WarSclerotic

Syrians detain 3,000 in 3 days – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Assad’s troops retake rebellious city of Rastan in worst clash since Syria’s uprising began six months ago, heavily bombing town for days

Roee Nahmias and AP

Syrian troops going house to house have detained more than 3,000 people in the past three days in a rebellious town that government forces recently retook in some of the worst fighting since the country’s uprising began six months ago, an activist said Monday.   In the rebellious central town of Rastan, which the government retook on Saturday, an activist told The Associated Press by telephone that security forces have detained more than 3,000 residents since Saturday. He said the detainees were being held at a cement factory, as well as some schools and the Sports Club, a massive four-story compound.   “Ten of my relatives have been detained,” said the activist, who asked that he be identified by his first name, Hassan. He said was he speaking from hiding in Rastan.   Protest against Assad in Syria (Photo: Reuters)  “The situation in the town is miserable,” he said, adding that the town of some 70,000 people was heavily bombed for five days starting Tuesday when the army launched an offensive.   Syrian activists say the fighting in Rastan pitted the Syrian military against hundreds of army defectors who sided with the anti-regime protesters, who are calling for Assad’s ouster.   Also, a member of Syria‘s outgoing parliament dismissed a broad-based national council set up by the opposition, saying it will not be able to overthrow President Bashar Assad‘s regime. Khaled Abboud told The AP that those who announced the formation of the council in Istanbul a day earlier are “deluding themselves.”   Syrian dissidents met in Istanbul Sunday and formally established a national council designed to overthrow Assad’s regime, which they accused of pushing the country to the brink of civil war. The council appeared to be the most serious step yet to unify a deeply fragmented dissident movement. Abboud dismissed the opposition move, saying: “It’s a dream that will never come true.”   The clashes in Rastan were among the worst the country has seen since the uprising began in mid-March.   The uprising began in mid-March amid a wave of anti-government protests in the Arab world that have so far toppled autocrats in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya. Assad has reacted with deadly force that the United Nations estimates has left some 2,700 People dead.

Haaretz: Panetta Arrives In Israel For ‘Urgent Consultations’ On Iran – OpEd.

Written by: Richard Silverstein

October 3, 2011

I have been writing for more than two years about the possibility of an Israeli war against Iran (make no mistake, an Israeli attack on Iran will notbe just a single discrete operation, but involve an ongoing, and regional war).  And I’ve never felt closer to the idea it was going to happen.  If it does, all of the political developments that led up to it should be fodder for an international studies colloquim on national conflicts, how they start, how to avoid them, and how needless and futile they are.

Today, Haaretz blares a headline (Hebrew print edition only) for a story by Amos Harel:

Second Meeting in Two Weeks:
U.S. Defense Secretary Arrives for Urgent Consultation on Iran

This is no ordinary meeting.  As Harel’s story notes, it’s the second meeting between Panetta and Barak in two weeks.  His first was in Washington DC, during which he also met with the new CIA director, David Petraeus.  Tomorrow’s meeting threatens to be a make or break one, during which Israel will argue for an attack and Panetta will (hopefully) attempt to dissuade them:

Barak and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are believed to favor an Israeli strike on Iran, while the Obama administration has gone out of its way to voice its objection to such a move. Panetta’s predecessor at the Defense Department, Robert Gates, has repeatedly reiterated his objection to an Israeli strike, claiming that such a move would have severe consequences.

Admiral Michael Mullen, who last month stepped down from his role as chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, has passed numerous messages to Netanyahu, clarifying that Israel does not have a “green light” to attack Iran.

Lately the administration has refrained from direct remarks about a possible Israeli strike.

Gee, why do you think that is?  Because Obama, with falling popularity ratings especially within the Jewish community, doesn’t feel strong enough to step in front of this oncoming train (wreck).  And possibly because he doesn’t oppose it nearly as strongly as he should.  Obama’s seen his poll numbers rise with his lethal approach to alleged anti-American terrorists.  Part of him at the least, must believe that unleashing Israel on the Iranians can’t hurt him with security-hawk voters.  Of course, Obama forgets or doesn’t care about the impact it will have on his progressive-liberal base.  He either takes them for granted, believes they have nowhere else to go, or thinks they’re insignificant.

I’ve been reporting here on numerous Israeli media sources who’ve noted the increasing apocalyptical rhetoric from both Ehud Barak and Bibi Netanyahu concerning the Iranian threat to Israel.  Never have a I read so many Israeli commentators reporting virtually the same portraits of leaders ready for war, and at the same time.  It’s ominous, I tell you.

Yaakov Katz, who is a veteran hawkish military correspondent for the Jerusalem Post, also reports today:

One of the last times Leon Panetta came to Israel was to stop the country from attacking Iran.  It was May 2009 and the then-CIA chief was reportedly sent to Israel to ensure the new government in Jerusalem was not planning unilateral action against the Islamic Republic.

…On Monday, Panetta will again arrive in Israel, although this time as secretary of defense…When he sits down for talks with Defense Minister Ehud Barak, Iran will again feature prominently on the agenda.  What he will find, though, might not be to his liking.

According to some estimations, the chances of an Israeli strike against Iran might be growing…Former Mossad chief Meir Dagan’s recent warning that with him, former IDF chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. (res.) Gabi Ashkenazi and former Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) chief Yuval Diskin no longer in office there is no one left capable of standing up to Barak and Netanyahu if they should decide to take action.

…Panetta will likely use this visit to try and [sic] ease Israeli concerns and tensions…He will also look for assurances that Israel will not surprise America.

Katz claims that Israel hasn’t yet given up on the efficacy of sanctions.  But U.S. defense secretaries don’t meet their Israeli counterparts twice in two weeks and fly half way around the world in order to discuss sanctions.  I smell war in the air.  God, I hope I’m wrong.  So many will die if I’m not, and needlessly so.

The Associated Press: Iran looks to sea as route to project power.

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Iran has never been shy about claiming military advances such as missiles capable of hitting Israel or an attack drone dubbed the “ambassador of death.” Its latest focus: The high seas.

In the past week, Iran has announced the deployment of ship-based missiles that can target shorelines from international waters, and its naval commander said that Islamic Republic warships could someday be cruising near America’s Atlantic seaboard.

While many defense analysts believe such a mission is still far beyond Iran’s naval reach, the current emphasis on maritime forces suggests a growing drive by Tehran to display power beyond the Gulf and the overwhelming presence right on its doorstep of the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet.

“Iran simply doesn’t have the ability to be a naval giant at this point,” said Theodore Karasik, a security expert at the Dubai-based Institute for Near East and Gulf Military Analysis. “That doesn’t mean, however, Iran is not serious about trying to move in that direction.”

Warships flying the Iranian flag already have been sent far beyond the Gulf.

In February, two Iranian navy vessels passed through the Suez Canal and into the Mediterranean for the first time since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, raising alarm from archfoe Israel. Iranian ships also have been sent to challenge Somali pirates off the Horn of Africa.

In June, Iran said it sent submarines to the Red Sea in the first such deployment outside the Gulf.

The next step is dispatching warships to cruise in international waters off the U.S. East Coast, said Iran’s navy chief, Rear Adm. Habilbollah Sayyari.

“In the same way that the ‘world arrogance’ is present near our sea borders, we will have a powerful presence near the U.S. sea borders,” Sayyari said last week, using one of Iran’s mocking phrases to describe the U.S.

Sayyari gave no timetable on a possible Atlantic mission. But many military analysts view it as more bluster than reality given Iran’s current naval fleet, which suffered blows in Gulf battles during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war.

Iran’s current navy has a few frigate-class vessels that can move beyond the Gulf but largely comprises much smaller attack and patrol craft that need to remain close to shore.

The website of Iranian state TV quoted Sayyari on Monday as saying that Iran’s “presence in the open seas” is supported by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has final say on all state matters.

“The Atlantic Ocean is one of the open seas and we can have a presence there and in other open seas around the world. We will definitely do that,” Sayyari was quoted as saying.

In Washington, White House spokesman Jay Carney responded to Iran’s Atlantic warnings by saying the U.S. doesn’t “take these statements seriously … given that they do not reflect at all Iran’s naval capabilities.”

But Iran is not short on ambition — or at least boasts about its purported military developments.

During war games in July, Iran unveiled underground missile silos it claims can withstand a direct bomb strike. Iran says it already has missiles with ranges of up to 1,240 miles (2,000 kilometers), putting Israel, U.S. bases in the Gulf and parts of Europe within reach.

The missiles are one of the showpieces in Iran’s self-described strides toward homegrown expertise in technology — including military arsenals, equipment to create nuclear fuel and rockets capable of putting satellites in orbit.

Part of the drive for self-reliance in engineering is a way to ridicule Western-led sanctions over Iran’s nuclear program, which the U.S. and others fear could lead to atomic weapons. Iran says it only seeks energy and medical research from its reactors, including a Russian-built plant that began producing electricity last month.

But Iran’s push for military self-sufficiency also springs from necessity. U.N. arms embargoes on Iran sharply limit its access to new technology and have forced military planners to retool existing equipment — some dating from the 1970s or earlier — or attempt to master their own designs.

“Even if Iran wants to try to improve its conventional military capability in the next few years and has the money to do so, the U.N. arms ban will make that close to impossible,” wrote Bruce Riedel, a military affairs researcher at the Brookings Institution in Washington.

Iran, however, tries to present a much more confident picture.

The country’s defense minister, Gen. Ahmad Vahidi, said last week that factories are now mass producing a ship-based missile with a range of 125 miles (200 kilometers) to hit “warships and coastal targets.” The missile was unveiled last month by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who claimed it was built entirely by Iranian technicians.

Last year, Iran announced its first domestically built guided-missile destroyer, Jamaran, which it said can carry attack helicopters.

The official news agency IRNA also quoted the head of naval research, Mansour Maghsoudlou, as saying new submarines are on the drawing board, but the report gave no other details.

“Iran’s trip to the Suez was mostly symbolic. The eastern Mediterranean is about the limit of their naval capabilities at this stage,” said Paul Rogers, a professor at Bradford University in Britain and a frequent commentator on security affairs. “But that probably won’t stop Iran from speaking loudly about their plans on the seas, which seem less about what they can really do and more for political purposes.”

Copyright © 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Panetta hints US opposed to unilateral action … JPost – Defense.

    US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta hinted Monday that America was opposed to unilateral Israeli action against Iran, saying during a press conference in Tel Aviv that the way to stop the Islamic Republic’s pursuit of a nuclear capability was for countries to work together.

Ensuring that Iran doesn’t “pose a threat to this region,” he said, “demands the countries working together.”
Panetta arrived in Israel on Monday morning on his first visit as secretary of defense. In 2009 as head of the CIA, Panetta was sent to Israel by US President Barack Obama to warn Israel not to take unilateral military action against Iran.

During the joint press conference with Defense Secretary Ehud Barak, Panetta said the US is “very concerned and we will work together to do whatever is necessary” to prevent Iran from threatening the region.

The US recognizes the threat from Iran, he said, as it continues to develop a nuclear capability and supports terrorist organizations throughout the region, some of which are responsible for the deaths of American soldiers.

Panetta also addressed a decision by the US Congress to withhold $200 million in aid to the Palestinian Authority, saying it was against the Obama administration’s position.

“The administration opposes holding these funds from the Palestinians,”  he said, adding that the funds have helped the Palestinian Authority build better security, which helps the Palestinians as well as Israel.

“This is a critical time and it is not a time to withhold those funds,” he said.

The US defense chief would not comment on reports that after his visit to Cairo on Tuesday, he will be bringing alleged Mossad spy Ilan Grapel back with him to the US.

“I cannot say anything about the specifics about that,” he said. “We’ve made our concerns known to the Egyptians about holding that individual.”

The release of imprisoned Israeli agent Jonathan Pollard is a “sensitive issue,” the secretary of defense said, claiming that there was a “great deal of opposition” to his release in the United States.

“Pollard has been a sensitive issue for a long time. There is a great deal of opposition to the release of Pollard that goes back to the fact that he was convicted as a spy.” For that reason, Panetta said, “the president has indicated that the position of the US is for him not to be released.”

Iran threatens US and UK with cyber-retaliation | TechCentral.ie.

Read more: http://www.techcentral.ie/article.aspx?id=17543#ixzz1ZiwDx6dl

FEN HAMPSON: The coming war in the Middle East | iPolitics.

The odds are 50/50 or better that within a year we will see the outbreak of a major war in the Middle East.

There are many different causes of war. Wars of aggression are fought for territorial gain (Hitler’s seizure of Czechoslovakia and subsequent attack on Poland; Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait). Major wars have also been fought to prevent another country from attacking because a country fears it will be attacked later on.  Ostensibly, that was the rationale behind Japan’s attack on the US at Pearl Harbor in 1941.  Wars can be driven by miscalculation and misperception (the origins of World War I; US attack on Iraq in 2003).  Wars, too, are fought to shore up support for unpopular leaders (Tsar Nicholas II’s goading of Japan into the Russo-Japanese War of 1904).

All of these combustible elements are now at play in the Middle East.  There is no shortage of territorial disputes, especially in the oil-rich Persian Gulf between Iran and its neighbors, but also between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, that are friction points for conflict.
Political relations between the region’s most powerful countries are also stressed to the breaking point (e.g., Turkey-Israel, Turkey-Syria, Egypt-Israel, Iran-Israel; Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States versus Iran).  The risk of miscalculation amidst heightened tensions throughout the region looms large.

Iran’s unabated nuclear ambitions pose a different kind of threat not just to its neighbors, but also to the US and Europe. Someday someone might launch a preventive attack on Iran to destroy its up-and-coming nuclear capabilities.

The Israeli-Palestinian dispute has long been a flash point for discontent and unrest in the region. As leaders on both sides play to the demos to shore up their shaky political support, the prospects for peace plunge further.

President Abbas’s bold bid for Palestinian statehood in the UN General Assembly two weeks ago raised the political stakes in this dispute, but also tensions. Although the Quartet (US, EU, UN, and Russia) is trying to resuscitate talks, they appear doomed by Obama’s own domestic political weakness and Netanyahu’s refusal to permanently halt construction of settlements on the West Bank. Only extremists on both sides will benefit from the impasse.

Syria is the region’s wild card. President Bashir Assad’s regime clings to power with brute force. He has repeatedly rebuffed approaches by Turkey and Iran to introduce political reforms. Turkey is now threatening to levy sanctions against Syria, which will further isolate his regime. Assad might well instigate trouble on his borders with Israel in a desperate move to rally support for his embattled regime.

Egypt’s military and political leadership continues to struggle with street protests and a public that is demanding political change faster than it can deliver. The country’s economic situation continues to deteriorate. Joblessness among Egypt’s youth is much higher than the national average. Ballooning food prices coupled with the fact that almost half the country’s population lives below the poverty line are adding to the political unrest.

The recent storming of the Israeli embassy in Cairo, which Egyptian security forces failed to stop, underscores the deterioration in relations between Cairo and Jerusalem in the Arab Spring’s aftermath. Regimes in transition, even as they move towards democracy, have a long history of running into trouble with their neighbors.

Jordan’s King Abdullah, a longstanding ally and friend of Israeli, is also on the ropes. He fired his government and struggles with protestors who are demanding curbs on his power and stiff penalties to combat corruption. Tensions have reached the breaking point between Jordan’s large Palestinian population and its traditional tribal groupings which form the bedrock of support for the Hashemite kingdom. Jordan’s ability to play peacemaker in the region is severely compromised by its internal woes.

Israel’s relations with Turkey have soured almost to the point of no return. The release of the UN report into the Marmara affair and Israel’s refusal to apologize for the incident prompted Ankara to withdraw its ambassador from Israel. Prime Minister Recep Erdogan has threatened to send warships to support future aid shipments by Turkish humanitarian groups to Gaza—a move that could trigger a dangerous escalation in this war of words.

Don’t forget to throw Iran’s support for Lebanon’s Hezbollah and other extremist groups into this volatile mix.

It won’t take much of a spark to set the region alight.

Israel fears Iran will copy its … JPost – Iranian Threat – News.

    As Iran continues its development of a nuclear weapon, Israel is growing more concerned that the Islamic Republic will embrace a policy of ambiguity, similar to the policy upheld in Israel regarding its own alleged nuclear capabilities.

“The possibility that Iran would adopt such a policy is growing,” a senior government official involved in defense-related issues told The Jerusalem Post.

On Monday, US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta will arrive for talks with Defense Minister Ehud Barak that will focus on the Iranian nuclear challenge as well as US efforts to help Israel retain its qualitative military edge in the Middle East.

Panetta will be met by an honor guard at the Defense Ministry in Tel Aviv and will later in the day lay a wreath at the Yad Vashem Holocaust Museum in Jerusalem. Panetta’s visit comes after a visit last week by Adm. James Stavridis, commander of the United States European Command (EUCOM).

Iran has mastered the fuel enrichment stage of its nuclear program and has proven its ability to enrich uranium to as high as 20 percent. General assessments are that if it so decides, it would take Iran just a number of months for it to enrich a sufficient quantity of uranium to over the 90% that would be required for one nuclear device.

Another alarming element for Israel is Iran’s announcement last month that it is moving a cascade of advanced centrifuges to the Fordo facility dug inside a mountain near Qom that Barak said in 2009 was immune to standard air strikes.

The current assessment in Israel is that Iran is working to accumulate a large quantity of low-enriched uranium that will enable it at a later stage to reprocess the material and enrich a larger quantity to higher levels and manufacture a number of nuclear devices.

“Iran very well could continue on its current course for a while, during which it continues to enrich uranium like it is today but without going to the breakout stage and publicly making a nuclear weapon,” the senior official said.

If that were to happen, the concern in Israel is that Iran would not immediately declare that it has developed a nuclear device – assuming that it did so without expelling international inspectors from Natanz – to avoid providing the world with the justification to either increase sanctions or to use military action to stop it.