WarSclerotic

This phoney finger-wagging won’t talk Iran out of nukes | Lionel Shriver | Comment is free | The Guardian.

Drop the moral posturing, Hillary – US hypocrisy will be all too clear in Tehran. Only realpolitik can halt their nuclear ambitions.

tehran times : Imminent nuclear plant startup has shocked enemies: envoy.

Imminent nuclear plant startup has shocked enemies: envoy
Tehran Times Political Desk

TEHRAN — Iran’s ambassador to Moscow has stated that Russia’s announcement that the Bushehr nuclear power plant will be loaded with nuclear fuel next week caught the enemies off guard.

“The news report about the loading of the Bushehr plant with nuclear fuel was so unexpected that it confused the enemies of this project and prompted them to issue irrelevant and illogical statements,” Ambassador Mahmoud-Reza Sajjadi told the Fars News Agency on Monday.

He made the remarks in response to John R. Bolton, the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, who told Fox News on Friday that the Bushehr power plant would become “immune” from an Israeli attack after it is loaded with nuclear fuel rods.

“Once the rods are in the reactor, an attack on the reactor risks spreading radiation in the air, and perhaps into the water of the Persian Gulf,” Bolton said.

Earlier, Russian Federal Atomic Energy Agency (Rosatom) spokesman Sergei Novikov had announced that the first reactor of the Bushehr plant would be loaded with nuclear fuel on August 21.

Sajjadi dismissed the Western powers’ claim that Iran should halt its uranium enrichment program because Russia has agreed to provide nuclear fuel for the Bushehr plant.

“It’s like telling a renter, ‘Why are you trying to buy your own house,’” Sajjadi said.

He went on to say that Russia’s decision to load the nuclear plant will restore Tehran’s confidence in Moscow.

Atomic Energy Organization of Iran Director Ali Akbar Salehi said on Friday that the reactor will reach 50 percent of its capacity one and a half months after it is fed with fuel.

But the reactor will need six or seven months to reach its full capacity, he noted.

The construction of the Bushehr nuclear plant was begun in 1975 by several German construction companies. They pulled out following the imposition of a U.S. embargo on supplying high-technology equipment to Iran after the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

In February 1998, Russia signed a contract with Iran to complete the construction of the nuclear plant.

Iran details plans for new nuclear sites.

Defying international efforts, Vice President Ali Akbar Salehi discusses 10 new uranium enrichment facilities

Will Israel Attack Iran? Writer Explores Possibility : The Two-Way : NPR.

It’s no secret that Israel views the possibility of Iran gaining nuclear weapons as an existential threat. Israel has said as much, as have U.S. policymakers.

It’s also well known that Israel has a policy of pre-empting threats to what it views as its survival. We need look no further than the 1981 precedent of the Israelis’ attack on Iraq’s Osirak nuclear plant.

We’ve also long known that U.S. policymakers can exert only so much influence over Israel.

And anyone who’s followed the coverage of U.S.-Israel relations since early 2009 knows that Israelis have more questions about President Barack Obama’s willingness to use force against Iran than they did about his predecessor, President George W. Bush.

Those are all major themes in Jeffrey Goldberg’s much discussed and controversial in the Atlantic, the “Point of No Return,” a piece that has drawn much attention. It’s not because it breaks news as much as it focuses attention on the very real possibility of an Israeli attack on Iran.

Much of the attention has come from Goldberg critics who accuse him of being a “propagandist” trying to make a war more likely.

That has drawn defenders like writer James Fallows to vouch for Goldberg’s journalism and to say, if nothing else, the piece provides useful clarity of the way Israeli and U.S. policymakers think about possible military action against Iran.

Aside from that raging debate, some of the piece’s smaller details were fascinating.

For instance, Goldberg writes that numerous Israeli defense ministry offices contain the same aerial photograph of Israeli jet fighters flying over a historic site in Poland with particular meaning for the modern world — Auschwitz. It’s a graphic reminder of one of the Jewish state’s shibboleths: Never Again.

Then there’s the influence of Ben-Zion Netanyahu, the 100-year old father of Israel’s prime minister, who is a noted historian of the Spanish Inquisition.

Goldberg describes the scene of a birthday party for the Israeli leader’s father at which the centenarian spoke, to demonstrate the pull of the father on the son.

“Our party this evening compels me to speak of recent comments made about the continued existence of the nation of Israel and the new threats by its enemies depicting its upcoming destruction,” Ben-Zion began. “From the Iranian side, we hear pledges that soon—in a matter of days, even—the Zionist movement will be put to an end and there will be no more Zionists in the world. One is supposed to conclude from this that the Jews of the Land of Israel will be annihilated, while the Jews of America, whose leaders refuse to pressure Iran, are being told in a hinted fashion that the annihilation of the Jews will not include them.”

He went on, “The Jewish people are making their position clear and putting faith in their military power. The nation of Israel is showing the world today how a state should behave when it stands before an existential threat: by looking danger in the eye and calmly considering what should be done and what can be done. And to be ready to enter the fray at the moment there is a reasonable chance of success.”

Many people in Likud Party circles have told me that those who discount Ben-Zion’s influence on his son do so at their peril. “This was the father giving his son history’s marching orders,” one of the attendees told me. “I watched Bibi while his father spoke. He was completely absorbed.”

Small wonder this piece has generated so much buzz in Washington and elsewhere.

Analysts see Iranian nuclear dispute continuing despite sanctions – The National Newspaper.

Michael Theodoulou, Foreign Correspondent

The shelves of a shop in north Tehran are stocked with imported detergent, which is not subject to sanctions. Caren Firouz / Reuters

The new wave of international sanctions against Iran will hurt its economy – already suffering from mismanagement and corruption – but not enough to change Tehran’s nuclear policy, many analysts say.

However, the sanctions should give Barack Obama, the US president, the “political space” at home to attempt engaging with Iran once more, said Sir Richard Dalton, Britain’s former ambassador to Tehran and a fellow at Chatham House, a leading British think tank.

That engagement might have a chance of changing Iran’s calculations and resolving the tangled nuclear dispute – although expectations among many foreign policy experts such as Mr Dalton are not high.

A resumption of long-stalled talks is expected next month or in October between world powers and Tehran on Iran’s nuclear programme. But yesterday, in a further demonstration of Iranian defiance, the country’s vice president and atomic chief, Ali Akbar Salehi, announced that the construction of a new uranium enrichment site, Iran’s third, would begin next March.

Mr Obama has been under constant pressure to act tough on Iran from hawkish pundits in Washington, among them many who clamoured loudest for invading Iraq.

But having secured tougher sanctions against Iran than his predecessor, George W Bush, ever managed, Mr Obama can now argue that the US will enter any new talks with Iran from a position of strength.

At a briefing with senior US correspondents earlier this month, Mr Obama said there were “rumblings” from Tehran that it was feeling the pain from sanctions. At the same time, he put the issue of talks with Iran back on the table, saying he was leaving the “pathway” open for a peaceful resolution of the nuclear issue.

Mr Obama’s aides believe that technical problems with Iran’s nuclear programme have bought at least a year for sanctions and diplomacy to work, said a New York Times editorial after the White House briefing.

But his dual-track strategy has failed to silence Washington’s hawks.

“The drumbeat for war from neo-conservative pundits and from Israel has only increased” since the “crippling, indiscriminate” new sanctions were imposed, said Trita Parsi, an Iran expert at the Washington-based Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

“The war drums may not necessarily be to make Obama bomb Iran, but to portray him as weak to hurt him in the upcoming [congressional] elections [in November],” Mr Parsi added in a telephone interview. “If successful, a new domestic political reality will likely emerge that makes a military campaign more probable.”

Mr Dalton, however, said such pundits could “fulminate as much as they want but my reading of the American military is that war against Iran is the very, very last thing they want”.

Mr Obama’s main military adviser made this clear at the beginning of the month. Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff, acknowledged the US does have a plan to attack Iran if needed to stop Tehran acquiring nuclear weapons. But in an interview with NBC Television, he left little doubt this was an option of last resort.

Adm Mullen said he would be “extremely concerned” about the prospect of a military engagement that could have unintended and unpredictable consequences in “an incredibly unstable part of the world”.

Mr Dalton said the pressure of sanctions was of less importance to Tehran than the nature of any new offer the international community may make if nuclear talks resume.

The key issue for Iran, which insists its nuclear programme is for civilian purposes only, is that it can continue enriching uranium on its own territory under international safeguards.

At his White House briefing, Mr Obama left open the possibility that the US would accept a deal that allows Iran to maintain its civilian nuclear programme, so long as Tehran provides “confidence-building measures” to verify that it is not building a bomb.

But he has always been careful not to define what he means by such a programme and whether that could entail uranium enrichment on Iranian soil.

As Iran prepares to activate its first nuclear power reactor at Bushehr this week using Russian-supplied fuel, the White House said on Friday this showed Tehran does not need its own enrichment capabilities. That assertion was swiftly rejected by a senior Iranian parliamentarian.

Whether the US eventually agrees to limited uranium enrichment in Iran will be left to any new nuclear talks, analysts say.

Many experts are, however, pessimistic that new negotiations will lead to a breakthrough.

“I have major concerns about the absence of Iranian flexibility on the issues that count – and on a parallel lack of flexibility in Washington,” Mr Dalton said in a telephone interview.

Gary Sick, an Iran expert at Columbia University in New York, questioned in his blog whether “Iran is capable under its current leadership to take a sober decision about how to deal with the outside world”.

And there was a “real danger”, he added, that “the Obama administration will be so preoccupied with American domestic politics and its constant demand to look tough when dealing with Iran that it will inadvertently rescue this cruel but hapless [Iranian] regime by providing a convenient scapegoat [with sanctions] for everything that goes wrong in Iran.”

A fourth set of UN Security Council sanctions on Iran in June was followed last month by more onerous unilateral measures imposed by the US and the European Union.

But the impact of the additional US and EU sanctions is likely to be reduced significantly by opposition from Russia, China, India and Turkey. They have said they will honour the UN sanctions but are not obliged to comply with those imposed by the US and EU.

Stuart Levey, the undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence at the US treasury department, is currently visiting the UAE, Bahrain and Lebanon on a tour aimed at strengthening support for the penalties against the Islamic Republic.

Bomb Iran’s Bushehr Nuclear Reactor?.

BY Michael Anton

White House denies giving Turkey ultimatum over Israel ties – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

(I suppose we should have known better.)

Obama administration rejects claims it threatened to scrap arms deal unless Ankara moved to sooth tensions.

By Natasha Mozgovaya

The United States on Monday denied reports it had given Turkey an ultimatum, threatening to scrap a huge arms deal unless the Muslim state toned down its hostile stance against Israel.

Earlier Monday the Financial Times reported that U.S. President Barack Obama had warned the Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan that strained ties with Israel and increasing support of Iran could hinder Washington’s plan to ship arms, including sophisticated drones, to Turkey.

	U.S. President Barack Obama meets with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
	Photo by: AP

But the White House has rejected the claims.

“I really don’t know where they would have divined that from,” White House Deputy Press Secretary Bill Burton told reporters.

“The President and Erdogan did speak about 10 days ago and they talked about Iran and the flotilla and other issues related to that. But we obviously have an ongoing dialogue with them. But no such ultimatum was issued.There’s no ultimatum,” he said.

Burton’s comments apparently contradict those of a senior Obama administration official quoted by the FT.

“The president has said to [Recep Tayyip] Erdogan that some of the actions that Turkey has taken have caused questions to be raised on the Hill [Congress] . . . about whether we can have confidence in Turkey as an ally,” the Londion paper quoted the official as saying.
.
Relations between Israel and Turkey have been increasingly fractious since Israel’s three-week invasion of Gaza a year and a half ago, reaching a low point in May when Israel killed nine Turkish activists in a raid on a Gaza-bound aid ship.

The attack led to the near severance of ties between Turkey and Israel, once close military allies, and Prime Minister Netanyahu has begun to search for other partners in the region, particularly Greece.

Iran concerned about improved Syrian-Saudi ties – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Al Hayat reports Tehran working to prevent Riyadh from increasing influence in Lebanon, worried about Saudi cooperation with Damascus
Roee Nahmias

Iran is concerned about the improving relations between Syria and Saudi Arabia, the London-based Arabic language newspaper Al Hayat reported Monday.

According to the report, Iran is displeased with Syrian President Bashar Assad and Saudi King Abdullah’s pledge to work together to help stabilize Lebanon.

During an unprecedented joint trip to Beirut in late July, Assad and Abdullah urged Lebanon’s rival factions to avoid violence.

“The leaders stressed the importance of stability… the commitment (of the Lebanese) not to resort to violence and the need to place the country’s interests above all sectarian interests,” said a communiqué issued after a mini-summit between Assad, the Saudi monarch and Lebanese President Michel Suleiman.

The statement also stressed the need to “resort to legal institutions and Lebanon‘s unity government to resolve any differences.”

The pair made the hours-long visit in a united bid to ease tensions over reports of an impending indictment against members the Shiite Islamist party Hezbollah for the 2005 murder of Lebanese ex-premier Rafik Hariri.

The leaders who took part in the summit urged the continuation of the investigation into the assassination.

As part of its efforts to prevent the Saudis from increasing their influence in Lebanon, Iran sent Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s advisor, Ali Akbar Velayati, to Beirut and Damascus. Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki also visited Syria, and senior Iranian officials were sent to both Lebanon and Syria to thwart a possible agreement that would not be to Tehran’s liking.

Speaking to Ynet, Syrian sources confirmed that Assad met with Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah due to Iran’s concerns. According to the Al-Hayat report, Syria expects Iran to be more understanding of Syria’s interests, particularly with regards to its influence in Lebanon.

Reuters contributed to the report

How Much Brinksmanship Will Israel Tolerate? – International – The Atlantic.

When Iran’s Natanz centrifuge factory was first inspected by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) more than seven years ago, the consensus among intelligence agencies and knowledgeable observers was that Iran could have a bomb in five years or less. Indeed, had the world done nothing, Iran would probably have a bomb by now. The fact that Iran is not there yet is largely due to successful Western efforts to impede the program. The UN sanctions have often been labeled “symbolic” whereas in fact they are targeted on dual-use items that are essential for Iran’s nuclear and missile programs. IAEA reports document the problems Iran has faced from lack of access to materials and technology necessary to make effective centrifuges, forcing Iran to stick with the bad P-1 design sold to it by A.Q. Khan. If we keep up our efforts, we may be able to slow Iran down for some years.

DEBKAfile, Political Analysis, Espionage, Terrorism, Security.

Iran’s first reactor goes on stream at Bushehr

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin decided it was safe to go ahead and load Iran’s first nuclear reactor with fuel on Aug. 21 – effectively making it active – after the Kremlin’s weekend announcement of this intent seemed not to trouble the US and Israel, debkafile‘s sources in Moscow and Tehran report. He decided the two governments had either been caught flatfooted or come to terms with a Russian-sponsored nuclear project that would allow Iran to produce weapons-grade plutonium.
The impression Russian officials tried to convey that the reactor would only go on stream in late September was meant to deflect US or Israeli pressure, which in the event was not forthcoming.
Monday, Aug. 16, therefore, Moscow further announced that Sergei Kirienko, the head of the Russian state nuclearcorporation Rosatom, would visit Bushehr Friday, Aug. 20, to see for himself how far the work on the 1,200-1,300 MWe reactor had progressed. He expects to be accompanied by Russian Energy Minister Sergei Shmatko.

Moscow furthermore disclosed it had guaranteed a 10-year supply of reactor fuel for Bushehr.
Then, on Aug. 21, Ali-Akbar Salehi, head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, will join the Russian officials at a press conference to coincide with the transfer of fuel to the Bushehr reactor and mark its effective inauguration. Salehi also announced that Iran would build another 10 installations for enriching uranium inside protected mountain caves – in addition to the three known facilities which brought Iran under UN and Western sanctions.
The announcements from Moscow, our sources say, broadcast due warning to would-be attackers that the Iranian reactor at Bushehr is now under Russia’s protection.

Rosatom’s spokesman Sergey Novikov commented Monday: “I think it is a very strong signal that international society supports such peaceful projects as Bushehr, because everybody understands that you cannot use a power plant in a hypothetical military program.” He went on to say: “A nuclear power plan just generates electricity, There are two double-purpose elements – enrichment and spent fuel management. Both of these elements are taken out of Iranian responsibility, because we are going to supply the Bushehr power plant with nuclear fuel.”

Russian and Iranian officials are bending over backwards to assure the world that Bushehr is a harmless and peaceful project for manufacturing electricity, whereas, as debkafile has previously reported and American experts stressed Monday: “Once fueled and operational, Bushehr will produce plutonium 239 which can be used to make nuclear weapons.”
They also confirmed the warning by former US ambassador to the UN John Bolton (that once the fuel is loaded, Bushehr will be immune from attack because of the risk of spreading radiation) by repeating: “…once it has gone critical, any attempt to do so (attack the reactor) would risk the release of a radioactive plume that might kill civilians and poison surrounding areas.”
Bolton gave Israel and the US less than a week – that is until Aug. 21 – to put the reactor out of commission before it was too late.
The American experts also stressed that, even if – and that is a big “if” – Iran does not at present have the right equipment for separating plutonium from fuel before the spent rods are shipped back to their Russian suppliers – as Moscow claims is part of the deal – possession of a large, functioning nuclear reactor will give Tehran extra impetus to lay hands on the necessary equipment and technology.
The apathy in Washington and Jerusalem greeting the Bushehr reactor going on stream stands in sharp contrast to the cooperation between them in September 2007 for Israel to bomb the Syrian reactor built by North Korean before it was completed. Its purpose was precisely the same as that of the Bushehr plant, albeit using different technology, namely to provide Iran’s military nuclear program with plutonium fuel.
In the case of Bushehr, this will be the first time Israel has stood by for a Middle East nation to get close to producing a nuclear weapon without taking action – even through its leaders openly avow their intention of wiping it off the map.