WarSclerotic

More deaths and injuries reported as thousands rally across Syria.

Al Arabiya

Friday, 30 September 2011

Syrian demonstrators protesting against President Bashar al-Assad march with their banners through the streets after Friday prayers in Kafranbel. (Photo by Reuters)

inShare0

Why is the U.N. silent on Iran’s nuclear program? – By Colum Lynch | Turtle Bay.

For European and American leaders, U.N. General Assembly debates would not be the complete without delivering a full-throated attack on Iran’s nuclear program.

But this year, the council’s major powers have been mute, particularly the three European powers, Britain, France and Germany, that have engaged in a long, fruitless effort to persuade the Iranian leadership to provide verifiable assurances that its nuclear program is peaceful in exchange for a basket of trade benefits and political rewards.

France’s President Nicolas Sarkozy didn’t make a single reference to Iran’s nuclear program in his address last week to the General Assembly. British Prime Minister David Cameron blasted Iran’s repressive policies at home, but said nothing about its atomic ambitions. Ditto for Germany’s Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle.

Minutes after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadenijad blasted the United States, Britain, and Israel for military aggression in the Middle East and elsewhere, Cameron shot back: “He didn’t remind us that he runs a country where they may have election of a sort but they also repress freedom of speech, do everything they can to avoid the accountability of a free media, violently repress demonstrations and detain and torture those who argue for a better future.”

President Barack Obama did commit a couple of sentences to Tehran’s nuclear program, but it was largely boilerplate, and lacked the sense of urgency and alarm that has marked previous public statements.

“The Iranian government cannot demonstrate that its program is peaceful, it has not met its obligations and it rejects offers that would provide it with peaceful nuclear power,” Obama said in a U.N. speech that addressed the Arab Spring and the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Iran, along with North Korea, “must be met with greater pressure and isolation,” he said, if they “continue down a path that is outside international law.”

If one missed the fire and brimstone diplomatic sermons on Iran’s nuclear threat that used to be standard fare in Washington and Paris there was only Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Speaking a day after Ahmadinejad excoriated the West for a litany of historical sins, Netanyahu said “can you imagine that man who ranted yesterday — can you imagine him armed with nuclear weapons? The international community must stop Iran before it’s too late. If Iran is not stopped, we will all face the specter of nuclear terrorism, and the Arab Spring could soon become an Iranian Winter.”

But apart from Netanyahu, it was notably quiet. “Most Council members remain concerned about the continuation and possible acceleration of Iran’s nuclear program,” according to an assessment by the Security Council Report, a non-profit, Columbia University-affiliated research group that tracks the Security Council’s activities. “However, as has been the case for some months, even members willing to consider additional action against Iran do not view any new measures as likely in the near future. It appears most members are not eager to push for additional Council action at this time.”

Certainly, Iran’s nuclear program hasn’t gone away or halted its advances.  On Sept. 2, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) issued a mixed report on Iran’s nuclear activities, citing continued cooperation with nuclear inspectors who visited many of Iran’s declared nuclear facilities, but also confirmed efforts by Tehran to step up its uranium enrichment activities — including the introduction of more advanced enrichment technology — in flagrant violation of successive U.N. resolutions.

The report also cited “extensive and comprehensive” information related to a possible clandestine military program to develop a nuclear payload for a missile. The report’s findings, coupled with Iranian officials’ public pronouncements, has raised concerns among the U.S. and Europeans about Iran’s plan to expand their stockpile of a more refined grade of uranium enriched to 19.75 percent — higher than that needed for the generation of electricity and more than required to fuel its advanced medical reactor in Tehran.

For its part, Tehran has repeatedly denied it is pursuing a nuclear weapon, saying it is pursuing a peaceful nuclear energy program. Last week, Ahmadinejad said Iran’s leadership considers nuclear weapons program’s “evil” and wants no part of it.

Ahmadinejad proposed last week in an interview with the Washington Post‘s Lally Weymouth, to halt Iran’s enrichment of the higher-grade 19.75 grade uranium if the United States or some other country would supply Iran with a reliable supply of the enriched uranium, which is used in a medical reactor that produces anti-cancer treatment, but could potentially converted into weapons-grade fuel — which must be enriched to 90 percent.

The United States and other Western governments have not formally responded to the offer, which they say has previously been proposed in bad faith by the Iranian leadership to avoid charges of intransigence.

David Albright and Christina Walrond of the Institute for Science and International Security outlined a range of projections on how long it would take Iran to acquire a large enough stockpile of 19.75 percent-grade fuel (also known as low-enriched uranium, or LEU) needed for the conversion into a nuclear-weapons grade fuel.

“The mid-projection, or the rate Iran seeks, estimates that by November 2012, Iran could have accumulated more than enough 19.75 percent low enriched uranium so that after further enrichment it would have enough weapons grade uranium for about one nuclear weapon,” they wrote. “The worst case scenario is that by mid-2012 Iran would have enough 19.75 percent LEU for a nuclear weapon. The least worrisome case is that Iran would need until late 2013 to accumulate enough 19.75 percent LEU for a weapon.”

The time table doesn’t mean that they will be able to produce or deploy  a nuclear weapon in 2013. There are still substantial technological hurdles Iran would have to cross — including mastering the conversion of nuclear fuel into a highly enriched grade and loading it into a workable missile. And any move to weaponize its nuclear fuel would require the expulsion of IAEA inspectors, a move that would heighten international political pressure on Tehran, and potentially trigger a military response.

France’s U.N. envoy, Gerard Araud, acknowledged in a public discussion that I moderated on Tuesday at the French Consulate in New York, that the nuclear problem has fallen “under the radar screen” — even as Iran’s nuclear program appears to be moving slowly, but inexorably, towards the capacity of developing a nuclear weapon, and toward a likely military confrontation with the West.

Araud, who has been directly involved in nuclear negotiations with Iran for more than eight years, initially as France’s political director and more recently as its U.N. ambassador, said that the U.N. Security Council has been preoccupied with responding to the political fallout brought out about Arab Spring. “The international community doesn’t know to chew gum and walk at the same time,” he said.

Araud also said that four rounds of U.N. sanctions are moving closer to harming the “crucial, vital interests” of Iran’s trading partners, mostly notably Russia and China, the latter of which is becoming increasingly dependent on Iranian oil to meet the energy needs of a rapidly growing economy. But the Western sanctions effort has become more complicated by the presence of three non-permanent Security Council members — Brazil, India and South Africa — that share Chinese and Russian opposition to sanctions.

“Is it possible to still tighten sanctions? Is it possible to go further, to move further?” he asked. I doubt it. I really doubt it. Maybe in six months.”

The French envoy said that the existing U.N., U.S., and European sanctions, combined with what appear to be covert sabotage efforts directed at Iran’s nuclear program, are raising the costs for the Iranian leadership for defying repeated resolutions demanding they halt their enrichment activities. They have also hampered Iran’s ability to shop around the world for essential parts for its nuclear program. Indeed, the last year has seen a marked increase in the number of seizures of foreign vessels engaging in illicit trade with Iran.

“I think it’s too easy to say [the sanctions] are not working because the Iranians have not stopped” enriching uranium, said Araud. “We consider that they are effective; that they are hurting the economy.”

But he conceded that efforts to restart the stalled diplomatic process have foundered, largely as a result of Iranian intransigence, and he dismissed Ahmadinejad’s latest offer as insincere. “Frankly we have tried everything,” he said. “They have never shown any openness…to a substantial negotiation.”

Araud said the lack of a meaningful diplomatic process has inherent risks that may inevitably lead to a military confrontation.

“If we don’t succeed to open the negotiations with the Iranians there is a strong risk of a military option and we want to avoid it because a military option would have disastrous consequences on the short and medium and long term in this part of the world.”

Araud, who previously served as France ambassador to Israel, challenged Israel’s contention that Iran’s leadership is bent on the destruction of Israel, saying he believes their true goal is projecting power and influence throughout the wider region, which would insulate them from the threat of an overwhelmingly superior U.S. military threat.

“I think the Iranians are pretty rational; they are extremely rational,” he said, noting that a nuclear strike against nuclear-armed Israel “would be mutually agreed destruction. You don’t risk destruction to make a point.”

Araud said that he would assign the likelihood that Iranian nuclear would never launch an atomic attack against Israel at 99.9 percent, but that “if you are on the side of Israel you don’t run the risk. This one percent is too expensive, you can’t afford it.

Yemen: Terror suspect Anwar al-Awlaki killed – CBS News.

This Oct. 2008 file photo provided by Muhammad ud-Deen, shows radical American-Yemeni Islamic cleric Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen. (CBS)

‘Israeli jets fly low over Turki… JPost – Arts & Culture – Arts.

    Low-flying Israeli warplanes and helicopters “harassed” a Turkish ship exploring for natural gas reserves near Cyprus on Thursday night, according to Turkish media reports.

Today’s Zaman, citing accounts in Turkish daily Vatan and Greek Cyptrio daily Phileleftheros, reported that two F-15 jets took off from Tel Aviv and flew through the airspace of both Greek Cyprus and Turkish-controlled northern Cyprus. The jets reportedly ignored warnings from officials of Turkish Cyprus.

According to the report, Turkey sent two F-16 jets to track the Israeli F-15s, which subsequently returned to Israel.

The report added that an Israeli military helicopter flew over the Turkish seismic research ship the Piri Reis, exploring for gas off of Cyprus’s southern coast.

Turkey said on Tuesday it was exploring for gas in an offshore zone where Cyprus started drilling last week, a step that could escalate a dispute over Mediterranean resources.

Israel is also drilling nearby, and the issue has emerged as a further bone of contention between Turkey and the Jewish state. Long Israel’s rare Middle East ally, Ankara has downgraded ties in recent weeks over Israel’s refusal to apologize for a deadly raid last year on a Turkish aid flotilla.

The question of who has the right to tap deposits in a region holding the world’s biggest natural gas find of the past decade has added urgency to efforts to settle the conflict over Cyprus, divided since 1974 into Greek and Turkish enclaves.

The internationally-recognized Greek Cypriot government says it has a sovereign right to drill. Turkey, the only country to recognize a separate Turkish Cypriot state in the north of the island, says the island’s status must be resolved first.

In Nicosia, the island’s divided capital, Greek Cypriot leader Demetris Christofias and Turkish Cypriot leader Dervis Eroglu resumed peace talks on Tuesday after a 10-day break for U.N. General Assembly deliberations.

The two sides are racing to make progress on complex reunification negotiations before a scheduled meeting with U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon at the end of October.

Last week, U.S.-based Noble Energy started drilling offshore on behalf of Cyprus in an area termed Block 12, south of the island. Turkey has pledged to drill for gas on behalf of Turkish Cypriots unless the Greek Cypriots stop.

“If the Greek Cypriots agree to stop, we’ll stop too. But if they insist on proceeding, they know very well Turkey’s attitude,” Turkey’s minister for European Affairs, Egemen Bagis, said on Tuesday during a visit to the island’s north.

“We have to warn against Greek Cypriot provocation. The resources are not going anywhere, so why are they being used to block [Cyprus reunification] negotiations?”

Cyprus has refused to back down. “The Republic of Cyprus cannot be held hostage to illegal actions of Turkey, which continues to occupy (Cyprus) and violates its territorial integrity and the human rights of both Greek and Turkish Cypriots,” said government spokesman Stefanos Stefanou.

“As an internationally recognized state, a member of the UN and the EU, the Republic of Cyprus is exercising its sovereign rights.”

Iran substitutes S-300 air defense system – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Tehran says it has developed missile capable of tracking, striking aircraft at distance of 70 to 150 km

Ynet

Iran has developed its own version of the Russian S-300 air defense system, Fars news agency reported on Thursday.

Military officials stated that the Mersad missile (“Ambush” in Persian) was developed and produced by Iranian engineers, and is designed to trail and hit “any enemy aircraft at a distance of 70 to 150 kilometers (40 to 90 miles).

“The missile’s control systems are advanced, and can track moving targets,” said a military official, adding that the system has undergone many tests in the past few months, some under “severe conditions.”

Some four years ago, Russia signed a contract with Iran for the supply of S-300 air defense system, but was placed under massive pressure not to supply the goods.

Last year, after the United Nations Security Council aggravated the sanctions against the Islamic Republic, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed a decree banning shipments to Iran of the weapons and equipment listed in the UN resolution, but promised to reimburse Tehran over $166 million for the botched deal.

Iran heavily criticized Russia for violating the agreement, but announced that it would produce its own missile defense system.

Earlier this week, Iran announced that it had begun mass production of a cruise missile capable of targeting battleships. The Iranian foreign minister noted that the “Radar” missiles have been transferred to the military and Navy, in order to safeguard Iran’s maritime borders.

Turkey a Growing Menace to Middle East Peace.

Turkey’s prime minister has called for United Nations sanctions on Israel at the same time that Turkish prosecutors are threatening to indict Israel’s prime minister and others in connection with the 2010 Mavi Marmara flotilla raid.

Coupled with other aggressive moves, including threats to break Israel’s Gaza blockade with military force, Turkey is waging a diplomatic war on its former ally.

Leading the charge is Turkey’s Islamist Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who has become one of Israel’s most outspoken critics on the international stage.

Erdoğan has repeatedly attempted to humiliate and isolate Israel internationally, while forging military and intelligence ties with nations sponsoring terrorism against the Jewish state.

On Monday, Erdoğan told Time Magazine that “Israel’s cruelty . . . cannot be continued any longer,” before calling for U.N. sanctions. Without an Israeli apology over the May 2010 flotilla raid, “the relations between the two countries will never become normalized,” he said.

Turkish prosecutors also compiled a list of 174 Israelis, topped by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Ehud Barak, and Israeli military officials for possible indictment over the flotilla incident.

Although the Turkish government claims that the list was drawn up by the Turkish-based group IHH, which led the flotilla, the Turkish newspaper Sabah claims that Turkey’s intelligence agencies were involved. Another Turkish newspaper, Zaman, even claimed that Turkish intelligence agents had operated inside of Israel to discover the identities of those listed.

Israeli officials challenged the list’s validity, saying the names “were rather recycled from previous lists that were published on anti-Israeli websites following Operation Cast Lead” in reference to the December 2008 incursion into Gaza to take out Hamas missile capabilities.

Military officials added the report is part of a psychological warfare conducted by Turkey.

Erdoğan’s most recent comments and the planned indictment follow a month of Turkish diplomatic attacks on Israel.

On Monday, Erdoğan also accused Israel of manipulating the Holocaust to inspire international guilt, while carrying out attacks that killed “hundreds of thousands” of Palestinians.

“Israeli people are only resorting back to the issue of genocide in history. And using that genocide [the Holocaust] they are always acting as if they are the victims all the time,” he said.

“So Germany has and is still paying its dues to Israel. But neither Turkey nor the Muslims in the region have such a problem [of genocide]; they have never exerted such cruelty on Israel. But Israel is very cruel in that regard. It shows no mercy,” he added.

Turkey is accused of waging genocide against Armenians starting in 1915, with 1.5 million people killed. Government officials refuse to acknowledge this history and withdrew its ambassador to the United States last year after a House committee passed a resolution calling on the president to label the event a genocide.

Erdoğan has also been called out for hypocrisy over the Palestinian issue, when Turkey’s Kurdish community has endured years of repression.

Still, Erdoğan pledged earlier this month that Turkish warships would protect future vessels trying to break Israel’s blockade of the Hamas-run Gaza Strip, a move sure to raise tensions between the two nations.

“The main mission of Turkish military ships is to protect Turkish vessels. This is their duty. We will send humanitarian aid to [Gaza], and this aid will not be subject to any attack like the one on the Mavi Marmara. If they are attacked, the attackers will meet an appropriate response,” Erdoğan said in an interview with Al-Jazeera television.

The interview followed the release of a United Nations report on the 2010 flotilla clash, which upholds Israel’s maritime blockade of the Gaza Strip. Furious that Israel would not apologize for the death of the nine Turks killed on the Mavi Marmara, Erdoğan also expelled Israeli diplomats and suspended military and defense ties with Israel.

Erdoğan supports IHH, the Turkish group which deliberately orchestrated the violent flotilla clash. IHH is under investigation for possible designation as a terrorist group by the U.S. State Department and has ties to Hamas.

“While there may not be any evidence of a direct link here, there can be no mistake that the Erdoğan government is morally and politically behind this group — the İHH,” columnist Semih Idiz wrote in Turkey’s English daily Hurriyet after the flotilla clash.

A report published by the Meir Amit Intelligence Center in January cited IHH statements that the flotilla received direct support from Erdoğan and several ministers. That included money, logistical support, satellite communications, the use of harbors and political propaganda support. IHH leader Bulent Yildirim maintains a relationship with senior government leaders including Erdoğan.

IHH “has helped Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan shore up support from conservative Muslims ahead of critical elections next year and improve Turkey’s standing and influence in the Arab world,” the New York Times reported in July, 2010.

Despite Erdoğan’s emphasis on the flotilla clash, he was accusing the Jewish state of murder years earlier. “You shall not kill,” he said in Hebrew during Israel’s 2009 war to stop Hamas terrorists from firing rockets into Israeli towns.

Israel’s counterterrorism effort, he said, was “defying the world and mocking the world,” before asking how the Jewish state dared “to enter the doors of the U.N.”

He stormed out of a Davos forum meeting in January 2009 after telling Israel’s president, “When it comes to killing — you know killing very well.”

Erdoğan declared his support for Hamas during a May interview, saying it was a sign of “disrespect” to Palestinians to call the group a terrorist organization.

The struggle against Israel is one facet of the Muslim nation’s new Islamist foreign policy under the leadership of Erdoğan and his AKP party. Turkey has distanced itself from membership in the European Union, a former goal of the nation, in order to pursue better ties with terror-supporting nations like Syria and Iran.

Turkey’s efforts with Syria backfired after a massive crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrators, leading Erdoğan to condemn Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and predict his downfall.

Turkey’s relations with Iran have also been on display, with Erdoğan openly repeating his intelligence cooperation with Iran in counterterrorism affairs. In a CNN interview, he brushed off Western concerns over Iran’s nuclear weapons program, choosing to take Iran at its word.

“And Iran says that its only purpose is to generate affordable energy through nuclear power,” Erdoğan said. “We don’t want to act on presumptions. And no sanctions based on presumptions are acceptable by Turkey.”

Such behavior and more indicates that “Turkey may be, along with Iran, the most dangerous state of the region,” Middle East Forum president Daniel Pipes wrote Tuesday.

In addition to Turkey’s troubling foreign policy, Pipes also notes its internal problems, including political challenges posed by the pro-Kurdish Peace and Democracy Party (BDP), more aggressive terrorist attacks by the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and a possible economic collapse.