to go into details of the alleged Scud shipments but said that “Hezbollah’s firing capacity has significantly improved.”

Israel accuses both Syria and Iran of supplying arms to the Shiite Muslim Hezbollah, whose deadly attack on an army patrol just inside Israel triggered a devastating in the summer of 2006.

In February, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accused Lebanon of allowing Hezbollah to develop its stockpile of weapons.

Israel estimates Hezbollah’s arsenal at some 40,000 rockets, a significant rise from the group’s 14,000 rockets in 2006, when the 34-day conflict killed 1,200 Lebanese, mostly civilians, and more than 160 Israelis, mostly soldiers.

It says the stockpile includes rockets with a range of more than 300 kilometres (116 miles), capable of reaching major Israeli population centres.

Vilnai said that Israel would again conduct military exercises this year to prepare for possible rocket attacks by Hezbollah.

Hezbollah is blacklisted by Washington as a terrorist organisation, although it is part of a Lebanese coalition government formed in November by US- and Saudi-backed Prime Minister Saad Hariri.

Israel remains technically at war with Syria and Lebanon.

via AFP: Israel accuses Syria of arming Hezbollah.

Sarkozy warns of Israel-Iran war

April 13, 2010

Sarkozy warns of Israel-Iran war.

As the Nuclear Security Summit opened in Washington on Monday night, French President Nicolas Sarkozy warned that if the world doesn’t act to prevent Iran from attaining nuclear arms, it could be responsible for a war between Israel and the Islamic republic.

“I would not want the world to wake up to a conflict between Israel and Iran, quite simply because the international community has been incapable of acting,” the French president told CBS News.

He said that an IAF strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities would be disastrous.

“It would be a disaster. I don’t even want to think about that possibility,” he said. “And the best way to avoid this disaster scenario is to take measures in order to get Israel to understand that we are determined to ensure its security. And Israel, furthermore, must equally make the necessary effort in order to bring about a fair and lasting peace with their Palestinian neighbors.”

Sarkozy reiterated that a nuclear armed Iran would be “dangerous and unacceptable,” particularly in light of “the many statements made by Iranian leaders against the democracy that is Israel.”

He said that patience with Iran had it limits, and so time had come to vote for sanctions against the leaders “who are leading the country to the wall.”

Sarkozy added that while a unified Security Council decision would be best, it must not come at the expense of a resolution that is so toothless that it would achieve nothing.

The French president said that his country could not agree give up its nuclear weapons, since it would jeopardize the nation’s security.

Sarkozy stressed that France was the only country in the world that had actually declared how many nuclear warheads it possessed – which, he emphasized, had been dropped to 300 – and that it had stopped nuclear testing. But he said France could do no more than that at present.

“I feel that if I were to go any further, I could in fact jeopardize the security of my country, and as head of state, I am the guarantor and guarantee of that security,” he said.

The French president went on to say that while everyone would applaud a “virtual world” with no nuclear weapons, that was currently no more than “an awesome dream.”

“I have inherited the legacy of the efforts made by my predecessors to build up arms as a nuclear power, and I could not give up nuclear weapons, insofar as I wasn’t sure that the world was a stable and safe place,” he said. “I will not give up that nuclear weapon because it underpins my country’s security. I will not do so on a unilateral basis in a world as dangerous as the one in which we live in today.”

Iran, Israel and the Bomb – WSJ.com

April 13, 2010

Iran, Israel and the Bomb – WSJ.com.

As far as grand summitry goes, an American President hasn’t hosted something like the current two-day talk-in on nuclear security in Washington since—well, as the Obama Administration described it, not since the San Francisco Conference of 1945. That meeting created the United Nations and helped establish the postwar world order. The agenda for the party that started yesterday is far more modest, but also hard to dislike.

President Obama invited the leaders of 46 countries to brainstorm ways to secure weapons-grade plutonium and uranium and ensure that terrorist groups don’t get their hands on a bomb. At the end of the Cold War, the U.S. tracked and locked down nuclear material in the former Soviet Union with admirable success through the Nunn-Lugar program. In our current post-9/11 era, al Qaeda and like-minded Islamists badly want a bomb, and this Washington gabfest can usefully focus minds and highlight best practices for governments willing to stop global proliferation.

Any achievements will be modest. Ukraine yesterday agreed to eliminate its stockpile of highly enriched uranium, nearly 16 years after giving up the nuclear arsenal it inherited from the Soviet Union. Kiev isn’t a proliferator of nuclear weapons, and while welcome, this deal won’t make anyone in the free world sleep better at night.

In his remarks on Sunday, President Obama declared that: “The single biggest threat to U.S. security, both short-term, medium-term and long-term, would be the possibility of a terrorist organization obtaining a nuclear weapon. This is something that could change the security landscape in this country and around the world for years to come.”

Associated Press

President Barack Obama talks with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan

That’s true enough, which only underscores what isn’t on the table this week. Namely, proliferation by Iran and North Korea. U.S. officials say they avoided these touchy subjects to ensure that all countries came on board. China might be annoyed by raising such state-sponsored proliferation, goes the argument, and in any case that’s being pursued at the U.N.

Really? Nuclear material in the hands of well-run democracies that play by international rules isn’t likely to fall into the hands of terrorists. However, were Iran to develop an atomic bomb and the means to deliver a warhead, the danger automatically rises that the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism might share it with its friends in Hezbollah or Hamas. Or imagine a North Korea hard up for cash and willing to sell a device to al Qaeda.

The restrictions on sensitive topics evidently doesn’t apply to Israel. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu cancelled plans to attend after Turkey and Egypt declared their intention to turn the spotlight on Israel’s presumed nuclear arsenal. Who wants to travel across the ocean to listen to insults?

Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan recently declared the Jewish state “the principal threat to peace in the region today.” But Israel’s nukes aren’t prompting him or the Saudis or Egyptians to kick-start their atomic programs; an Israeli bomb poses no threat to them. An Iranian bomb would.

In our view, “the single biggest threat to American security” would be to allow Iran to defy years of effort by the world’s leading nations and become a nuclear power. That would unleash a new age of proliferation that would swamp this week’s attempts at controlling nuclear materials. Prevent an Iranian breakout, and the risk of an al Qaeda nuclear attack falls sharply. High-profile nuclear summitry has its uses, but it won’t mean much if Mr. Obama dodges the hard decisions necessary to stop the world’s most dangerous proliferators.

U.S. official: China agrees to support new Iran nuclear sanctions – Haaretz – Israel News

April 13, 2010

U.S. official: China agrees to support new Iran nuclear sanctions – Haaretz – Israel News.

U.S. President Obama and China’s President Hu Jintao, left, on Monday.
(AP)

China shares U.S. concerns about Iran’s nuclear program and agreed to direct its officials to work on a UN sanctions resolution against Tehran, a U.S. official said after talks between U.S. President Barack Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao.

Jeffrey Bader, Obama’s top China adviser, said Obama and Hu, meeting on the sidelines of a nuclear security summit, talked at length about Iran and discussed nuclear non-proliferation.

Obama stressed to Hu the need to act urgently against Iran’s nuclear program, and Hu agreed that Beijing would help craft a UN resolution, Bader said.


The White House had hoped the one-on-one meeting would help determine whether China was serious about moving forward with the United States, Britain, France, Russia and Germany in forging a new round of UN sanctions on Iran.

“The resolution will make clear to Iran the cost of pursuing a nuclear program that violates Iran’s obligations and responsibilities,” Bader told reporters after the meeting. “The Chinese are actively at the table in New York.”

Bader said the two presidents agreed that their delegations should work on a Security Council resolution on a new round of Iran sanctions “and that’s what we’re doing.”

Obama deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes said the United States still expects a UN resolution by this spring.

Bader said Obama’s meeting with Hu “was a sign of international unity” on Iran. Western powers want to deter Iran from what they see as a drive to develop nuclear weapons, while Tehran insists its program has only peaceful, civilian purposes.

China, which holds veto power in the Security Council, had recently shown an increased willingness to pressure Iran while signaling it remained reluctant to take some of the toughest measures proposed by Washington and other Western powers.

Following the meeting, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Ma Zhaoxu said that President Hu had told Obama in “positive and constructive” talks on Monday that Beijing wanted to resolve bilateral economic friction through consultations.

China and the United States also “share the same overall goal on the Iranian nuclear issue,” Ma said in a written statement after the two leaders met on the sidelines of a nuclear security summit in Washington. Ma provided no details on the talks and repeated China’s standard call for “dialogue and negotiations” with Iran.

Speaking to reporters afterwards, Obama made no mention of his talks with Hu but said he expects the 47-nation summit to make progress toward locking down loose nuclear material.

“It’s impressive. I think it’s an indication of how deeply concerned everybody should be with the possibilities of nuclear traffic, and I think at the end of this we’re going to see some very specific, concrete actions that each nation is that will make the world a little bit safer,” Obama said.

Speaking to ABC’s Good Morning America earlier Monday, Russian President Dimitry Medvedev said that while he supported sanctions on Iran’s nuclear program he felt those sanctions should not harm the Iranian people.

On the subject of imitating new sanctions against Iran geared at forcing it to abandon its nuclear program, the Russian president said that “it’s not whether it’s a good thought or bad thought, I’m talking about something else.”

“The sanctions is a tricky thing which works seldomly. You yourself were busy with politics, and you know that sanctions is not without conditions,” Medvedev said, adding but sometimes you have to do that.”

“What kind of sanctions? We have spoken about that with President Obama yesterday. Sanctions should be effective and they should be smart,” the Russian President said.

“They should not lead to humanitarian catastrophe, and the whole Iranian community would start to hate the whole world. And we’re worried that there are a significant number of people which have radical opinions. Do we want that radical thought to be sent to the whole world?,” Medvedev said.

However, the Russian president did not rule sanctions altogether, saying that they “should be smart.”

“They should force or obligate the Iranian leadership to think about what’s next. What could sanctions be? It could be trade, arms trade. It could be other sanctions,” Medvedev said, adding that “sanctions should let the country understand that all who impose sanctions have the same opinion.”

Medvedev said that any new sanctions “should not be paralyzing. They should not cause suffering. Aren’t we in the 21st century? That’s why if we’re going to develop our cooperation in this direction we have a chance to succeed. Better would be to go without sanctions and achieve things politically.

Earlier Monday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad condemned Obama’s nuclear summit, calling it humiliating to humanity.

On Holocaust day, Israel warns of Iranian threat

April 12, 2010

On Holocaust day, Israel warns of Iranian threat – News – World – bnd.com.

Associated Press Writer

//

JERUSALEM — Israel used the solemn occasion of Monday’s annual Holocaust memorial day to call on the world to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons and to draw new attention to the plight of the dwindling number of survivors.

The wail of air raid sirens pierced the air for two minutes as the country came to a standstill in a yearly ritual remembering the 6 million Jews who perished in World War II. People stood at attention and traffic halted during the moment of silence, as radio stations played mournful music throughout the day.

Israel was built on the ashes of the Holocaust, and preserving the memory of the Nazi genocide plays a central role in the country’s identity.

At the memorial’s opening ceremony late Sunday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu tried to draw parallels to the rise of Nazi Germany and the development of Iran’s nuclear program.

Israel, like the West, believes Iran is developing nuclear weapons, and Netanyahu derided the world’s response to curbing Tehran’s atomic ambitions as limp.

“If we have learned anything from the Holocaust, it is that we must not be silent or be deterred in the face of evil,” Netanyahu said.

Israel considers a nuclear-armed Iran an existential threat, underscored by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s repeated references to the Jewish state’s destruction and Tehran’s support for anti-Israeli militant groups. Israel has hinted at taking military action against Iran if diplomacy fails.

The Yad Vashem memorial authority picked “Voices of the Survivors” as the theme of this year’s commemoration. Sixty-five years after World War II, about 207,000 aging survivors, many of them destitute and alone, live in Israel, down 63,000 from just two years earlier.

In Jerusalem, Yad Vashem opened a new art exhibit on Monday displaying works by survivors.

Among the collection was a painting by Shoshana Noyman, 78, who lost her father and sister during a six-week death march in Ukraine. The painting shows a bearded man, eyes closed with exhaustion, carrying a young girl on his shoulders. She said her father dropped dead of exhaustion at the end of the march, while her sister died from typhus.

“I have no pictures of my family. I drew this from memory. This is how I remember them,” said Noyman, who was forced to stand guard by her sister’s body for more than a week before it could be removed.

At the Israeli parliament on Monday, Netanyahu, President Shimon Peres, other officials and survivors read names of loved ones who perished.

Peres recited the names of his family members killed “with 2,060 of their community members in the town of Vishneva in August 1942,” saying the “Nazis and their accomplices assembled the town’s residents in the synagogue that was made of wood and cruelly shot and burned them to death.”

The reading is an annual rite known as “Every Person Has a Name” that tries to break down the 6 million number into stories of individuals, families and communities wiped out during the war. Memorial ceremonies were also held at schools and military bases, while restaurants, cafes and theaters were closed.

The front page of the Yediot Ahronot daily carried a black-and-white photo of a bearded Polish Jew, wrapped in a prayer shawl, kneeling before two Nazi soldiers, his arms raised, fists clenched, before he was executed.

The man was the maternal grandfather of Meir Dagan, chief of the Mossad spy agency, who told the newspaper: “I see that photo every day and vow that something like that will not happen again.”

The Simon Wiesenthal Center on Monday praised Germany for bringing accused Nazi war criminals John Demanjuk and Heinrich Boere to trial over the past year, but said a “lack of political will” continues to be the major obstacle to punishing others, particularly in post-Communist Eastern Europe.

The center singled out Hungary’s failure to try Sandor Kepiro, whom it accuses of organizing the mass murder of at least 1,200 civilians in Serbia in 1942.

10 reasons why Barack Obama is the most naïve president in US history – Telegraph Blogs

April 12, 2010

10 reasons why Barack Obama is the most naïve president in US history – Telegraph Blogs.

In honour of this week’s cringe-inducing nuclear summit in Washington, which represents yet another step towards American decline under the current US administration, here is a list of ten key reasons why Barack Obama qualifies as the most naïve president in US history.

Despite some strong competition from Woodrow Wilson and Jimmy Carter, President Obama has spectacularly blown the opposition out of the water, on almost every level, from appeasing America’s enemies abroad to building the foundations of a European-style welfare state at home. The end result is an America that is weaker, more vulnerable to attack, and mired in mountains of debt. No other president in US history has done more to undermine the original vision of America’s Founding Fathers, while replacing it with a reckless and risky agenda that threatens America’s ability to lead the free world.

1. Obama believes unilateral disarmament will achieve a nuclear-free world

The Obama administration may dream of a day when the world is free of nuclear weapons, but its lofty vision bears no relation to the realities of the modern world. Even the president of France believes that President Obama needs to live in the real world, not a virtual one, which is a rather damning indictment of US leadership. There is not a shred of evidence to suggest that Washington’s decision to cut its nuclear arsenal will encourage the likes of Iran and North Korea to disarm, and history has shown that a unilateral policy of disarmament will not prompt tyrannical regimes to change their behaviour.

2. Obama thinks evil regimes can be negotiated with

The naïve appeasement of practically every odious tyranny on the face of the earth has been a central hallmark of Barack Obama’s foreign policy. From extending the hand of friendship to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Hugo Chavez, to turning a blind eye to horrific human rights abuses in Iran, Sudan, Zimbabwe and Burma, the Obama administration has made the art of appeasement into an art form under the guise of “smart power”. It is a morally bankrupt approach to foreign policy, epitomised by the words of Obama’s special envoy to Sudan, retired Air Force Major General J. Scott Gration, who declared:
“We’ve got to think about giving out cookies. Kids, countries — they react to gold stars, smiley faces, handshakes, agreements, talk, engagement.”

3. Obama doesn’t believe America is fighting a global war

Within weeks of taking office, the Obama administration dropped the phrase “Global War on Terror” in favour of “Overseas Contingency Operation”, and has gone to great lengths since then to emphasise that the United States is not engaged in a world wide war against Islamist terrorists who seek the destruction of America. As Vice President Joe Biden put it at last year’s Munich Security Conference, the US was involved in “a shared struggle against extremism” and a fight against “a small number of violent extremists (who) are beyond the call of reason”. Can you imagine Winston Churchill or Franklin D. Roosevelt declaring in 1943 that World War Two was a mere “struggle” against a small band of fascist extremists? Al-Qaeda killed over 3,000 Americans on 9/11, and their sole aim is the destruction of the West and the establishment of an Islamist caliphate. If that’s not a declaration of war I don’t know what is.

4. Obama believes increasing spending and raising taxes leads to prosperity

While even the Germans are balking at spending more taxpayers’ money to stimulate the economy or bail out failing members of the Eurozone, the Obama administration seems determined to build up ever greater levels of government debt, with vastly expanded entitlement programmes and government spending. At the same time, Paul Volcker, its chief economic adviser, is dangling the prospect of additional European-style taxes to pay for it all, the surest way to kill economic growth and stifle job creation. As the recent success of countries like Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand attest, economic growth and prosperity is directly linked to limited government intervention, low taxation, and above all, economic freedom.

5. Obama thinks government-run health care is good for America

In the face of overwhelming public opposition, Barack Obama’s health care reform legislation represents the biggest expansion of government power in over 70 years, and is a major step towards a government-run health care system. It is a hugely naïve and risky social experiment in a nation whose success has always been driven by the principle of individual freedom. As I noted before, what we have just witnessed is a massive slap in the face for limited government and the principle of individual responsibility. Its net result will be the erosion of freedom in America, and a further undermining of the country’s economic competitiveness. This may be a political victory for the president and his supporters in Congress, but it is in reality a defeat for America as a great power, and another Obama-led step towards US decline.

6. Obama doesn’t believe in American exceptionalism

President Obama has made it clear that he doesn’t think that American exceptionalism is any different to the “exceptionalism” of other countries. He also believes that “no one nation can or should try to dominate another nation. No world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will succeed. No balance of power among nations will hold.” Not only is this a staggeringly naïve position to adopt as the leader of the world’s dominant superpower, but it is also an astonishing declaration that the United States is no better than any other nation, and has no right to project its values onto other countries – which is exactly what the US successfully did in Germany and Japan in 1945, Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003. It is both a striking abdication of world leadership as well as an egalitarian vision of the world, and one that significantly undermines American global power.

7. Obama believes alliances don’t matter

No American president in modern times has invested less effort in maintaining US alliances than Barack Obama. Whether it is siding with Marxists in Honduras against pro-American forces, condemning Israel, throwing the Poles and Czechs under the bus, or trashing the Anglo-American Special Relationship, the Obama administration has gone out of its way to kick its allies in the teeth while kowtowing to America’s enemies. Great Britain and Israel in particular have borne the brunt of Barack Obama’s disdain, with the leaders of both countries humiliated during visits to the White House. For a president who boasted in his election campaign of restoring America’s “standing” in the world, Obama has done a spectacularly bad job of preserving friendships with Washington’s closest friends.

8. Obama trusts Russia

A central element of President Obama’s nuclear deal with Moscow is the naive belief that Russia can be trusted as a partner of the United States, and that the treaty does not impose restrictions on America’s ability to deploy missile defences. The Russians in contrast have made it abundantly clear that there is a “legally binding linkage between strategic offensive and strategic defensive weapons.” In other words they expect to have a veto over a US missile defense system. The Obama administration has already bowed to Moscow’s demands to scrap US plans for third site missile defences in eastern and central Europe, and will no doubt surrender again when Moscow makes further demands. At the same time, there is no sign that Russia will support significantly stronger sanctions against Iran. In effect, Washington has gained nothing at all from its “reset” strategy towards Medvedev and Putin, but merely looks like a soft touch in the eyes of the Kremlin.

9. Obama believes the UN is indispensable

President Obama’s speech before the United Nations General Assembly last September has to rank as the most embarrassing so far of his presidency, cheered to the rafters by an audience that traditionally hates what America stands for. As I wrote at the time, this was a staggeringly naïve speech by President Obama, with Woodstock-style utterances like “I will not waver in my pursuit of peace” or “the interests of peoples and nations are shared.” All that was missing was a conga of hippies dancing through the aisles with a rousing rendition of “Kumbaya”. It was a speech fitting for a president who believes the United Nations is “indispensable” to the United States, and who thinks the UN Human Rights Commission is a force for good. In reality, the UN’s elites dedicate much of their efforts at undermining American power, persecuting Israel, wasting taxpayers’ money, and shielding human rights violators.

10. Obama believes a federal Europe is good for America

The Obama administration has gone to considerable lengths to back the development of a European Union defence identity as well as a European Union foreign policy, both of which will weaken the NATO alliance as well as the broader transatlantic alliance. This is the first US administration to actively back the rise of a federal Europe, and whose key players on European issues actually believe a united Europe is good for the United States. It is an extraordinarily naïve approach which will eventually bite Washington in the back. Even the spectacularly embarrassing appointments of both Herman Van Rompuy and Baroness Ashton as President and High Representative for the European Union have not succeeded in dimming the enthusiasm of the Obama team for the European project.

Israeli attack on Iran might lead to nuclear conflict – Medvedev

April 12, 2010

Israeli attack on Iran might lead to nuclear conflict – Medvedev | Top Russian news and analysis online | ‘RIA Novosti’ newswire.

MOSCOW, April 12 (RIA Novosti) – Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has warned Israel against a military attack on Iran, saying it might lead to nuclear war and global disaster.

The United States and Israel have refused to rule out military action against Iran if diplomacy fails to resolve the dispute over Tehran’s nuclear program.

In an interview with the ABC News, the Russian leader said an attack on Iran would be “the worst possible scenario” in the Middle East, because “everyone is so close over there that nobody would be unaffected.”

“And if conflict of that kind happens, and a strike is performed, then you can expect anything, including use of nuclear weapons. And nuclear strikes in the Middle East, this means a global catastrophe. Many deaths,” Medvedev said.

He added that he was uncertain on whether Israel would decide to carry out an airstrike against Iran.

“The Israelis are directing their own policy. I do have a good relationship with the president and prime minister of Israel. But those are independent people. And I would say that on many questions they are defending stubborn positions. Very tough,” he said.

“The US has seen the proof of that lately,” he added, in a reference to the issue of the Israeli settlement construction in East Jerusalem,

Hopes for a solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict were dealt a serious blow by Israel’s recent decision to build 1,600 houses for Jewish families in East Jerusalem, considered occupied territory under international law. East Jerusalem is also claimed by the Palestinians as the capital of their future state.

Fury as Russia sells its missile system to Iran

April 12, 2010

Fury as Russia sells its missile system to Iran – Exclusive – mirror.co.uk.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (Pic:Getty)

Iran is buying an ultra-sophisticated missile system from Russia to protect its nuclear sites.

The S-300’s surface-to-air rockets can hit many targets at once, including in-coming cruise missiles, making any Western or Israeli strike on Iran much more difficult.

News of the multi-billion pound deal with Moscow has caused fury and fear among Western powers as they desperately try to stop the country developing nuclear weapons.

An intelligence source told The Mirror: “In the game of bluff and counter-bluff this is bad news for Israel and the West.

“The new missile system will hugely empower Tehran which already has a fairly inflated view of its military and defence capability.

“This has everyone worried – Israel because it knows the US is currently not up for attacking Tehran and the US because it knows Tehran has the upper hand.”

The S-300, which Iran has been trying to buy since 2005, can hit a target at 100 miles and will be delivered to them within months.

It is a massive blow to Israeli defence chiefs who fear Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, below, is building up a nuclear capability to attack them.

Pentagon chiefs have already written up a detailed plan to strike as many as 100 targets if they have to destroy Tehran’s nuclear installations.

Bunker-buster bombs would hit underground complexes and Hellfire missiles targeted to kill the country’s top scientists.

Mikhail Dmitriyev, head of the Russian Federal Agency for Military Co-operation confirmed delivery of the S-300 is imminent. Russia’s stateowned news agency RIA Novosti said: “Contracts have been signed.”