WarSclerotic

Iran’s Bomb | FrontPage Magazine.

If the newest round of sanctions levied against Iran by the international community doesn’t stop Iran’s march towards a nuclear weapon, what will? That answer to that question, whatever it may be, will fundamentally shift the balance of power in the Middle East. There is no good solution to dilemma of the Iranian bomb, and as time goes on and the bomb comes nearer to reality, the options will only get worse. Nonetheless, a decision must be made. Is the Obama administration up to the task?

In a recent New York Times analysis, veteran journalist David Sanger suggests not. The administration has plans, to be sure — diplomatic pressure, military deterrence, backroom negotiations, continued economic measures, intelligence operations, etc — but as Sanger depressingly notes, the administration’s own officials grant that even combined, all these steps will work out to be “not enough.” If resolutely applied, they may slow Iran’s progress towards a nuclear weapon, but that’s all. If things continue down their current path, an Iranian nuclear bomb is guaranteed.

After all, the history of the regime has shown that international pressure does little to impress the Tehran theocracy. After the UN Security Council handed the latest round of sanctions down two weeks ago, Iran indeed spun the situation to its advantage, using the unified front being presented by the world’s great powers to rally support for the regime inside Iran. “We have always used this unity option with a solid heart against any attack,” prominent Iranian cleric Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani told reporters. “I believe we have to preserve this unity, even if it has been slightly tarnished.” In other words, the regime is portraying itself as the hero, standing up to foreign pressure. It’s an old game, but a useful one.

Even as the regime makes good use of this latest series of sanctions, adopted for their mutual agreeability to all the veto-wielding members of the Security Council rather than their ability to punish Iran, President Obama is working to weaken sanctions proposed by Congress, including his own party. The new sanctions, targeting Iran’s energy sector, are reportedly deemed by the administration to be too strong, running the risk of provoking a backlash from European allies, as well as the Russians and Chinese. (Concerns over a European backlash seem unlikely, given that the European Union is also discussing a new round of sanctions, likewise aimed at Iran’s petroleum revenues, upon which the regime is totally dependent for survival.)

Why the President would seek to weaken sanctions that even the dovish Europeans are considering is difficult to fathom, particularly since these would not be international sanctions, but limited to American companies and individuals. Perhaps it’s yet another attempt to demonstrate America’s goodwill to a regime that continues to oppress its own citizens, export terror and seeks to destabilize the Western world’s only reliable outpost in the region. Whatever the aim, it will not succeed. Not sanctioning Iran didn’t work, but Obama’s advisors agree that sanctioning it won’t work, either … what else can be done?

Indeed, Sanger’s piece lays out the grim proof that sanctions do not work. Sanctions, and the threat of them, did not stop India and Pakistan from developing and testing their nuclear weapons. North Korea utterly destroyed its own national economy in the pursuit of nuclear weapons even in the face of devastating international sanctions (far worse than have been levied against Iran), and the end result was a starving populace in a nuclear-armed state. Years of sanctions did little to bring Saddam to heel, only outright conquest of his country was able to dislodge him and his loyalists from Iraq’s numerous palaces. Iran has already accepted that it will face sanctions if it continues to pursue a bomb, and has planned accordingly. The regime has been crystal clear in their priorities — they value a nuclear arsenal more than President Obama’s friendship or free trade with the international community. Short of vaporizing Tel Aviv, they can’t get much clearer. Why can’t the White House accept what is plain?

Perhaps because the administration is privately aware that they have no idea how to respond to the inevitable, and therefore seek to postpone it as long as possible. One White House official told Sanger that asking what America will do to stop Iran’s construction of a bomb is “not the kind of question you win many points asking.” Other suggest that the White House has not yet, even at this late date, truly determined how far it will let Iran go, and what steps it’s willing to take to hold them back from that point of no return. That the White House might not have yet made this fundamental determination is nothing less than horrifying. Every other option, every possible contingency scenario, hinges upon knowing how far one is willing to go. Until you know what, you are helpless. Iran knows this, and continues to build its bombs accordingly.

But not every country is as content to wait for Iran to embrace the ways of peace. Last week, the London Times reported that, afraid of what an Iranian bomb would mean for the Arab world, that Saudi Arabia had quietly consented to Israel flying through its airspace as part of any attack on Iran. Saudi Arabia quickly denied the report, of course, but it does point to a bleak truth — neither Israel nor the Arab states want to see Iran develop a bomb. And if the United States won’t take serious action to stop them, someone else — alone or in cooperation with their neighbors — might decide to do it themselves.

Matt Gurney is an editor at the National Post, a Canadian national newspaper, and writes and speaks on military and geopolitical issues. He can be reached at matt@mattgurney.ca.

Hanging on to the flotilla myth.

YouTube Censors Israel Gaza Flotilla Video We Con The World As WeJew.com Provides Hosting.

According to the Israel News Agency, after this past week, no one can say that the Jews control the media. After more than 3 million views on YouTube, the Israel produced satire We Con The World, illustrating the facts and truth of the Pallywood and Turkey staged Gaza Freedom Flotilla, was removed from YouTube. As Iranian ships close in on Israel, the pro Israel, pro democracy video is now being hosted on WeJew.com and MetaCafe.com.

“We must remember that the world stood quietly during the Holocaust as the 6 million walked into gas chambers,” says Leyden. “We will no longer be silenced.”

New York, NY (PRWEB) June 16, 2010 — “After this past week, no one can say that the Jews control the media,” says Joel Leyden, publisher of the Israel News Agency.

Hamas, Islamic Jihad “peace activists” as portrayed in the video ‘We Con The World’

Leyden states that after more than 3 million views on YouTube, the Israel produced satire We Con The World, illustrating the facts and truth of the Pallywood and Turkey staged Gaza Freedom Flotilla, was removed from YouTube.

Israel which suffers from both a lack of budget and PR professionals finally got in the last word with this Web viral marketed video, after the Israel Defense Forces were accused of killing “humanitarian peace activists”. The so-called peace activists were actually caught on video attacking IDF soldiers who came to inspect a vessel for weapons. The IDF, which were carrying paintball guns, were attacked with gunfire, knives, metal poles, chains and metal balls made for slingshots.

“We Con the World,” which was sung to the tune of “We Are the World,” the 1980’s fund-raising song for African poverty and recorded again last year to help the people of Haiti following a devastating earthquake, was removed from YouTube over a copyright claim by Warner / Chappell Music, Inc.

The video was created by Latma, an Israel group that normally produces political satire in Hebrew. A Washington, D.C. think tank, the Center for Security Policy, funded the project.

A link to the video was circulated by the Israel Government Press Office and several Web 2.0 PR professionals through Facebook and Twitter. When the Israel News Agency received the video it had only a few dozen views but within 24 hours the video had blasted off into cyberspace, with over 100,000 views.

Carolyn Glick, a Latma editor and contributor to the Jerusalem Post stated that copyright attorneys had told the group that the use of the song for the parody falls under the Fair Use Doctrine.

Fair Use is a doctrine in US copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as for commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching or scholarship. Transcending this, the use of the We Con the World video was protected by the additional facts that it emerged from a non-profit group – no one was making any money from the distribution of this anti Islamic Jihad Hamas video.

When searching for the video today on YouTube one gets a disclaimer stating: “This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Warner/ Chappell Music, Inc.”

Please notice the word “claim”.

Leyden asks: “Are we missing something in this picture? Does this mean that all free speech on YouTube can come tumbling down with a simplistic “claim”. Anyone can make a claim. My cats can make a claim. But to prove the claim is an entirely different matter.”

Leyden, one of the pioneers of the Internet who co-created the first Web site in Israel and was the first to integrate public relations with search engine optimization SEO, says that Israel has been subjected to so many false claims that one would believe that Israel hands out poison candy to Palestinian children and eat Palestinian babies. In fact today, one so called claim stating that a Palestine boy named Al-Dura who was supposed to have been killed by the IDF was actually killed by Palestinians who created a faked death and has been proven as a hoax by a French court. The French government TV channel originally broadcast staged scenes from segments of film that slandered the IDF.

“We in Israel may want to think that the world is changing in a positive manner, becoming more democratic and open to free speech,” says Leyden. “While in fact, a heavy and potent accent of Islamic Jihad is now being illustrated by the creation of electronic Jihad and legal Jihad – holy war against all Jews and Christians. This Jihad is having a devastating effect everywhere – from London and Paris to Turkey and the White House.

“As Iranian ships close in on Israeli waters, attempting to provoke a war, Israel needs to remember what it learned in 1948. Never rely on others. Never take any nation’s or corporate support for granted. Just listen to the prophetic words of the video: “the truth will not find its way to your TV.”

“YouTube, which is owned by Google and was created by Jews, has turned her back to Israel during these days of severe crisis with Islamic Jihad, Turkey and Iran. We can only hope that YouTube learns that it made a mistake and abides by law and not succumbs to “claims” in the future.”

In the meantime, Israel will once again distribute ‘We Con The World’ through other medias such as MetaCafe.com, WeJew.com and JewTube.com.

“The founder of WeJew.com, Shlomo Wolllins, has extensive journalistic experience and media exposure both in Israel and abroad,” Avi Abelow, CEO of WeJew.com told the Israel News Agency.

“From his experiences covering the Sderot terror missile crisis in 2007, and the 2006 Lebanon war on-the-scene as a video journalist and interacting with the global media – it became clear that there was and would be a critical need for an alternative video platform that has a pro-Israel, facts-based editorial policy and approach. The flotilla incident which resulted in perhaps the most pressing PR crisis for Israel in years came as solid reinforcement of this need as YouTube was flooded with anti-semitic videos and comments simply overwhelming any factual or pro-Israel video content.”

Abelow adds: “The banning of the “We Con The World” viral video by YouTube on June 12th, 2010 provided a flashpoint for the Jewish world’s growing perception that we are facing a media onslaught of unprecedented proportions – and the approaching Iranian ships will provide the anti-Israel forces with another unique opportunity to use social media to attack Israel’s right to defense and even right to exist.”

“We must remember that the world stood quietly during the Holocaust as the 6 million walked into gas chambers,” says Leyden. “We will no longer be silenced.”

“It’s not as if a clip that has been seen by 3.5 million viewers is just going to disappear,” said Glick.
“We see a double standard here, ours is the only one that has been attacked. If anybody thinks that this is going to intimidate us, then they’re sorely mistaken,” she said.

Time for another reassessment.

.large_body p, .large_body span { font-size: 18px; } .small_body p, .small_body span { font-size: 12px; } // //
Photo by: AP

By ARYE ELDAD
06/15/2010 23:36

In light of the recent NPT Review Conference results, Israel should rethink the value of all US promises, regardless of how or where they were made

The term “reassessment” entered the diplomatic discourse between Israel and the United States in 1975. Secretary of state Henry Kissinger sought to pressure prime minister Yitzhak Rabin into an “interim agreement” with Egypt, by which IDF forces would withdraw from the Yom Kippur War cease-fire lines to the Mitla and Gidi passes in Sinai. Kissinger froze US arms shipments and hinted that more drastic measures would follow. Rabin was unfazed and took his case to the Senate. President Gerald Ford and Kissinger relented.

Even at the height of that crisis, the US did not dare to endanger the heart of its strategic understanding with Israel: its ambiguous nuclear policy. President Lyndon Johnson and prime minister Golda Meir set the policy in 1969 that has been followed by all the presidents and prime ministers since. This policy has often been articulated in written agreements between them, but occasionally simply by mutual understanding.

“Israel will not be the first to introduce nuclear weapons to the Middle East,” said prime ministers Levi Eshkol and Shimon Peres, Golda Meir and Yitzhak Rabin, and all who followed. US presidents have come and gone; sometimes they had questions, sometimes they asked for clarifications, but ultimately they all accepted the formula and agreed to abide by it. Until Barack Obama.

After his election, Obama promised Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to maintain the ambiguity. Two weeks ago he betrayed that promise.

On May 28, the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference, which meets once every five years, called unanimously – with America’s support – for Israel to sign the treaty and open its nuclear installations to external supervision. Israel is not a signatory to the treaty; Iran is a signatory, yet Iran is rushing toward production of nuclear weapons. Syria and Libya are signatories, but their signatures have not prevented them from building uranium enrichment plants for military purposes.

North Korea built a bomb and tests nuclear weapons, mocking the entire world supposedly opposed to it. Pakistani scientists, led by the “father of the Pakistan’s nuclear bomb” Abdul Qadeer Khan, sold nuclear secrets and technology necessary for the building of nuclear weapons to Iran, Syria, Libya and possibly North Korea. In the face of this burgeoning industry, the US gave in to an Egyptian initiative and agreed to single out Israel as the country the world should be worried about. Israel alone was mentioned in the NPT Review Committee’s report. Apparently only its installations need to be examined.

THE TIME has come for a reassessment of US-Israeli relations. Israel may want the billions of dollars it receives in military aid from the US, and in the event of a long war, it may need the US munitions reserves currently stored here and resupply lines for the IDF; the US market is also of great importance for the economy; and US intervention often limits our international isolation. But the fact is, we can no longer rely on US support.

We must reassess the value of all American promises, whether they be in writing, made ceremoniously at public festivities or whispered privately in a room of the White House. He who, without batting an eyelash, betrayed us on the nuclear issue, a matter whose existential importance to the Jewish state is obvious given the Iranian dash for a bomb, will not hesitate to deny other commitments.

Obama is currently pressuring Israel to accept dictates that would lead to a Palestinian state in the heart of its country. In return, he offers to guarantee our security, preserve our technological advantage and ensure the Palestinian state will be demilitarized. Why would anyone be willing to take existential risks while relying on the commitment of an American president who has betrayed and denied the commitments of his predecessors and forgotten even his own?

One might think that as our military and political situation worsens, our ability to maneuver opposite the US decreases. But with our back to the wall and knowing full well that we have no one to rely on, we can turn this lack of maneuverability into resoluteness and the dearth of options into strength. When doubts are resolved, fortitude may emerge. The knowledge that American promises are without value is of itself quite valuable. Even a pauper will not agree to give the little he has in exchange for a guarantee openly declared to be worthless.

Obama is no more frightening than Ford. Hillary Clinton dislikes us no more than Kissinger did. The sea we are threatened with being thrown into is the same sea. The Arabs are the same Arabs. But the wall our backs are up against is much closer and more dangerous. The depth of Obama’s betrayal must be made known to the American public today. As the November elections approach in the United States, Netanyahu has the opportunity to replicate Rabin’s achievement of 1975.

The writer is a National Union MK.

DEBKAfile, Political Analysis, Espionage, Terrorism, Security.

Tags: IDF Sinai Terrorists

Mt. Harif, a desolate MidEast flashpoint

A band of armed terrorists carrying explosive devices was intercepted by an Israeli border patrol as it crossed the Egyptian border of Sinai opposite the Israeli Negev desert town of Mitzpe Ramon early Wednesday, June 16, debkafile‘s military sources report. One of the intruders was killed in the firefight, the rest fled back to the Egyptian side of the border, some of them apparently wounded.
The assailants were challenged and put to flight at their crossing point near Mt. Harif, 139 kilometers northwest of Eilat and opposite Mitzpe Ramon, indicating this Israeli town or the military facilities in the vicinity were their destination.  The arms and explosive devices left by the fugitives pointed to a plan to split up for a multiple operation against several targets in southern Israel.
debkafile‘s military sources add that the investigation will try and determine whether the terrorists were Palestinians from Hamas-ruled Gaza or al Qaeda cells which Egyptian forces are battling in Sinai. Egypt and Israel work together to purge their long desert border of terrorist activity.

DEBKAfile, Political Analysis, Espionage, Terrorism, Security.

Tags: Gaza blockade Hamas missiles Yuval Diskin

Shin Beit Director Yuval Diskin

debkafile‘s military sources report: The Shin Beit (internal security) director Yuval Diskin sternly warned Tuesday, June 15, that the steps embarked on by prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu and defense minister Ehud Barak to ease the blockade on Gaza gravely imperiled Israel’s security.
He raised the alarm at the Knesset foreign affairs and security committee after not a single security cabinet minister, including retired generals, had raised a hand to halt those steps.
Diskin said a “gigantic security breach” would open up for Israel if the Israeli Navy were forced to leave inspections of Gaza-bound freighters to international monitors or foreign ports.

He delivered his briefing the day after the prime minister and defense minister decided to allow international teams to inspect cargoes bound for Gaza on the high seas or in Greek or Cypriot ports (as debkafile disclosed Monday, June 14) . It was clear from Diskin’s words, that foreign inspections could not be relied upon to detect weapons or strategic materials in the ships’ holds – as abundantly proven in Lebanon, where in four years, international monitors and peacekeepers have had not the slightest effect in diminishing arms smuggling to Hizballah by land and sea.

Now the Israeli government was letting itself be squeezed into letting world powers, spearheaded by the European Union and Turkey and cheered on from Washington, grant Hamas the same indulgence they give Hizballah and its Syrian and Iranian munitions suppliers.
The Palestinian terrorist organization Hamas ruling the Gaza makes no bones about continuing its implacable war against Israel. The Shin Bet chief noted that Hamas and Jihad Islami continue to pile up missiles and rockets with no other target than their Israeli neighbor. The have 5,000 in stock – many homemade (from raw materials smuggled through tunnels). Most have a range of 40 kilometers, which is enough to menace the towns and villages of southern Israel, with a few capable of reaching the Tel Aviv region.
debkafile‘s military sources identify the long-range missiles as Iranian Fajr-5.
Their strategists still promote suicide killings as a method of war against Israel, said Diskin, although Hamas often relegates such attacks to its smaller allies.

The alarm raised by the Shin Bet chief reflects the extreme disquiet spreading through Israeli military and strategic circles over what they see as a prime minister and defense minister letting themselves be pushed around and guided in their decisions by an overwhelming urge to please the Americans and Europeans at the expense of concern for the fundamentals of Israel’s security and its defense forces’ capabilities.
debkafile quotes members of these circles as warning that Israel is falling back on its national goals – even those promoted public by Netanyahu himself – with no sign of the enemy in Gaza relenting by an iota on its designs. For instance –

1. The prime minister insists he is safeguarding the IDF’s freedom of action, whereas he is doing the very opposite: By giving up the siege of Gaza, he is depriving the Navy of its operational leeway and curtailing the IDF’s freedom to defend the South against attacks mounted from Gaza. Once this Palestinian enclave is rebuilt with outside help, Israel will have lost the option of proactive deterrence against terrorist attack.
2. Netanyahu has vowed an Iranian port must never be established in Gaza, whereas what he is doing is relinquishing Israel’s ability to prevent Iranian and Turkish ships from docking there.