WarSclerotic

DEBKA.

Iran has crossed a critical threshold which the latest International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) nuclear agency report from Vienna omitted from the report it circulated Tuesday, Nov. 8: Not only has the Islamic Republic managed to mount nuclear warheads on its Shahab ballistic missiles, DEBKA-Net-Weekly‘s military and intelligence sources report, but the newly-outfitted missiles have been successfully tested four times.
The last test was conducted June 28 under cover of the “Great Prophet 6” war maneuver. This experimental launch tested the missile’s performance as well as its targeting accuracy.
The only Western leader to go public on this disquieting news was the British Foreign Secretary William Hague. On June 29, under the impact of that test the day before, he dropped the information on a surprised parliament: “Iran has also been carrying out cover ballistic missile tests and rocket launches, including testing missiles capable of delivering a nuclear payload in contravention of UN Resolution 1929,” he said.
But the revelation never went any further. It was not picked up by any American, Western or Israeli official although Hague was a good deal more explicit and his information more up-to-date than the IAEA report.
Nuclear warheads already mounted on missiles – and tested
Our military sources report that three tests of nuclear-capable missiles were carried out between October 2010 and February 2011; the fourth mentioned by Hague in June this year. Today, Iran has in its arsenal two types of nuclear-capable ballistic missiles, the Shahab-3 Kadar and the Sejil, both of them powered by solid fuel with ranges of up to 2,510 kilometers and both tested in the series beginning in October 2010.
Two Shahab tests were a success; the Sejil failed.
Shahab-3 Kadar was successfully tested again in June.
All these experiments focused on the performance and accuracy of the nuclear warheads.
Our military sources report that after launching the 27-kilogram Omid earth satellite in February 2009, the Iranians knew they had a missile capable of a 330-kilogram payload capacity.
From June, 2011, Tehran advanced to operational missiles capable of carrying nuclear payloads to any point on the world map. Its nuclear program now concentrates on enhancing their precision.
DEBKA-Net-Weekly‘s intelligence sources stress that Yukiya Amano, head of the UN nuclear agency, agreed to keep those tests and their grave significance dark. It is not by chance that the report he authored covered the state of Iran’s nuclear program in 2008 updated to the end of 2009, but no later. Its language on Iran’s nuclear missiles is vague, referring to “Documentation of at least 14 progressive design iterations for a missile warhead to deliver an atomic warhead to a distant target.
Time bought for Obama’s hard choices
Had the IAEA paper been updated up to 2010 and 2011, it could not have avoided disclosing that the “atomic warhead” had by then matured into the successfully-tested payload of ballistic missiles.
The decision to abbreviate the report was taken, according to our Washington sources, during a secret visit Amano paid to the White House on Oct. 29, 2011. He sat down with National Security Adviser Tom Donilon and together they decided to cut out of the final report the last two years in which Iran’s nuclear program matured into a weapon capability – even though they knew this for a fact – so as to buy President Barack Obama another six to ten months for the necessary hard decisions.
After perusing the document, therefore, the Western media were unable to say anything more definite than that the IAEA does not claim Iran has mastered all the necessary technologies or estimate how long it would take for Iran to be able to produce a nuclear weapon.
Although US, British, German, French, Dutch and Israeli intelligence know perfectly well that Iran is already armed with operational nuclear weapons, concealment of this knowledge gives President Obama a free hand to break the news on the world at a time of his choosing.
It also gives Iran time to stage a nuclear test, from which point there is no return.

DEBKA.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has put the country on a war footing having decided that the threats by the United States, Israel and NATO members Britain, France, Italy, Germany and Holland to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities should be taken with the utmost seriousness.
Sunday, Nov. 6, two days before the publication of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)’s critical report, Khamenei summoned the regime’s top officials and commanders to his office for a tour d’horizon of Iran’s readiness for a confrontation.
By taking this stand, the Supreme Leader, DEBKA-Net-Weekly‘s Iranian sources report, put an end to the arguments among three establishment factions over whether the US, Israel and NATO powers were saber-rattling in earnest or faking it to destabilize the regime by scaring 70 million people into believing that a Western offensive was coming down on their heads, brought on by their government’s aggressive nuclear policy.
1. The military faction won out over the other two by persuading Khamenei that the Western-Israeli threat is not only genuine but could be realized at any moment. This faction is made up of a formidable array of top military and Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) officers: IRGC chief Gen. Ali Mohammed Jafari, the al Qods Brigades chief Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the Navy commander Adm. Habibollah Sayyar, Head of the Basij Forces Gen. Nagdio Mohammad-Reza and Commander of Iran’s ground forces Gen. Brig. Ahmad-Reza Bourdastan.
Ahmadinejad apocalyptic
Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi offered this enigmatic view: “Let them publish their report. One can die only once and even grief passes.”
He appeared to be advising the Islamic Republic to face up to the inevitable without fear.
2. The position taken by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Defense Minister Ahmad Vahidi at the head of the second faction was that an attack on Iran is not certain but the threat should not be taken lightly. This week, Ahmadinejad maintained that if Iran did not prepare itself for a possible attack, it could face destruction and be thrown back 500 years.
Then, Tuesday, the president gathered his closest advisers around him for an apocalyptic message: “The military showdown with the West and Israel is close. It can no longer be prevented.”
3. This faction warned that plunging into reckless action would give the US and Israel a pretext for attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities. Tehran must exercise the utmost caution in its responses to avoid giving its enemies cause for war. This group’s spokesman is Mohammed Reza Qalidaf, the Mayor of Tehran and until five years ago one of the four IRGC top commanders.
The Guards mark 102 US Mid-East targets
Gen. Soleimani launched the military review which followed by spreading out a map on which he had marked the first 102 American military targets in the Middle East designated for missile attack the moment the US or Israel went into action against Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Some of the missiles were to be fired from locations outside Iran.
DEBKA-Net-Weekly‘s military sources report he was referring to missiles to be launched from Syria by Iran’s surrogates, the Lebanese and Iraqi Hizballlah, as well as al Qods and other cells.
Those missile teams, he reported, were standing by on the Syrian-Iraqi frontier ready for action. The plan is for them to step across the frontier, release their rockets against the US targets listed in their orders and immediately step back into Syria. This stratagem aimed to muddy the sources of the attack.
The IRGC chief also uncovered plans for Iraqi Hizballah fighters to shoot missiles from southern Iraq against the oil fields and terminals of the Persian Gulf emirates and set them on fire.
Those fighters have taken possession of 150 Scuds B and D which were in Iraqi army use up until 2003 and are now maintained in good order by Iranian technicians present in South Iraq under cover.
The Chairman of Iran’s Nuclear Energy Agency Fereydoon Abbasi then reviewed his crash operation to transfer all the nuclear testing labs and equipment to underground structures safe from air and missile attack.
Not all the bunkers were finished, Abbasi said. But to save time, the transfers of essential installations had begun this week into unfinished underground chambers. This meant they would not be fully operational for some weeks, if not months.
In Abbasi’s view, any US or Israeli operation would also seek to disrupt the country’s strategic and civilian infrastructure.
Starting next week, he reported, top nuclear scientists, engineers and technicians would be collected from their homes and hidden in secret facilities for their protection.
Iran has 400 WMD-capable missiles
The IRGC Aerospace commander Gen. Amir-Ali Hajizadeh, who is responsible for Iran’s missile systems whether for attack or defense, offered the most extensive briefing, the crux of which was the disclosure of 400 operational Shahab-3 Kadar missiles capable of carrying nuclear, chemical and different kinds of poison gas warheads.
(British Foreign Secretary William Hague reported to the Commons on June 29, 2011 that Iran had been carrying out “covert ballistic missile tests and rocket launches, including testing missiles capable of delivering a nuclear payload…”)
Like the speaker before him, Gen. Hajizadeh stressed the monumental effort his forces had made in recent months to transfer the missiles into underground tunnels and speed up the construction of launching silos.
He reckoned that 5-8 percent of all missile barrages fail on average; another 10-15 percent miss their aim; and an unknown proportion would be intercepted by American, Israel, Saudi or Gulf anti-missile missiles.
But he remained optimistic, certain that hundreds would still reach their targets.
Gen. Hajizadeh added that Hizballah in Lebanon and the Hamas and Jihad Islami in the Gaza Strip would shoot 1,000 more long- and medium-range missiles in the first hours of the war, plus 3,000 short-range rockets such as multiple-rocket Katyushas and mortar rounds.
This barrage would cover every part of Israel.
Twelve military districts
The IRGC and Basij Forces commanders then reviewed their war preparations in Iran’s 12 military districts or sectors. Each one has a separate autonomous command which functions independently of the supreme command and other district centers.
Established in mid-2010 as insurance against the breakdown of authority in one district having a knock-on effect on the others, the system was designed as an obstacle course for curtailing the spread of a popular uprising across the country.
In early 2011, it was converted from civilian to military use as part of a master plan for keeping the various parts of the country independently afloat under foreign military assault.
Navy Commander Adm. Sayyar described how the Iranian fleet was arrayed in the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea in deployments for thwarting Western and Israeli submarine attacks on targets in Iran and safeguarding Its coasts from landings by foreign marine and special forces.

DEBKA.

Barack Obama and Binyamin Netanyahu

The muted responses of US President Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to the matter at the top of their agenda, the IAEA report accusing Iran of building a nuclear weapon program, were in line with the same shared tactics which dictated the report’s publication date of Tuesday, Nov. 8.
The US and Israeli administrations have worked their way through to an exceptional level of policy coordination in more than one active sphere.
Although in Syria, Bashar Assad has been massacring his people for eight months, the US administration continues to shun military intervention and Israel, which shares a border with Syria, distances itself from its domestic upheaval.
The Obama administration has made the Supreme Military Council ruling Egypt a keystone of its Middle East policy. The Netanyahu government, for its part, treats the Egyptian generals with respect and consideration. Any upsets between Cairo and Jerusalem are handled delicately and with dispatch at the highest levels using Egypt’s Intelligence Minister Murad Mofai and the Israeli intelligence Mossad Director Tamir Pardo as go-betweens.
Obama and Netanyahu are also of one mind over the Palestinian question. And, ahead of military action against Iran, Obama insisted on the Turkish and Israeli prime ministers mending their prickly relations.
And indeed the confrontational tones have disappeared from their discourse. Ankara, for instance, has stopped raising objections to the deal whereby Cyprus and Israel have reserved their oil and gas drilling zones in the eastern Mediterranean.
A harmonious working relationship
The US and Israeli leaders, though not exactly buddies at the personal level, are in close, amicable dialogue, almost daily, because harmonious coordination between them is essential for the success of a joint operation to destroy Iran’s nuclear program. Rarely has a US president concerned himself with so many tiny minutiae of a military operation, especially not with a foreign leader.
DEBKA-Net-Weekly‘s sources in Washington describe three levels of intensive interaction between the two capitals:
The first is the direct line between the president and the prime minister. Their decisions are handed down to US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak, who has spent most of the last two months in Washington, for laying out the master planning. This is passed to Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint US Chiefs of staff and the IDF Chief of Staff of the IDF, Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz, for the next stage.
CIA Director Gen. David Petraeus and Mossad, Military Intelligence and Shin Bet directors, Tamir Pardo, Brig. Aviv Cochavi and Yoram Cohen are briefed on intelligence aspects of the operation.
The planning goes into the smallest details so as to leave nothing to chance.
Those involved are fully aware that they are charting the largest military operation in history against a national nuclear program. The armies of 13 nations will be involved and more may be drawn in at some point.
In addition to the US, Israel and Iran, the planners cite Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, Britain, France, Germany, Holland, Italy, Canada, Australia and Saudi Arabia as involved actively or potentially.
The IDF would provide the sharp point of the operation
The veil was briefly lifted from the advance preparations when straight after Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron discussed cooperating on the Iran venture in the last week of October, the British Chief of staff Gen. Sir David Richards arrived in Israel on Nov. 2 on an unannounced visit, followed the next day by the Israeli defense minister’s arrival in London to tie up the ends of the UK’s role in the operation.
Next week, Barak has scheduled another of his frequent trips to Washington for a visit of undetermined length. Thursday, Nov. 10, the London Daily Mail revealed that British ministers had been told to expect Israeli military action “as early as Christmas or very early in the new year.”
The paper added: “Ministry of Defense sources in London confirmed that contingency plans have been drawn up in the event that the UK decided to support military action.”
Although it must be assumed that this report, like other stories appearing in the media these days, was deliberately misleading – particularly with regard to the timeline – it appeared to be signaling that the Cameron government had come aboard.
The final timetable will depend on a host of variables, such as the weather, the position of the moon with respect to tides, storms in the Red Sea and Persian Gulf and the seasonal directions of underwater coastal currents. However, it is generally expected to go forward as expeditiously as possible.
In many ways, President Obama views the NATO operation just ended in Libya, and its focus on air and sea bombardment and actions by small special forces units, as a curtain-raiser for the campaign against Iran – only this time he wants to see not only the US but also other Western allies taking a back seat.
Israel would provide the sharp end of the attack, with the allies providing all the necessary intelligence, logistic and air and missile defense, so as to leave Israel’s armed forces (IDF) free to fully focus on the offensive part of the operation.
Days not weeks needed to accomplish the mission
Neither Obama nor Netanyahu supports the theory that Israel would take three months to disable Iran’s nuclear installations and its elite Revolutionary Guards bases. They agree that a blitz offensive could do the job in 10 days to two weeks.
According to some expert assessments, the exercise of IDF might to its fullest extent, with efficient support from Western logistical and intelligence infrastructure should suffice without the need for extra time. If, however, Israel fails to accomplish its missions, then the question of direct US military intervention along with West European armies will arise.
There are two reasons to assume that the Iran operation will be brief:
1. Its purpose is not regime change in Tehran but is limited to disabling Iran’s primary nuclear facilities and the command structure of the Revolutionary Guards. US military planners believe the two objectives can be achieved in five days to a week.
2. It is hoped that a blitz campaign if short enough will not draw Syria and Hizballah into the war. Syrian President Bashar Assad and Hizballah leader Hassan Nasrallah will want to see which way the winds of war blow before committing their forces to a confrontation – not just with Israel but with the United States and a host of European armies.
Plan incorporates surprises for Iran
DEBKA-Net-Weekly‘s military sources report that there is no resemblance between the operational master plan approved by Obama and Netanyahu and the hypothetical scenarios published in recent weeks. The essential feature of the plan is speed. The nature of the weaponry and tactics are kept under tight wraps in order catch Iran by surprise.
The sympathetic working relationship cultivated between the US president and the Israeli prime minister has not completely dispelled their old mutual distrust. Obama still entertains a lingering suspicion that Netanyahu may at some point act unilaterally, possibly by jumping the gun on the attack, while the Israeli leader fears Obama may pull back at the last minute.
However, according to our sources in Washington and Jerusalem, preparations for the strike are so far advanced and Western allies like Britain, France and Germany so deeply committed, that it is almost impossible for either leader to go off on a unilateral tangent without the other.
At the same time, those sources warn that right up until D-Day, some unforeseen event may not be ruled out for throwing the plan off-course.

Three facts and fo… JPost – Iranian Threat – Opinion & Analysis.

    The Iranian nuclear issue contains various components of national security, foreign policy and politics. If we remove commentaries that are personal or affiliated to a political party, which are inherently speculative, we are left with three basic facts that are indisputable.

The most essential fact is the progress Tehran has made in its bid to produce a nuclear weapon. Iran embarked on its journey in this direction many years ago. But over the last decade, its efforts have gained enormous momentum.

Today no one disputes the fact that Iran has acquired the necessary know-how to enrich uranium for an atomic bomb.

There is also no doubt that Iran has developed the ability to launch long-range missiles that can carry nuclear warheads.

Even the biggest skeptics concede that if the moves designed to stop Iran fail, it will be able to fire missiles with nuclear warheads at any target in the Middle East and beyond in just a few years.

The second fact concerns the dangers of Iran’s nuclear threat to Israel. We often explain to the world how the Iranian nuclear program threatens it. From the dismal failure of the international community’s campaign against the nuclearization of Iran, and its refusal to take significant steps beyond economic sanctions, one can only conclude that the threat cannot be contained by the world.

The US, Russia, China, Britain and France, which all have nuclear arsenals, have learned for generations to live in the shadow of “mutual fear.” The existence of several dozen bombs in the shelters of a few more countries does not interfere with their sleep.

In contrast, for Israel, it is a very serious development. The leaders of Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states have made it publicly clear that they would not leave Iran alone in the “nuclear club.”

The nuclear arms race in the Middle East will leave Israel under a nuclear threat growing with time, dictating limits and restraints too difficult to deal with as we face terrorist threats and provocations from other countries.

In fact, it will leave Israel with no qualitative edge against its neighbors. To that, we should add other possible dangers: nuclear weapons falling into the hands of extreme terrorist groups such as al-Qaida; a possible nuclear confrontation triggered by a miscalculation, after the Middle East turns into a region filled with irrational parties holding weapons of mass destruction; and above all hovers the fanatic logic articulated in the past by the Iranian president, that Iran, with its 70 million inhabitants – unlike little Israel – has the ability to survive a non-conventional confrontation.

The third fact that everyone should face directly, without self-delusion, is the absolute failure of diplomatic attempts to divert Iran from progressing toward acquiring a nuclear weapon. Four firm decisions of the UN Security Council, severe reports of the IAEA, great efforts to cause significant damage to Iran’s economy through sanctions, and innumerable loud speeches – by the leaders of the US, UK, Germany and France on their “commitment to prevent a nuclear Iran” – have all crashed against the rocks of the fundamental stubbornness of the regime in Tehran.

An analysis of reasons for this failure is not important now. Essentially, it’s the result of the unwillingness of Russia, China and India – and with them many of the European countries such as Germany – to pay the price attached to more stringent economic and political sanctions, which would also include sanctions in the energy field.

The important thing is the bottom line: In the unequal race between the stammering international community and a determined fanatical state, the Iranian runner will be the first to cut the tape at the finish line.

SO MUCH for the three facts. And now for the four dilemmas that derive from them:

1. Will the US act to thwart Iran’s nuclear program through military means?
2. If the US refrains from military action against Iran, does Israel have the capacity to carry out an attack against Iran on its own?
3. If it can, should Israel condition its decision on the consent, direct or implied, of the American government?
4. If Israel believes it has the power to act against Iran’s nuclear program even without American consent, it must examine the implications of such action in many areas:

• Its relations with the US.

• Its relations with Egypt and Jordan.

• The threat of direct Iranian retaliation by missiles or air strikes.

• The threat posed by Syria.

• The threat posed by Hezbollah.

• The threat posed by terror organizations in Gaza and Judea and Samaria.

• The threat posed by Iranian retaliation in the form of terrorist acts against Israeli targets and/or Jews around the world.

• What it would mean for Israel if Iran would respond by taking measures that would cause a huge price rise in the global energy market.

SUBSTANTIVE DISCUSSION of these implications, as well as intelligence analysis and operational options, must be conducted behind closed doors, in secret. So I will not address them here.

All I would allow myself to say is that I totally reject the apocalyptic scenarios published in recent days. To the best of my knowledge, based on constant dealings with the Iranian issue in the most intimate possible way over seven consecutive years, I think that coming to terms with a nuclear Iran would cause much more danger and harm to Israel than the anticipated damage from any action designed to harm Iran’s nuclear program.

Because of my familiarity with the political scene in the US, I believe that the warnings about a “destruction of relations with the United States” have no basis. The leader of the US understands well that it has no right to undermine Israel’s right of self-defense against a strategic threat. This is true of the Obama administration as well as of any other administration, if there is a new one, following the US election in November 2012.

I agree with those who recommend waiting for a US decision on whether to raise its hands and concede defeat in the wake of continued Iranian defiance, or to raise up a US Air Force attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

However, the waiting period should be limited. President Barack Obama, following his election three years ago, promoted a controversial initiative on direct dialogue (engagement) with Tehran. Iran rejected the initiative with complete contempt.

Then the White House expressed its intention to impose “crippling sanctions” on Iran, but the resolution that was finally passed by the UN Security Council, in June 2010, was watered down and ultimately ineffective.

A year and a half have passed, and if anyone is paralyzed in this stand-off, he is definitely not in Tehran. For the future of Israel, I hope the paralyzed person is not in Jerusalem as well.

(Moria Dashevsky translated this from Hebrew.)

The writer is a former head of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee.

‘Strike on Iran would be existen… JPost – Iranian Threat – News.

    A senior Iranian official warned Israel on Thursday that a military strike against Iran would create a threat to its own survival.

“If the Zionist regime allows itself such an oversight, a question of its existence will arise — not a question of its legitimacy but a question of its existence,” Ali Baqeri, deputy secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, said through an interpreter during a visit to Moscow.

Baqeri’s remarks echoed a warning by Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who said military action against Iranian nuclear sites would be met with “iron fists”, Iranian state television reported.

“Our enemies, particularly the Zionist regime, America and its allies, should know that any kind of threat and attack will be firmly responded to…Our nation, the Revolutionary Guards and army…will answer attacks with strong slaps and iron fists,” said Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said.

Tension over Iran’s nuclear program has increased since the release of an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report saying Tehran appeared to have worked on designing a bomb and may still be conducting secret research to that end.

Speculation has heightened in the Israeli and Western press about the possibility of strikes by both Israel and the United States on Iran’s nuclear sites.

Baqeri said Iran does not believe Israel will launch an attack, saying Israel “is in the worst condition since its creation … in political, economic and social terms and in terms of security issues.”

He said “the people of these countries [in the Middle East] want to chase Israel from the region. And so now the Zionist regime has very many weak points.”

IsraCast: Israel Now Watches and Waits.

Thursday, November 10, 2011

In Israel, Mum’s The Word After Latest IAEA Exposes Iran’s Nuclear Weapons Program

Prime Minister Netanyahu Signals That Time For Words Is Over – It’s Now Time For International Community To Get Serious About Iranian Nuclear Threat

IsraCast Assessment: Israel Will Wait & See If UN Security Council Will Finally Decide On Decisive Sanctions Against Iran Or Continue To Jaw-Jaw In Face Of Damning Indictment

It now boils down to what the international community now decides to do, or not to do, after the latest IAEA report has exposed Iran’s duplicitous drive for nuclear weapons. The result will affect Israel’s course of action in the foreseeable future. After years of self – denial and U.S. President Barack Obama’s policy of engagement and dialogue with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, one undeniable fact has emerged. There is no prospect that Iran will give up her nuclear weapons program unless and until crippling sanctions are imposed. Jerusalem seems to be signaling the Western world ‘It’s your call’ and Israel will decide on what she will or will not do according to the answer.

The ‘smoking gun’ for Iran’s nuclear weapons project has now been exposed by the International Atomic Energy Agency’s report of November 8th. For the first time, the UN’s nuclear watchdog has expressed its ‘serious concerns’ over the undeniable indicators that Iran has been secretly developing nucler weapons. It came as no surprise to Israel, which Tehran has repeatedly threatened to ‘wipe off the map’. The Israeli government will now be waiting to see if the international community, including Russia and China, will finally agree to impose the crippling sanctions that will force the fanatical Iranian regime to halt its drive to acquire the bomb. If not, Israeli leaders have made clear they will do what it takes to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (photo: U.S. State Department)

The IAEA report is a ‘game changer’ not only for Israel, but also for the Middle East and the entire world. There now can be no doubt the Islamist regime in Tehran has been developing nuclear weapons for years. So far, everything has failed to deter Iran that is moving full steam ahead to acquire the bomb. Not only would Israel be in Iran’ nuclear cross-hairs but also Saudi Arabia and all the Gulf states with their massive oil resources on which the Western world is so dependent. Therefore, the IAEA findings have sent shock waves throughout the entire region and in the corridors of power around the globe. The Sunni Arab states as well as Israel will now be looking to the UN Security Council, to see if the international community will finally impose a fifth and crippling set of sanctions on Iran that will force a halt to its nuclear weapons development. Time is of the essence. The Iranians have enough 20% enriched uranium that could be upgraded to 95% weapons grade. They also have ballistic missiles capable of reaching Israel and various European capitals. Their key problem is in the sphere of weaponization – building a nuclear warhead that could be mounted on a missile. Israeli expert Uzi Eilam told Channel 1 that an uranium fueled nuclear weapon is very large and extremely difficult to install on a missile. In his opinion, the Iranians will opt for the plutonium warhead. Work on it may be planned for the Fordo underground site near the holy city of Qom.

In reaction, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadenijad lashed out at Yukiya Amano, the new IAEA, calling him an American puppit. Ahmadenijad and senior military officers warned that Israel would be scorched off the earth if she even considered attacking Iran. Earlier in the day, Defense Minister Ehud |Barak was asked about the Iranian threats of retaliation. ‘Grossly exaggerated’ he responded; a worried Knesset member had asked him if fifty-thousand Israelis might be killed if Israel launched an attack on Iran’s nuclear targets. Barak scoffed at the dire prediction saying: ‘Not fifty-thousand, not five-thousand and not even five-hundred, if Israelis go into their bomb shelters when instructed. And he added: ‘If there is a grave threat to Israel and a major crisis there would be a need to take risks – that is what a crisis dictates’. The Defense Minister repeated Israel’s long standing position that all options were on the table to bar Iran acquiring nuclear weapons.

The Iranian Missile Range

Maj.Gen. (res.), Eitan Ben Eliyahu a former Israel Air force commander said only a fool would now doubt that Iran was developing nuclear weapons. The question was when they might decide to ‘break out’ into the last stage that they could possibly complete in a relatively short time span. But the fighter pilot, who participated in the Israeli air strike that destroyed Saddam Hussein’s nuclear reactor in 1981, added this statement: ‘Although the Iranians have been working for years on their military progam, Israel had not been sitting on her hands or resting on her laurels. There is no comparison with our capabilities today and that of the nineties’ (when Iran started its nuclear weapons project). The former Air Force commander referred to what he called Israel’s ‘full spectrum of possibilities’. In his view, the IAEA report and the current nuclear dialogue in Israel recalled the days of the Cuban missile crisis in 1962. U.S. President John Kennedy had raised America’s military preparedness on all fronts and imposed a naval blockade of Cuba. Tose measures eventually led to peaceful resolution of the crisis. Ben Eliyahu hoped that a combined operation comprised of international diplomatic pressure and the military threat might now deter Tehran.

Russia & China: These two countries, which have consistently vetoed stiffer UN sanctions on Iran, will now be in the limelight. The case of Russia is particularly vexing. The |Russians have played a key role in Iran’s nuclear development by building the nuclear reactor at Bushehr that went operational last summer. True this is indeed a peaceful nuclear facility but the Russian training of Iranian nuclear scientists has been a major contribution to Tehran’s overall nuclear advancement. There is no separate nuclear physics for peaceful and military purposes although the technology is different. Back in the nineties, before the news of the Russian involvement was made public, a senior IDF intelligence officer revealed to a closed door gathering: ‘Those bastards the Russians are going to build a nuclear reactor for the Ayatollahs! Where do they think all that know-how is going to end up?’ Well the IAEA has now given its official answer.

And after blocking previous diplomatic measures to stop Iran, Russian leaders Putin, Medvedev and Levrov have been preaching to Israel that a military strike on Iran was out of the question. In their view, war was legal only as an act of self-defense or if authorized by the UN Security Council. How conveniently the Russians have forgotten their recent war on tiny Georgia. Moreover a Russian scientist is said to be involved in Iran’s nuclear weapons project. Unless Russia now supports severe sanctions she will be inviting Israel to play Russian roulette for her survival with Iranian Islamist fanatics.

IAEA under new management: What is now clear is that Japan’s Yukiya Amano, the new IAEA director has chosen to disclose all the facts as opposed to his predecessor Mohamed ElBaradei of Egypt. Israeli officials had long suspected ElBaradei, the IAEA boss from 1997 – 2009, of covering up the mounting evidence that Iran was trying to dupe the world. ElBaradei contended there was no credible evidence that Iran was developing nuclear weapons, a position that was seized upon by many states and international companies eager to do business with Tehran. Ironically, ElBaradei was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2005 for his ‘achievements’ at the IAEA. However although Israel has been vindicated for her concern over the years, sometimes at odds even with the American intelligence community, Prime Minister Netanyahu’s has initially instructed his cabinet ministers that ‘mums the word’. Rather than gloat over ‘We told you so’ Israel’s decision makers will now be waiting to see whether U.S. President Barak Obama will succeed in galvanizing international support for his declared goal of more severe sanctions against Iran.

If past experience is anything to go by, Obama’s prospects do not look promising. Russia has already criticized Amano for publishing such a damning report, charging that it will hamper the diplomatic effort. Is there no limit to diplomatic duplicity? Does anyone after Obama’s abysmal failure of engagement with Tehran really believe is interested in a diplomatic solution? What’s to be done? Defense Minister Barak has indicated that future sanctions should include a naval blockade to cripple Iran’s crucial oil industry. However Barak has said he was not optimistic because over the years most countries actually knew about Iran’s nuclear weapons project, although they deigned to turn a blind eye and follow ElBaradei’s lead at the IAEA. Israel will wait and see. If the international community, in the face of the official IAEA report, still dilly-dallies and refuses to get serious about Iran, then the Israeli government will have to decide whether to go it alone, if the rest of the world, including President Barack Obama, is ready to sit back and let Iran acquire nuclear weapons with all that implies for Israel, the Middle East and yes, the rest of the international community.

The bottom line: The saga of Iran’s nuclear weapons program has reached a new plateau – the era of deceit by Iran and self-denial by the international community has hit a dead end. Israel will apparently serve notice that what the international community now decides to do will have a decisive bearing on her stand that Iran must not be permitted to acquire nuclear weapons. If Iran may be only months away from reaching the nuclear point of no return, this may be the last chance for U.S. President Barack Obama to engage the international community for a diplomatic solution. One that is not based on empty rhetoric and wishful thinking but on the hard facts and effective action.

Obama Gave Bunker-Busters To Israel.

A GBU-28 “bunker buster” bomb is unleashed on its target

The Obama administration has supplied GBU-28 bunker-busting bombs to Israel for a probable attack on Iran’s fledgling nuclear program, despite a media-induced perception that the two powers have a bitter relationship.

Newsweek, which broke the story on September 25, also reports that Israel has set up a radar defense system with some of its Arab neighbors to give an early warning of an Iranian missile attack.

The Bush administration rejected Israel’s first request for the bombs back in 2005, along with a Pentagon freeze on all US-Israeli joint defense projects out of concerns that Israel was selling the technology to China.

“In 2007, Bush informed then–prime minister Ehud Olmert that he would order the bunker busters for delivery in 2009 or 2010,” Newsweek reports. “The Israelis wanted them in 2007. Obama finally released the weapons in 2009, according to officials familiar with the secret decision.”

The GBU-28 question surfaced in a November 2009 US cable released by Wikileaks, in which the US embassy in Tel Aviv noted that “the transfer should be handled quietly to avoid any allegations that the USG is helping Israel prepare for a strike against Iran.”

Back in March 2010, the US Navy shipped bunker-buster bombs to its base on the British Island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. Strategists at the time identified it as a sign of an imminent attack on Iran.

It’s a deal: Obama agreed to send the bombs to Israel while publicly antagonistic towards the nation.

While the bombs were being quietly delivered, media focus remained on an apparent falling out between the Obama administration and Israel over the issue of settlement building in the West Bank. During a 2009 White House press event with prominent Jewish leaders, Obama declared, “I’ll always be there for [Israel], but we are going to ask to make hard political choices—settlements, borders,” Newsweek reports.

When asked about the bomb delivery by The UK Guardian, an Israeli official would say only: “The strategic relationship between Obama and Netanyahu is deeper than meets the naked eye.”

However, The UK Guardian notes that Israel has a history of making strongly-worded statements against Iranian support of nuclear power. Back in January 2005, Israel declared to strike the Islamic republic if their development program reached “a point of no return” only to do nothing but drop the phrase when those thresholds were met.

The current set of “red lines” defined by Israeli diplomats have been pushed back repeatedly to a point where a military strike would only occur if Iran broke international nuclear safeguards to build a warhead, the paper writes.

Russia: Iran wants more reactors – Israel News, Ynetnews.

While Western countries are looking to exacerbate sanctions against Iran, Russia, who built the Islamic Republic’s first nuclear power plant in Bushehr, is already working on future cooperation.

Russia’s nuclear chief Sergei Kiriyenko said Thursday that Tehran is interested in purchasing more Russian-built reactors.

Kiriyenko, who heads the Russian Rosatom nuclear agency told a Cabinet session chaired by Prime Minister Vladimir Putin that his agency was working an agreement.

Russin and Iranian officials have discussed building more reactors in the past, but Kiriyenko’s latest statement comes amid Western calls for sanctions on Tehran over the IAEA report released Tuesday that details suspected nuclear weapons-related advances.

‘Serious doubts’

Russia has firmly rejected imposing any new sanctions on Iran and called for dialogue and criticized the report, saying it would reduce hopes for dialogue with Tehran and aimed to scuttle the chances for a diplomatic solution.

“We have serious doubts about the justification for steps to reveal contents of the report to a broad public, primarily because it is precisely now that certain chances for the renewal of dialogue between the ‘sextet’ of international mediators and Tehran have begun to appear,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement following the release of the report on Tuesday.

Ali Bagheri, deputy secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council who was in Moscow to meet with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, said the IAEA report was aimed at derailing Russia’s efforts to find a diplomatic solution.

Bagheri said Tehran does not believe Israel will follow through on threats to carry out a military strike, but warned that Iran would retaliate.

“If the Zionist regime allows this mistake to happen, then this will probably be not just an issue of Israel’s legitimacy but its sheer existence,” he told reporters.

Romney: I will not let Iran get nuclear weapons | Reuters.

(Reuters) – Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney laid down a foreign policy marker on Wednesday, saying that if elected he would not allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons.

An International Atomic Energy Agency report on Tuesday indicated Iran had worked to design nuclear bombs, testing Western powers anew in their standoff with Tehran, which insists it is developing a civilian nuclear program.

Romney, leading some polls of Republican voters in the race to be the party’s 2012 presidential nominee, said he would be prepared to work with U.S. allies on a diplomatic solution but would be prepared to act unilaterally if necessary to stop Iran.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum. That is a Latin phrase, but the ayatollahs will have no trouble understanding its meaning from a Romney administration: If you want peace, prepare for war,” he wrote in an opinion article for The Wall Street Journal.

He said he would start his presidency by imposing a new round of “far tougher” economic sanctions on Iran “together with the world if we can, unilaterally if we must.”

“I will back up American diplomacy with a very real and very credible military option,” he said, by maintaining a regular naval presence in the Mediterranean and Gulf region and by increasing U.S. military assistance to Israel.

“These actions will send an unequivocal signal to Iran that the United States, acting in concert with allies, will never permit Iran to obtain nuclear weapons,” Romney said.

Successive presidents have attempted to stop or slow Iran’s alleged march to a nuclear weapon, but Tehran’s leadership has ignored the pressure.

Romney accused President Barack Obama of relying too heavily on international sanctions that had produced little progress.

“Sanctions clearly failed in their purpose. Iran is on the threshold of becoming a nuclear power,” Romney wrote.

Obama has had a string of national security achievements, such as the killing of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, which may make it difficult for his 2012 opponent to attack him in that area.

Romney said the Obama administration had done little in response to an alleged Iranian plot to kill Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to the United States.

“Only when the ayatollahs no longer have doubts about America’s resolve will they abandon their nuclear ambitions,” he wrote. (Reporting by Steve Holland; Editing by Peter Cooney)

Top Israeli firm: World more likely to accept nuclear Iran than pay high cost of war – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

(Sounds reasonable, but is it disinformation? – JW)

Report by one of Israel’s largest brokerage houses, Clal Finance, says military action against Iran nuclear sites will be deterred by forecast of rising oil prices and damage to global trade.

By Reuters

A leading Israeli investment firm said on Thursday any military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities would exact an economic price too high for the world to accept, and as a result, it would likely acquiesce to a nuclear Iran.

A sharp rise in the price of oil, the costs of war and the damage to global trade would be too great and deter world powers from taking any serious action, said Amir Kahanovich, chief economist at Clal Finance, one of Israel’s largest brokerage houses.

The assessment differed sharply from Israel’s official position that Tehran’s nuclear aspirations are unacceptable and that all options are on the table in preventing a nuclear-armed Iran, which it views as a threat to its existence.

	Israel Air Force F-16 taking off on a mission.
	Photo by: AP

In a report “The Iranian Issue through Economic Eyes”, Kahanovich laid out courses of action — ranging from additional “light sanctions” to military strikes — and told investors the world would likely balk at taking the steps needed to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

Even for Israel the economic cost of a military confrontation that could include retaliatory missile attacks by Tehran and proxies in Gaza and Lebanon would be too high, Kahanovich wrote.

“Unfortunately, it appears that a nuclear Iran is the most reasonable scenario,” he added.

Israel on Wednesday called on the world to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons, after the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, said Tehran appeared to have worked on designing an atomic bomb and may still be conducting secret research.

Speculation about an attack on Iran was fuelled last week when Israel, widely assumed to have the Middle East’s only nuclear arsenal, test-launched a long-range missile and by comments by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Tehran’s nuclear program posed a “direct and heavy” threat.

Iran, which denies it wants nuclear weapons, said the IAEA findings were “unbalanced” and “politically motivated” and vowed to push ahead with its atomic program.

Kahanovich said even a threat of attack on Iran could take an economic toll by raising risk premiums in Israel.

If Iran were backed into a corner it could take action, such as blocking the Strait of Hormuz, causing the price of oil to jump above $250 a barrel, the report said.

And the burden of funding a military confrontation would be too great with so many countries already hurting in the world economic crisis, it added.

Asked about the likelihood of global consensus for tougher sanctions against Iran, Ephraim Kam, a researcher at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies, said China and Russia, which wield veto power in the UN Security Council, would not support such steps and risk economic fallout.

“The most we may see is another round of light sanctions,” he said.