WarSclerotic

Why Arab regimes don’t do more.

Photo by: Associated Press

By BARRY RUBIN
07/25/2010 22:57

If the Arab world feels so threatened by a nuclear-armed Iran, shouldn’t it cooperate more closely with the West to seek a solution?

Mossad chief reportedly visited Saudi Arabia for talks on Iran – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

Account on WorldNetDaily follows series of recent reports on increasing secret cooperation between Israel and the Saudis, including defense coordination on matters related to possible military action.

Mossad chief Meir Dagan visited Saudi Arabia recently, if unofficial reports published over the weekend on the WorldNetDaily website are accurate. The Internet news site attributed the story to Arab sources.

According to the reports, the talks conducted in Saudi Arabia with the head of Israel’s espionage agency dealt with Iran and its nuclear program. The account follows a series of recent reports on increasing secret cooperation between Israel and the Saudis, including defense coordination on matters related to possible military action against Iran’s nuclear facilities.

	Mossad chief Meir Dagan

Two months ago, the Times of London reported that during the course of a Saudi military exercise, air defense system operations were halted for a few hours to rehearse a scenario whereby Israeli fighter planes would cross Saudi Arabian air space en route to an attack on Iran.

Arab and Iranian media outlets have also reported Israeli air force planes and helicopters landing in Saudi Arabia for the purposes of positioning equipment there.

Three weeks ago, it was reported that the United Arab Emirates’ ambassador in Washington said at a conference that the consequences of nuclear weapons in the hands of the Iranians would be more serious than an Israeli assault, because a nuclear Iran could not be tolerated. His remarks reflect a common concern felt in Israel and the Persian Gulf states over nuclear weapons in Iranian hands.

The new, improved Obama.

By CAROLINE GLICK
07/26/2010 22:09

Just when you thought he was shifting gears he pulls out a zinger.

You have to hand it to US President Barack Obama. He is relentless. Just when you thought he was shifting gears – easing up on Israel and turning his attention to Iran’s nuclear weapons program – he pulls out a zinger.

His recent courtship of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu led some Israelis and supporters of Israel in the US to believe the administration had seen the light. After 18 months, we were told Obama finally realized that contrary to what he had thought, Palestinian statehood is not the most urgent issue in the Middle East, Iran’s nuclear weapons program is.

In the past week alone, two prominent commentators – Aluf Benn from Haaretz and Ehud Ya’ari from Channel 2 both wrote articles claiming that Obama’s Middle East policy has undergone a transformation. As Benn put it, “President Barack Obama’s campaign of wooing Israel reflects a fundamental about-face in US policy in the Middle East.”

And in Ya’ari’s words in an article in the Australian, “The foreign policy team of US President Barack Obama is undertaking a reassessment of its policy all over the Middle East, including Israel.”

Both claimed the administration has resolved to cooperate with Israel as an ally rather than attack it as an obstacle to peace, and that Washington has recognized that Iran must be prevented from acquiring nuclear weapons.

The basic notion informing both of these nearly identical articles is that the Obama administration’s foreign policy is fundamentally pragmatic rather than ideologically motivated. Both Ya’ari and Benn, like many of their fellow commentators on the Left, argue that Obama’s decision to invite Netanyahu to Washington and treat him like an ally rather than an enemy is proof that when stripped to its essentials, his foreign policy is pragmatic.

After a year and half in office, Obama recognized that his previous view of the Middle East was wrong. And as a pragmatist, he has embarked on a new course.

Yet before the ink on their proclamations had a chance to dry, Obama demonstrated that their enthusiasm was misplaced. Late last week the administration decided – apropos of nothing – to upgrade the diplomatic status of the PLO mission in Washington.

From now on, the PLO will be allowed to fly its flag like a regular embassy.

Its representatives will enjoy diplomatic immunity just like diplomats from states.

Indeed the PLO delegate in Washington Maen Areikat claimed that the administration’s move equates the PLO’s diplomatic status in the US to that of Canada and states in Western Europe.

Some in the media have claimed that this is a symbolic act and essentially meaningless.

But this is not true. While this step does not constitute US recognition of a Palestinian state in the absence of a peace treaty between the Palestinians and Israel, it certainly sends a clear signal that this is the direction the US is heading. As such, it represents a dangerous step that will encourage continued Arab hostility.

TO PUT this move in perspective, it is worth comparing the PLO’s new status to that of the US’s firm ally and fellow democracy – Taiwan, the Republic of China. Whereas the PLO now has a “delegation general” in Washington, Taiwan has the “Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office.”

When asked to comment on the move, White House spokesman Thomas Vietor said, “This decision reflects our confidence that through direct negotiations, we can help achieve a two-state solution with an independent and viable Palestine living side by side with Israel. We should begin preparing for that outcome now, as we continue to work with the Palestinian people on behalf of a better future.”

Like the decision itself, Vietor’s explanation signals that the Obama administration has not embraced pragmatism over ideology. Vietor could never have made his statement if it had.

Any pragmatic analysis of the situation leads to the clear conclusion that there is little chance of the Palestinians agreeing to a settlement anytime soon. Just this past week Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas escalated still further his already unacceptable preconditions for direct negotiations.

Now in addition to his absurd demand that Israel agree ahead of time to withdraw to the indefensible 1949 armistice lines, Abbas is demanding that it also agree to withdraw all of its forces to those lines and accept the deployment of foreign forces along its borders with the Palestinian state.

These are demands that no government in its right mind would accept in direct negotiations, let alone as a precondition for them.

And any pragmatic US administration upon hearing these demands would recognize that there is no chance that the Palestinians will agree to any reasonable offer of a peace treaty in the foreseeable future.

Indeed, for any pragmatic US administration, the message to send at this time is that statehood can be achieved only by getting serious about negotiations. That means clarifying that statehood is not inevitable but, rather a potential result of Abbas deciding to abandon his preconditions and get serious about talks.

In line with this, if the US intends to recognize a Palestinian state formed in the framework of a negotiated peace settlement, then it is utterly ridiculous, in the face of Abbas’ latest pronouncements, for it to upgrade the Palestinians’ diplomatic status. The move makes sense only if the US is secretly preparing to help the Palestinians avoid negotiations and obtain a state that is not established in the framework of a peace treaty.

But then, an administration that is willing to recognize a Palestinian state outside the framework of a peace agreement is an administration that is motivated by ideology and not by pragmatism. Moreover, it is motivated by an ideology that is fundamentally opposed to a strong democratic Israel.

This is the case because there is no Palestinian leader – not the US favorites Mahmoud Abbas and Salam Fayyad and not their competitors in Hamas – who accepts the legitimacy of the Jewish state. And so any state formed outside the framework of a peace treaty will be in a de facto state of war with Israel. Indeed, its legitimacy with the Palestinian people and other Arabs will be defined by its commitment to the eventual destruction of the Jewish state. And now, by upgrading the PLO’s mission, the Obama administration is actively encouraging just such an outcome.

OBAMA’S DECISION shows that he has not allowed reality to interfere with his perception of the absence of a Palestinian state as the most urgent problem he faces in the Middle East. He has adopted other measures that indicate that he remains fundamentally unconcerned about the threat that Iran poses to both US national security and to regional security in the Middle East.

That threat has been spelled out clearly in recent weeks by top US officials. Last week the outgoing US commander in Iraq, Gen. Ray Odierno, told reporters that Iran fields three Shi’ite militias in Iraq whose forces are attempting to attack US troops as they withdraw from the country. Iran’s goal is to present the image that the US is withdrawing in defeat.

As for Afghanistan, last March the Sunday Times reported that Iran is training Taliban fighters at camps inside Iran. Last Wednesday the deputy commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps threatened that US commander Gen. David Petraeus will be overwhelmed by terror in Afghanistan.

Brig.-Gen. Massoud Jazayeri told the Iranian media, “The presence of Petraeus in Afghanistan will increase terrorism and seal the expansion of American failures.

The US government has no chance of success as the igniting flames which will engulf America in Afghanistan are already visible.”

Then there is Iran’s nuclear weapons program.

As CIA Director Leon Panetta said last month, sanctions on Iran will “probably not” deter the regime from moving forward.

This understanding would be sufficient to convince a pragmatic administration that force must be used to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. A pragmatic administration, after all, could be expected to understand what a nuclear armed Iran would mean for the US’s strategic interests in the region.

If Iran becomes a nuclear power it will be able to wreak havoc on oil shipments from the Persian Gulf. So too, it will make it all but impossible for the US to safely project is military force in the region. The current threat that Iranian proxies will force US troops to flee Iraq and Afghanistan will likely be realized.

Furthermore, Kuwait, Bahrain and Qatar can be expected to expel US forces from their territory as the regimes cut deals with the new regional nuclear power.

Obama recently ended his public support for appeasing Iran and seemed to adopt a more confrontational approach as he moved to pass a new round of sanctions at the UN Security Council and when he signed congressional sanctions. But rhetoric aside, as Michael Ledeen reported at Pajamas Media Web site last week, his appeasement policy remains in force.

Since 1979 the Swiss Embassy in Teheran has represented US interests. According to Ledeen, last week the Swiss ambassador submitted a request from US congressmen to meet with their Iranian counterparts. The Iranians rejected their request out of hand.

What this means is that the Obama administration – now working through congressional proxies – is still trying to cut a deal with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Ali Khamenei.

All of this makes clear the sort of leader Obama is. He is a pragmatic politician and a radical ideologue all rolled into one. The pragmatic politician understands that going into the congressional elections in November, he has to convince the US public that he is a reliable ally for Israel and that he is credible on Iran. So he invited Netanyahu to Washington for a public hug and he made angry declarations about Iran’s nuclear program.

As an ideologue though, even in the midst of his charm offensive he couldn’t resist the urge to attack the Jewish state, so he signaled that he will recognize a Palestinian state that does not recognize it. And as an ideologue, he can’t stop begging the Iranians to love him.

The desire of commentators like Benn and Ya’ari to believe that the US government is behaving rationally is understandable.

But their wish is unsupported by facts. We can only hope that Netanyahu has not been similarly fooled.

Iran opposition warns of revolution.

By ASSOCIATED PRESS
07/26/2010 19:29

Internal strife as Canada, EU slam Iran with unilateral sanctions.

Iran’s opposition leader said Monday that Ahmadinejad’s regime could suffer the same fate as the deposed Shah if they continue to consolidate their grip on power.

The internal pressure comes as western countries imposed unilateral sanctions on Iran, including Monday’s sanctions from both the EU and Canada, which came in the wake of UN sanctions and a harsher set of unilateral US sanctions in June.

The comments by opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi represent a clear break with a ruling system he was once firmly a part of. The former prime minister was a fervent supporter of the 1979 revolution that brought cleric-led government to Iran before recasting himself as a leader of the reform-seeking opposition in last year’s disputed presidential election.

In comments on his website Monday, Mousavi accuses hard-liners of moving toward an oppressive, one-party system. Previously, he limited his criticism to authorities’ post-election crackdown rather than taking on the ruling system.

Unilateral sanctions:
Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon announced unilateral sanctions against Iran, saying the new measures will include a ban on any new Canadian investment in Iran’s oil and gas sector, and restrictions on exporting goods that could be used in nuclear programs.

Iranian banks will also will be barred from opening branches in Canada and Canadian banks will not be able to operate in Iran.

The European Union formally adopted new energy sanctions against Iran earlier Monday which target the country’s energy, banking, and foreign trade sectors.

The move came on the heels of the unilateral US sanctions passed last month by the Senate. The EU sanctions were agreed to in principle by European leaders in June, and are the latest in a series of measures taken by the international community in an effort to halt Iran’s nuclear program.

“We have a comprehensive set of sanctions. This is something where we have all 27 countries working together,” EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said ahead of the meeting.

According to the decision reached in June, the sanctions will target dual-use items that could be used as part of a nuclear program, and Iran’s oil and gas industry — including the “prohibition of new investment, technical assistance and transfers of technologies.”

Iran’s shipping and air cargo companies will be blacklisted and banned from operating in EU territory, and new visa bans and asset freezes will be imposed on Iran’s Revolutionary Guard. The sanctions also encompass trade insurance and financial transactions.

EU exports to Iran — mainly machinery, transport equipment and chemicals — amounted to euro 14.1 billion in 2008.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s response to the June around of sanctions passed by the UN was that they were “worthless” and should only go into “the trash bin,” in a report cited by Bloomberg News.

Iran’s UN Ambassador Mohammad Khazaee has accused the United States, Britain and their allies of abusing the Security Council to attack Iran.

“No amount of pressure and mischief will be able to break our nation’s determination to pursue and defend its legal and inalienable rights,” said Iran’s UN Ambassador Mohammad Khazaee. “Iran is one of the most powerful and stable countries in the region and never bowed — and will never bow — to the hostile actions and pressures by these few powers and will continue to defend its rights.”

Iran says ready to talk as EU approves new nuclear sanctions – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

Tehran says ready to restart negotiations without preconditions after EU move targets the Iran’s foreign trade, banking and energy sectors.

Iran is ready to return to negotiations on a nuclear fuel swap without conditions, its envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said on Monday, the official IRNA news agency reported.

Talking of a letter that Iran handed to the IAEA about the proposed nuclear fuel swap, Iran’s envoy to U.N. agency, Ali Asghar Soltanieh said:

	Technicians measuring parts of Iran’s Bushehr nuclear power plant in this undated photo.
	Photo by: AP

“The clear message of this letter was Iran’s complete readiness to hold negotiations over the fuel for the Tehran reactor without any conditions.”

International concerns about Iran’s uranium enrichment program have led to a tightening of economic sanctions against the Islamic Republic. The European Union on Monday formally adopted a package of new sanctions against Iran, targeting the country’s foreign trade, banking and energy sectors.

The move, which EU leaders had been agreed to in principle in June, is the latest in a series of measures taken by the international community in an effort to halt Iran’s nuclear program.

In Tehran, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast denounced the EU decision.

“Moving toward confrontational measures and supporting unilateral actions and damaging the atmosphere are not considered by us to be a good use of the opportunity,” Mehmanparast said, according to the state television network’s website.

In Brussels, EU foreign ministers adopted a decision on a package of restrictive measures in the areas of trade, financial services, energy and transport, said a diplomat who spoke on condition of anonymity under standing rules.

Israel, meanwhile, lauded the move: “We welcome any diplomatic process that can cause Iran to reconsider its intention to acquire a nuclear capability,” said Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilnai.

The new measures will come into force in the next few weeks, after they are published in the bloc’s official gazette, officials said.

“We have a comprehensive set of sanctions. This is something where we have all 27 countries working together,” EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said ahead of the meeting.

According to the decision reached in June, the sanctions will target dual-use items that could be used as part of a nuclear program, and Iran’s oil and gas industry – including the prohibition of new investment, technical assistance and transfers of technologies.

Iran’s shipping and air cargo companies will be blacklisted and banned from operating in EU territory, and new visa bans and asset freezes will be imposed on Iran’s Revolutionary Guard. The sanctions also encompass trade insurance and financial transactions.

EU exports to Iran – mainly machinery, transport equipment and chemicals – amounted to euro 14.1 billion in 2008.

Imports from Iran, the EU’s sixth largest energy provider, amounted to euro 11.3 billion, with energy being 90 percent of the total.

The new European restrictions will come on top of a fourth round of sanctions imposed last month by the UN Security Council to curtail Iran’s nuclear program over fears it is developing weapons. The council endorsed those sanctions after Iran rebuffed a plan to suspend uranium enrichment and swap its stockpiles of low-enriched uranium for fuel rods.

The new restrictions are similar to measures adopted by the Obama administration, which has imposed penalties against additional individuals and institutions it says are helping Iran develop its nuclear and missile programs, and evade international sanctions.

Iran denies that it is working on a nuclear weapon, saying its program is intended solely for peaceful purposes such as energy-generation, and that it has the right to enrich uranium under the international nonproliferation treaty.

EU foreign ministers also are expected reaffirm the bloc’s invitation to Tehran to hold talks on the issue.

“Our aim is to bring Iran back to the negotiating table,” said German State Secretary Werner Hoyer. “We’re offering our hand, and all they have to do is to take it.”

Iran has sought to deflect pressure and further sanctions by displaying a willingness to talk about nuclear issues – a line reinforced Monday by Ali Ashgar Soltanieh, Tehran’s senior envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

“Iran is ready to go back to the negotiating table quickly to discuss exchanging some of its enriched uranium for fuel rods for Tehran’s nuclear reactor,” Soltanieh told reporters in Vienna.

He spoke after presenting revised proposals on a possible swap to IAEA chief Yukiya Amano, who was expected to relay them to the U.S., France and Russia – the three nations engaged with Iran in such an exchange.

No details of the latest offer were available. But under a similar deal in May with Brazil and Turkey, Iran agreed to ship 1,200 kilograms (2,640 pounds) of low-enriched uranium to Turkey, where it would be stored. In exchange, Iran would get fuel rods made from 20 percent enriched uranium. That level of enrichment is high enough for use in research reactors but too low for nuclear weapons.

‘If Hizbullah strikes, we hit Lebanon’.

The IDF will attack Lebanese government institutions if Israel is again subjected to rocket attacks, Defense Minister Ehud Barak said in an interview with The Washington Post published Sunday.

He told the newspaper that since the Lebanese goverment is allowing Hizbullah to rearm, “we will not run after each Hizbullah terrorist or launcher. . . . We will see it as legitimate to hit any target that belongs to the Lebanese state, not just to Hizbullah.”

RELATED:
Israel urges world: Stop Lebanese ships
Barak: Flotilla a ‘provocation’

Ahead of his visit to Washington today, Barak drew attention to this issue as well as his views on the Iranian nuclear threat and the actions currently being taken by the international community.

“There are differences about what could be done about it, how it should be done, and what [is] the timeframe within which certain steps could be taken,” he told the newspaper.

The defense minister also reiterated his support for further sanctions against Iran, but said that there needs to be an awareness of the limitations.

“It’s still time for sanctions,” he said, though he added that “probably, at a certain point, we should realize that sanctions cannot work.”

Addressing the peace process, Barak told The Washington Post that the government’s will to move forward “is there. But, of course, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. We have to prove it in actions, in the negotiations.”

U.S. strike on Iran likelier than ever, former CIA chief says – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

Michael Hayden says Iran intends to reach the point where it’s just below having a nuclear weapon, adding that such a step would be as destabilizing to the region as the ‘real thing.’

A former CIA director says military action against Iran now seems more likely because no matter what the U.S. does diplomatically, Tehran keeps pushing ahead with its suspected nuclear program.

	A U.S. fighter jet taking off from the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf, Sunday, June 6, 2010.
	Photo by: AP

Michael Hayden, a CIA chief under President George W. Bush, said that during his tenure “a strike was way down the list of options.” But he tells CNN’s State of the Union that such action now “seems inexorable.”

“In my personal thinking,” Hayden said, “I have begun to consider that that may not be the worst of all possible outcomes.”

Hayden said that the likelihood of a U.S. strike on Iran has rises in face of Tehran’s defiance to halt its contentions nuclear program, saying “We engage. They continue to move forward.”

“We vote for sanctions. They continue to move forward. We try to deter, to dissuade. They continue to move forward,” he added.

The former CIA chief predicted Iran, in defiance of the international community, planned to “get itself to that step right below a nuclear weapon, that permanent breakout stage, so the needle isn’t quite in the red for the international community.”

Hayden said that reaching even that level would be “as destabilizing to the region as actually having a weapon.”

The United States, the United Nations and the European Union have imposed new restrictions on Iran over its nuclear enrichment activities, which the West fears could lead it to make a bomb.

The fourth round of U.N. sanctions calls for measures against new Iranian banks abroad if a link to the nuclear or missile programs is suspected and for vigilance on transactions with any Iranian bank, including the central bank.

On Saturday, several key Iranian officials estimated that the United States and Israel would not dare attempt a military strike of Iran’s nuclear sites, adding that they were confident that Iranian forces would easily repel such an attempt.

The United States, which has ships in the Persian Gulf, has not ruled out a military strike to thwart what it suspects is an Iranian nuclear weapons program. Iran denies its atomic program is aimed at making weapons.

Iran’s ISNA news agency quoted an aide to the country’ Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Saturday as saying that Israel and the United States would never strike Iran, saying that “both the U.S. and Zionist regime face internal problems and they know that we make many troubles for them if they attack Iranian territory.”

Yahya Rahim Safav told ISNA that Iran’s armed forces were “fully prepared and enemies are aware of that, they do not have the power to take a political decision on the issue, because they know they can start the war but are not able to finish it.”

“Wwe need to be fully vigilant of these attacks, the enemy knows that it will regret if launches a land strike against Iran.” Safavi said.

Iran’s official IRNA news agency quoted the commander of the Islamic Republic’s Revolutionary Guards, Mohammad-Ali Ja’fari as saying that the United States would not dare to attack Iran as it is fully aware of Iran’s defense power and its nation’s determination.

Ja’fari also said, according to the IRNA report, that he considered his forces’ preparedness as being at their “highest level,” adding that recent sanctions imposed on Iran in view of its contentious nuclear program would have no impact on Iran’s potency.

Also Saturday, a former naval chief in Iran’s Revolutionary Guard said his country has set aside 100 military vessels to confront each U.S. warship that poses a threat.
General Morteza Saffari is quoted by the conservative weekly Panjereh Saturday as saying that troops aboard U.S. warships “are morsels for Iran to target in the event of any American threat against Iran.”

In 2008, Iran put its most powerful military force, the Revolutionary Guard, in charge of defending the country’s territorial waters in the Persian Gulf, a vital oil route.
Speaking with the semi-official Fars news agency, Iran’s Defense Minister Ahmad Vahidi said that the increased U.S. pressure on Iran were prompted by Washington’s desire to advance its “propaganda campaign “and gain control of the region.

Fars quotes Vahidi as saying that a military strike on Iran was unlikely, adding that Israel too was “uttering such remarks in a bid to reduce the growing international pressures through psychological warfare,” Vahidi told Fars.

“We, too, advise them not to seek trouble and tension in the region through spoiling the atmosphere,” Vahidi said.

4 rockets fall in south; none injured – Israel News, Ynetnews.

One rocket, with 115 mm diameter, appears to have been made outside Gaza Strip, using professional means

Shmulik Hadad

U.S.-Israel tensions boost conservatives ahead of midterm elections – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

With his support in opinion polls low, Obama’s criticism of Israel has provided Republicans with ammunition.

WASHINGTON – In light of the wide range of issues that have been injected into public debate in the United States in advance of the November Congressional elections, from the economy to illegal immigration, Israel seems to be the last thing that would be worrying the voters. The rift between the Israeli government and the U.S. administration, however, has barely been bridged, and it’s too good an opportunity for conservatives to pass up in their campaign against Barack Obama and Democratic candidates.

“Obviously we welcome the administration’s better treatment of Israel in public, but one good meeting doesn’t define a relationship,” said Noah Pollak, executive director of the Emergency Committee for Israel, a new Washington-based conservative organization.

	U.S. President Barack Obama. “It is unacceptable for Iran to possess a nuclear weapon,” he said in an interview with Channel 2.
	Photo by: AFP

Pollak added: “You have to look beyond the atmospherics to the substance, and there are big concerns about the administration when it comes to Iran, the commitment to Israel in the international arena, where America has helped discourage the obsessive and one-sided treatment of Israel and in so doing strengthened the international system.”

During Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s last visit, he said, “we saw an effort to improve the image of the relationship, but there is a big question about what happens after the mid-term elections. It wasn’t long ago that the administration was openly questioning the very fundamentals of the US-Israel alliance. Is Obama going to tack back to that stance? And we see that the Palestinians once again are failing to negotiate in good faith with Israel. How is Obama going to handle that?”

In describing his organization, Pollak said: “This is not a Jewish group, it’s a pro-Israel group – and all faiths are welcome. We are independent of other organizations, and felt that the strategy we wanted to pursue wasn’t being undertaken by existing groups”.

The Emergency Committee’s first act was to intervene in the U.S. Senate race in Pennsylvania, when in a television ad, it accused the Democratic candidate for the seat, Congressman Joe Sestak, of not supporting Israel when he called for the end of the Israeli blockade on Gaza. The left-leaning American Jewish lobby J Street quickly responded with its own commercial in support of Sestak.

“We welcome the debate over Joe Sestak’s record and Obama administration policy toward Israel,” said Pollak. “The Sestak campaign obviously is not so enthusiastic about this, because they’ve been trying to get our ad pulled off the air with legal threats.”

Although this is not the first organizational effort of its kind, Obama’s support in opinion polls is low at the moment and the U.S. president’s criticism of Israel over the past year and a half has provided the conservatives with ammunition.

In explaining his group’s aims, Pollak said: “The idea of the committee is to try to address the threats to the US-Israel relationship, to the US position in the Middle East, and to Israel. Those threats are first and foremost the Iranian nuclear program, Iran’s sponsorship of terrorist organizations, the delegitimization campaign against Israel and the poor treatment of Israel by the Obama administration.”

News | EU agrees on tougher sanctions on Iran.

Bushehr nuclear power plant in Iran (AFP)

BRUSSELS, TEHRAN (Agencies)

The European Union reached agreement Thursday on a package of sanctions against Iran which targets Tehran’s energy sector over its refusal to halt sensitive nuclear work, an EU diplomat said.

Meanwhile, in defiance to the U.N. , U.S. and now the EU sanctions, Iran planned on Friday to issue 11.5 billion euros ($14.8 billion) worth of bonds by March 2011 to help finance development of its energy sector, the semi-official Mehr news agency quoted a senior official as saying on Friday.

Analysts say Iran needs funds to help modernize and expand its oil and gas sector, but Western companies in particular are increasingly wary of investing in the major oil producer due to Iran’s nuclear dispute with the West.

” By end of this (Iranian) year (March 2011), we will issue bonds worth 11.5 billion euros to help finance oil and gas projects as well as building power plants “ Iran\’s first Vice-President, Mohammad Reza Rahimi “By end of this (Iranian) year (March 2011), we will issue bonds worth 11.5 billion euros to help finance oil and gas projects as well as building power plants,” said first Vice-President Mohammad Reza Rahimi. Oil Minister Massoud Mirkazemi said in May that Iran needs around $25 billion a year in oil and gas industry investment and could turn into an importer of oil because of the lack of such funds. One of the world’s biggest oil and gas producers, Iran has been hit by U.S. and U.N. sanctions that have frightened away international energy firms. The Islamic state has increasingly turned to Asian firms instead but they often lack the technology to implement oil and gas projects.

Tougher EU sanctions does not only target Iran’s energy sector ” (EU Sanctions)expected to have a material impact on the country’s energy industry “ International Energy Agency Ambassadors from the 27 E.U. member states met in Brussels to endorse the sanctions, which include measures against the oil and gas industry and must be approved at a meeting of foreign ministers on Monday to come into force. “The text on the restrictive measures against Iran have been adopted,” the diplomat said on condition of anonymity. The U.N. Security Council imposed a fourth set of sanctions on Tehran in early June, but E.U. leaders and the United States decided shortly after to impose their own penalties against the Iranian energy sector. The sanctions are part of a twin-track approach with E.U. foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton seeking to revive moribund talks between Iran and six world powers — the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China. Western powers have demanded that Iran suspend its uranium enrichment program, fearing that Tehran would use the material to build a nuclear bomb. Tehran says that its atomic program is a peaceful drive to produce energy. E.U. leaders agreed at a June 17 summit to impose a ban on new investment, technical assistance and technology transfers to Iran’s huge gas and oil industry, particularly for refining and liquefied natural gas. Iran is the world’s fourth largest producer of crude oil but it imports 40 percent of its fuel needs because it lacks enough refining capabilities to meet demand. The U.S. and E.U. sanctions, seen as much tougher than U.N. sanctions, were “expected to have a material impact on the country’s energy industry,” the International Energy Agency said.

” longer term, development of the country’s oil and gas industry will clearly be adversely impacted”, the IEA said. “Iran’s growing gas and natural gas liquids projects are expected to be hardest hit “ IEA The IEA noted that it was “significant” that China and Russia had agreed to back the UN sanctions but that those did not include specific measures aimed at Iran’s energy sector. The U.S. and E.U. sanctions were harder, and “longer term, development of the country’s oil and gas industry will clearly be adversely impacted”, the IEA said. “Iran’s growing gas and natural gas liquids projects are expected to be hardest hit.” The E.U. measures also target the Islamic republic’s transportation, banking and insurance sectors, and slap new visa bans and asset freezes on the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

EU sanctions to deter Iran and bring it to the negotiation table ” For the first time Iran will face biting sanctions that will significantly impact its economy “ Mark Fitzpatrick, director of the nonproliferation program at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London “These sanctions are surprisingly strong,” said Mark Fitzpatrick, director of the nonproliferation program at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London. “They go much further than the UN sanctions.” Fitzpatrick added: “For the first time Iran will face biting sanctions that will significantly impact its economy.” The sanctions “could nevertheless give reasons to Iran to go back to the negotiating table,” he said. “In the past, Iran has always moved once it was under pressure of the international community.” Also, the EU foreign ministers, during their meeting on Monday, will urge Iran to set a date for new talks. The last high-level talks between Iran and the six world powers were held in Geneva in October 2009 when the two sides agreed a nuclear fuel swap that has since stalled. Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said last week that talks could begin in September after Ashton reached out to Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili in a letter in June. According to the draft conclusions, E.U. foreign ministers will call on “Iran to seize this opportunity to allay the concerns of the international community about its nuclear program and agree on a concrete date for talks with the E.U. High Representative, together with the six countries.”

UAE gives its back to Iran’s attempt to switch its crude-oil sales currency ” We are free to choose any currency for our oil sell and this issue depends on Iran’s interests…the important issue is to exclude euros and dollars “ Mohammad Reza Rahimi Iran will switch to currencies other than euros and dollars for payment of its oil exports, a senior Iranian official was quoted on Friday as saying by the semi-official Mehr news agency. “We are free to choose any currency for our oil sell and this issue depends on Iran’s interests…the important issue is to exclude euros and dollars,” said Mohammad Reza Rahimi. “We will shift from euros and dollars to any other currency.” To avoid this, Iran has been discussing shifting to other currencies, most notably to the dirham, however the United Arab Emirates central bank governor dismissed on Tuesday reports that Iran may seek payment in dirhams for its oil exports to Europe to get around sanctions. Rahimi said shifting to dirhams “depended on the country’s national interests”. The dollar is the standard currency for oil trade, but Iran had shifted to the euro for European deals in response to years of U.S. sanctions against the Islamic Republic. Oil transactions can in theory be carried out in whatever currency the parties involved decide. Iran still claims that its nuclear development program is only for peaceful purposes.