WarSclerotic

DEBKAfile, Political Analysis, Espionage, Terrorism, Security.

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report December 7, 2011, 12:17 PM (GMT+02:00)

Golani commando drill

Tuesday, Dec. 6, the US, France and Britain went into concerted diplomatic action to contain the Syrian crisis before it detonated a regional conflict and deteriorated into civil strife more horrendous and dangerous than the Iraq war. At the same time, Syria and its neighbors have sharply intensified their war preparations, fully expecting diplomacy to fail.  debkafile’s military and Washington sources report their pessimism emanates from the conviction in the region that even if Bashar Assad and his family pretend to cooperate, they will fight to the last Syrian before they actually relax their grip on government.

The US and allies launched their bid for a negotiated end to the Syrian impasse launched last week. A number of Western agents infiltrated Syria from Lebanon and Jordan and entered the embattled cities of Homs, Hama and Idlib in the north, Deir al-Zour and Abu Kemal in the east and Daraa in the south. Their mission was to unite the deeply divided opposition factions and local rebels into a coherent front. The Assad regime chose to turn a blind eye.

Building on that groundwork, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called together Tuesday, Dec. 6, in Geneva the leaders of Syrian opposition groups operating in different European capitals, as well as Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan, and urged them to overcome their differences and back the US-Western peace initiative.

She explained, our sources disclosed, that the administration had resolved to up the diplomatic, economic and military pressure on Bashar Assad. President Barack Obama, Clinton announced, had personally instructed all parts of the American administration to starting referring to his regime as the “Assad gang.”

On Wednesday, Dec. 7, Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Jeffrey Feltman was due in Beirut to set up a base of operations there after coordinating the American step with Israel’s government and military leaders in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv.
As part of the drive for negotiations, Washington and Paris returned their ambassadors to Damascus after an absence of six weeks. Their task is to open direct channels to President Assad and sound him out on their proposal for him to accept an orderly transition of power in order to avert a regional war and save his country from plunging further in to civil strife.

The US and French Presidents Obama and Sarkozy and British Prime Minister David Cameron are of one mind about pursuing diplomacy for ending Assad’s rule even though not the slightest sign of willingness to cooperate has come from the presidential palace in Damascus. Even the Arab League’s proposal to send monitors into Syria met with conditions that were deemed tantamount to a rejection. ,

This initiative has had no effect on the hectic military preparations going forward in the region in anticipation of an imminent outbreak of armed hostilities.

The Syrian armed forces staged a large-scale war game Saturday and Sunday, Dec. 3-4, in the eastern part of the country.
Israel Defense Forces reciprocated by organizing an extensive exercise of the 51st Battalion of the Golan Brigade on the Golan border with Syria Tuesday, Dec. 6.

Both practiced tactics for repelling invading foreign forces and moving the battle into enemy territory.
The Syrian security and military leadership turned out in full to observe the Syrian armed forces’ performance, while on the Israeli side, Defense Minister Ehud Barak and IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz

were in conspicuous attendance – as were TV cameras on both sides of the border.

The Israeli army spokesman uncharacteristically made a point of highlighting a visit Minister for Home Front Defense Matan Vilnai paid Tuesday to the Haifa oil refineries to inspect Israel’s emergency fuel reserve. He announced that a battery of the home-made anti-missile Iron Dome may be posted at the refineries.

Tuesday also saw unusual activity in the Lebanese capital: Hizballah’s Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah emerged from his bunker after three and-a-half years to declare before a Shiite audience assembled for the Ashura ceremonies that Hizballah’s support for Bashar Assad is absolute.
In his capacity has leader of Iran’s Lebanese Shiite surrogate, he pledged that Hizballah would provide the regime in Damascus with all the help it required.

Malfunction likely put US drone in Irani… JPost – International.

    WASHINGTON – The unmanned US drone Iran said on Sunday it had captured was programmed to automatically return to base even if its data link was lost, one key reason that US officials say the drone likely malfunctioned and was not downed by Iranian electronic warfare.

US officials have been tight-lipped about Iranian claims that its military downed an RQ-170 unmanned spy plane, a radar-evading, wedge-shaped aircraft dubbed “the Beast of Kandahar” after its initial sighting in southern Afghanistan.

The US-led NATO mission in Afghanistan said the Iranians might be referring to an unarmed reconnaissance aircraft that disappeared on a flight in western Afghanistan late last week. But they declined to say what type of drone was involved.

A US government source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the plane was on a CIA mission. The CIA and Pentagon both declined to comment on the issue.

The incident came at a time of rising tensions between Iran and the West over Tehran’s nuclear program. The United States and other Western nations tightened sanctions on Iran last week and Britain withdrew its diplomatic staff from Tehran after hard-line youths stormed two diplomatic compounds.

The United States has not ruled out military action against Iran’s nuclear facilities if diplomacy fails to resolve a dispute over the program, which Washington believes is aimed at developing atomic weapons.

The RQ-170 Sentinel, built by Lockheed Martin , was first acknowledged by the US Air Force in December 2009. It has a full-motion video sensor that was used this year by U.S. intelligence to monitor al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan ahead of the raid that killed him.

Former and current military officials familiar with the Sentinel said they were skeptical about Iranian media reports that Iran’s military brought down one of the drones in eastern Iran, especially since Tehran has not released any pictures of the plane.

Possible “catastrophic” malfunction

The aircraft is flown remotely by pilots based in the United States, but is also programmed to autonomously fly back to the base it departed from if its data link with US-based pilots is lost, according to defense analyst Loren Thompson, who is a consultant for Lockheed and other companies.

Other unmanned aircraft have a similar capability, including General Atomics’ Predator drone, industry sources said.

The fact that the plane did not return to its base suggests a “catastrophic” technical malfunction, agreed one industry executive familiar with the operation and programming of unmanned aerial vehicles.

US officials say they always worry about the possibility of sensitive military technologies falling into the hands of other countries or terrorist groups, one reason US planes quickly destroyed a stealthy helicopter that was damaged during the bin Laden raid in Pakistan.

Many classified weapons systems have self-destruction capabilities that can be activated if they fall into enemy hands but it was not immediately clear if that was the case this time.

In this case, the design of the plane and the fact that it had special coatings that made it nearly invisible to radar were already well documented. If it survived a crash, all on-board computer equipment was heavily encrypted.

Lockheed confirmed that it makes the RQ-170 drone, which came out of its secretive Skunk Works facility in southern California, but referred all questions about the current incident to the Air Force.

Thompson and several current and former defense officials said they doubted Iranian claims to have shot the aircraft down because of its stealthy features and ability to operate at relatively high altitudes.

Iran was also unlikely to have jammed its flight controls because that system is highly encrypted and uses a direct uplink to a US satellite, they said.

“The US Air Force has experienced declining attrition rates with most of its unmanned aircraft. However this is a relatively new aircraft and there aren’t many in the fleet, which means that malfunctions and mistakes are more likely to occur,” Thompson said.

One former defense official familiar with the RQ-170 and other unmanned aircraft said he “absolutely” agreed that the aircraft was not lost due to any action by Iran.

Exact details about the drone remain classified but industry insiders say the plane flies at around 50,000 feet and may have a wing span of up to 90 feet. Its shape harkens back to the batwing design of the radar-evading B-2 bomber.

Wary US uncertain of Israel’s Ir… JPost – Iranian Threat – News.

    WASHINGTON – The Obama administration does not know Israel’s intentions regarding potential military action against Iran, and the uncertainty is stoking concern in Washington, where the preferred course for now is sanctions and diplomatic pressure.

Although Israel remains one of the United States’ closest allies and the two countries’ officials are in regular contact, US officials have a “sense of opacity” regarding what might prompt an Israeli military strike on Iranian nuclear sites, and about when such an attack might occur, according to a senior US national security official.

Two key US senators acknowledged on Tuesday that there are gaps in US knowledge about Israeli leaders’ thinking and intentions.

“I don’t think the administration knows what Israel is going to do. I’m not sure Israel knows what Israel is going to do … That’s why they want to keep the other guys guessing. Keep the bad guys guessing,” said Democratic Senator Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Senator John McCain, the senior Republican on the committee, echoed Levin’s view: “I’m sure (administration officials) don’t know what the Israelis are going to do. They didn’t know when the Israelis hit the reactor in Syria. But the Israelis usually know what we’re going to do.”

In one way, the ambiguity is an advantage for the United States, because Washington could claim it had no foreknowledge of any Israeli attack, which would almost certainly increase anti-American sentiment among many Muslims in the Middle East.

Israeli leaders have not suggested an attack on Iran’s suspected nuclear weapons sites is imminent. But neither have they – or US President Barack Obama, for that matter – ruled it out.

Israel, widely believed to have the only nuclear arsenal in the Middle East, says a nuclear-armed Iran would threaten its existence. Iran says its nuclear program is entirely peaceful and denies Western accusations it is seeking an atomic bomb.

Panetta: miltary action could have unintended consequences

The uncertainty comes amid extraordinarily sharp public warnings in the last few weeks by US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta about the potential “unintended consequences” of military action against Iran.

Panetta told a forum in Washington last week that an attack on Iran would risk “an escalation” that could “consume the Middle East in confrontation and conflict that we would regret.”

It could disrupt the fragile economies of the United States and Europe, spark a popular backlash in Iran bolstering its rulers and put US forces in the region in the firing line, he said. “The United States would obviously be blamed and we could possibly be the target of retaliation from Iran, striking our ships, striking our military bases,” Panetta said.

General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the US military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, told Reuters in an interview he did not know whether the Jewish state would give the United States notice ahead of time if it decided to act.

An Israeli government official said, “Israel and the United States are in close and continuous communication on the threat posed to world security by the Iranian nuclear program. We appreciate President Obama’s determination to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.” The official declined to comment further.

At the same time, however, Obama’s relations with Israeli leaders have not been particularly warm. He has not visited the country as president.

A former US government official said: “There are plenty of instances when the Israelis have undertaken action without informing the United States first. So not always should we assume a level of coordination (between Washington and Israel) in advance on all issues.”

“Israel has history of conducting operations without notice”

Bruce Riedel, a former senior CIA expert on the Middle East who has advised Obama, said, “Israel has a long history of conducting military operations from Baghdad to Tunis without giving Washington advance notice.”

Riedel said the White House wants to send Israel a strong message that the United States does not expect to be blindsided by its ally. “Obama wants Bibi to understand unequivocally he does not want a repeat performance in Iran,” he said, referring to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by his nickname.

The Obama administration suspects that Israeli leaders have marked out for themselves certain “red lines” related to Iranian nuclear progress which could trigger Israeli military action if they are crossed, one US official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

But Obama administration policymakers are plagued by a “sense of opacity” in their understanding of where the Israeli red lines are drawn, the official added.

Two other US officials, also speaking on condition they not be named, said Washington is deeply concerned Israel, unconvinced sanctions and diplomatic pressure will halt Iran’s nuclear program, could eventually decide to take action on its own.

By the same token, one of the US officials said, speeches and statements by Israeli leaders, like an address by Netanyahu on Sunday in which he talked about making “the right decision at the right moment” even if allies object, could be politically motivated.

Under this interpretation, Netanyahu and other Israeli officials may be playing to domestic audiences or trying to put pressure on the international community to do more on Iran.

Clinton Meets Syria Opposition in Geneva as U.S. Envoy Sent Back – Businessweek.

By Nicole Gaouette

Dec. 7 (Bloomberg) — Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met for almost two hours with Syrians seeking to end the rule of President Bashar al-Assad, a sign of U.S. determination to see Assad’s regime end.

Clinton met yesterday with members of the Syrian National Council, a coalition of opposition groups, shortly after the State Department announced it was sending Ambassador Robert Ford back there. Ford was pulled out on Oct. 24 due to fears for his safety.

“His return demonstrates our continued solidarity with the Syrian people and the value we place on Ford’s efforts to engage Syrians on their efforts to achieve a peaceful and democratic transition,” White House spokesman Jay Carney said in a statement yesterday. The U.S. expects the Syrian government to fulfill its obligation to protect diplomatic personnel, he added.

Clinton said she is listening to Syrian opposition plans to oust the Assad regime and shift their country to democracy. She urged them to protect universal rights, the rule of law and minorities. She also urged the different opposition groups in the coalition to work together.

“If Syrians unite, they together can succeed in moving their country to that better future,” Clinton said. “We are well aware that there is a lot of hard work to be done. There are many Syrians in exile. We are committed to helping their country make this transition.”

Legitimate Opposition

A State Department official present at the meeting said the U.S. considers the council to be a leading and legitimate representative of Syrians seeking a peaceful, democratic transition. The official wasn’t authorized to speak on the record. Clinton spent almost two hours with the group, the official said.

The seven coalition representatives at the meeting told Clinton that they are seeking a peaceful, orderly transition in which Assad, his family and key regime figures would leave Syria after transferring power to a provisional government with limited authority leading to elections, the official said. They told Clinton the end result would be a Syrian-designed democracy, one in which citizenship would transcend sect or gender, he said.

They made no reference to holding Assad or other leaders accountable or to methods of reconciling social, ethnic or political divisions created by the violence that has wracked Syria since protests began in March, according to the official.

Seeking Assad’s Exit

Clinton expressed hope that Assad would see merit in leaving and commended the council plan as measured, deliberate and devoid of revenge, the official said.

While the U.S. is in touch with other opposition groups, the official said, the administration has been impressed with the progress this council has made unifying the opposition within and outside Syria.

One member of the ethnically and religiously diverse group suggested the U.S. formally recognize the council, as it did the National Transition Council in Libya, which now temporarily governs that country. Clinton responded by saying that, for now, they should focus on outreach to minorities, the official said.

The regime is playing “divide and conquer” with minority communities in Syria, the official said, pitting one against the other and suggesting they have more to fear if another sect comes to power than if the Assad regime stays.

Minority Outreach

The group said minority outreach would be their top priority, to which they would dedicate significant resources. They will also focus on detailed planning and diplomacy, the official said.

They asked Clinton to place a very high priority on addressing the killings in Syria and spoke of the need to protect civilians in Homs and Hama, scenes of some of the worst violence. They told Clinton of reports that security forces were using rape as a weapon against men and women and were targeting children.

The fastest way to create “safety zones” for these civilians would be if Syria would approve the Arab League request to send more than 500 observers to the country, the group told Clinton.

The council believes that, if they can get observers on the ground, chances are the regime won’t do its worst, they told Clinton, according to the official.

Second Meeting

Clinton had met Syrian opposition figures once previously, in August, shortly before the U.S. began explicitly calling for Assad to step down.

All seven of the representatives are exiles. Many opposition figures inside Syria are afraid to leave because they may not be allowed to return.

Ford was due to arrive back in Syria early today. He was recalled to Washington from Syria in October, a month after a violent mob of government supporters hurled concrete blocks at his car and attacked it with iron bars while Ford visited an opposition lawyer.

“He will continue the work he was doing previously; namely, delivering the United States’ message to the people of Syria; providing reliable reporting on the situation on the ground; and engaging with the full spectrum of Syrian society on how to end the bloodshed and achieve a peaceful political transition,” State Department spokesman Mark Toner said in a statement in Washington.

–With assistance from Kate Andersen Brower in Washington. Editors: Terry Atlas, Jim Rubin.

To contact the reporter on this story: Nicole Gaouette in Geneva at ngaouette@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Mark Silva at msilva34@bloomberg.net

Iranians begin bank runs and stockpiling as threat increases for imminent attack – National Finance Examiner | Examiner.com.

On December 6th, the Iranian government and Revolutionary Guard began deploying forces on the belief that an attack by the West, Israel, or another coalition is imminent.  In response to these moves, Iranian citizens are beginning to pull their money out of banks, and stockpiling supplies in lieu of the increased threat of war.

“Many foreigners are leaving Iran … I suspect that there will be military action … we will become another Iraq,” said architect Mahsa Sedri, 35. “Obviously something is going on … otherwise the foreigners would not leave Iran.”

“We are going to be attacked … I sense it … I am pulling out my money from the bank to have cash in hand in case of an attack,” said government employee Hassan Vosughi. “I and all my friends have stockpiled goods at home.” – Ynet

A war, or even a tactical strike on Iranian targets or nuclear facilities could have devastating consequences to Europe, Japan, and even the United States as the potential for a new oil crisis would increase drastically.  Simple projections show that the price of crude could skyrocket to $250 a barrel overnight, with a complete shutdown if the Straits of Hormuz are blocked.  These disruptions in oil delivery would also matriculate into food costs and other industries that require large amounts of energy.

Advertisement

Perhaps this is why Americans are also focussing on Disaster Preparedness, and an increase in gun purchases since Black Friday.  Besides war with Iran, there is an overall growing sense of a systematic breakdown in the global economic system, and Americans are preparing for a different type of crisis than the Iranians.

Actions today by the Iranian government and Iranian peoples show a growing tension that an attack, or outright war in the Middle East is imminent.  Bank runs by government employees, coupled with a growing stockpiling of food are sure signs that the citizenry is preparing for a long term campaign, not simply a tactical strike on nuclear targets.

Feature: Amid reports of impending strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, Israeli Air Force brandishes spy drones.

Xinhuanet

PALMACHIM AIR BASE, Israel, Dec. 6 (Xinhua) — In an unusual move, the Israeli Air Force (IAF) on Monday invited media for a briefing on its secret drone program, allowing a rare glimpse of one squadron that deploys some of the most sophisticated surveillance technology available.

The tour of the seaside air base, south of Tel Aviv, comes against the backdrop of local media reports in recent weeks that Israel is poised to strike Iran’s nuclear sites.

Major Gil, deputy commander of the 200th Squadron, flatly declined to discuss Iran specifically.

“All I can say is that we can get anywhere we want and need to, ” he told reporters who assembled at the squadron’s headquarters.

Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), commonly referred to as drones, officially entered service with the IAF in 1971, making Israel’s military the world’s first operator of pilotless aircraft for gathering real-time battlefield intelligence.

Since then, the IAF’s drones, all of them locally produced, have evolved into a refined fleet of long-range surveillance platforms that are ever-present in the skies over Israel’s borders.

Though outfitted with sophisticated hardware ranging from smart bombs to satellites, the Israeli military presently relies on no technology more heavily than the drones of the 200th Squadron.

Gil said that drones have been shouldering the bulk of the IAF’ s reconnaissance missions over the past decade, logging more flight hours annually than all of its manned aircraft combined.

The 200th Squadron’s pilots, whose full names cannot be divulged due to censorship regulations, would only provide scarce details of the craft they guide from innocuous, windowless, metal sheds. The operators fly the Heron 1, a drone with a cruising altitude of 30,000 feet that can stay airborne for up to 45 hours. Another squadron based here operates the Hermes 450, a medium- altitude aircraft.

Last February, the IAF inaugurated its flagship drone, the Heron TP II. Developed by Israel Aerospace Industries, the all- weather TP II can reach 45,000 feet high, carry a maximum payload of 1 ton, and remain aloft for 36 hours.

The number of IAF drone squadrons, the range of the aircraft and most other technical specifics are closely guarded secrets.

If Israel were to attack Iran’s suspected nuclear facilities, the drones at Palmachim, some of whom are said to be equipped with stealth technology, would be sent well ahead of bomber pilots, transmitting back images of the designated target areas, and would subsequently assess the damage caused by the strike.

While such plans are still confined to the drawing board, remotely controlled drone aircraft are heavily used by the Israeli army in daily operations.

Gil said that his drones’ main mission is to provide support to ground troops by relaying bird’s-eye views of a combat zone to field commanders.

Mission specialists said there is no ground encounter without a UAV flying overhead. Gil also briefly described how drones often ” paint” targets for strikes by manned aircraft.

In the 2006 Lebanon war, for instance, UAVs flying from Palmachim scoured the ravines and villages in southern Lebanon, constituting a critical element in the IAF’s efforts to destroy Hezbollah’s rocket launchers and to evacuate injured troops.

Outfitted with cameras that can transmit high-resolution images in total darkness, drones have also proved indispensable in the Israeli military’s operations against Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip in recent years. They are regularly tasked with overflying the coastal territory to hunt for rocket and mortar launchers and lead helicopter gunships to the locations of hidden arms caches, and they are also reportedly involved in the periodic targeted killings of militants.

Gil said that although his pilots do not press the trigger to releases a bomb over a target, they feel “an immense moral and professional responsibility” for a raid’s outcome. The drones’ operators said they are convinced that the technology they use significantly reduces collateral damage, noting that the majority of strikes on militant strongholds in Gaza take place in areas heavy populated by civilians.

Like all the drone operators here, many of whom began their military service in the IAF’s prestigious flight academy, Gil wears flight overalls with sewed-on squadron patches.

He declined to comment on the unconfirmed reports that Israel also deploys missile-launching drones and kamikaze craft that explode upon impact. But independent experts said Israel has used such hardware on numerous occasions, including for striking targets far beyond its borders.

Israel, a powerhouse of UAV technology, has already sold drones to some 30 militaries worldwide, many of whom dot the skies over Afghanistan, Iraq and other U.S.-led operational theaters.

On Sunday, Iran claimed to have shot down an advanced American RQ-170 spy drone in an eastern province. Western officials said the craft had been flying a reconnaissance mission over western Afghanistan and wrongly flew across the border into Iran after its operators lost contact.

Three weeks ago, a huge explosion that destroyed a major missile-testing site near Tehran was attributed to a weapon possibly fired from a drone loitering overhead. Israeli and U.S. intelligence officials said the incident, in which the chief of Iran’s missile program was killed, was a major setback for the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program.

Iran’s state-run media dismissed the reports of suspected sabotage, declaring the explosion an accident.

While drone pilots are spared the dangers of a real battlefield, their workload remains among the heaviest in the IAF. Gil said the fact is unlikely to change in the near future.

“I can’t tell you how many drones we operate, but I can say that we don’t have enough of them,” he said.

William Galston: What Israelis Hear When Obama Officials Talk About Iran | The New Republic.

Over the weekend I had the privilege of sitting in on the 8th annual Saban Forum, a high-level, Brookings-sponsored dialogue between Israeli and American officials (current and former) along with journalists, intellectuals, and representatives from other countries in the Middle East. The participants discussed many significant topics, including the Arab Spring and its aftermath, the prospects for renewed peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, and the state of the relationship between the United States and Israel.

By far the gravest issue, though, was how to proceed in the face of a looming Iranian nuclear threat. I came away from the two days with a dark and disturbing conclusion: There is a gulf between Israel and the United States that could have momentous consequences in 2012. When American officials declare that all options are on the table, most Israelis do not believe them. They have concluded, rather, that when the crunch comes (and everyone thinks it will), the United States will shy away from military force and reconfigure its policy to live with a nuclear-armed Iran. This is an outcome that no Israeli government can tolerate. For Israel, the Palestinian issue is an identity question: What kind of country will Israel be and what kind of life will Israelis lead? But the Iranian issue is an existential question: Will Israel and Israelis survive?

Most of the Forum was conducted under “Chatham House rules,” which prohibit naming or identifying participants. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta’s opening address was on the record, however. Much of the press coverage has focused on peace talks and on Panetta’s characteristically salty advice: “Just get to the damn table.” But from the Israeli perspective, the real news lay elsewhere.

In his opening remarks, the Secretary of Defense restated President Obama’s declared position on Iran’s nuclear ambitions that “we have not taken any option off the table.” During the question period, however, he offered a long list of reservations against the military option: Some of the targets are very difficult to get at, and even a successful attack would set back the Iranian program by no more than two years. The Iranian regime, now approaching pariah status, would be able to mobilize renewed support at home and abroad. U.S. interests in the Middle East would be subject to retaliation. The fragile economies of the United States and Europe would be gravely disrupted. And worst of all, the ensuing conflagration could “consume the Middle East in a confrontation and a conflict that we would regret.” Whatever Panetta’s intention, Israelis heard those remarks as a declaration of his opposition to the use of force against Iran, even if that country was on the verge of producing nuclear weapons. (The administration’s reluctance to go along with sanctions against the Central Bank of Iran—a matter Israelis raised repeatedly during the meeting—only adds to its credibility problem.)

During a break, I button-holed a knowledgeable, highly respected former Israeli official and asked whether he thought that the military option was still on the table for the United States. No, he replied, the United States had shifted to a containment strategy two years ago. Another former official, equally knowledgeable and respected, shook his head in dissent. No, he said, it was one year ago. While I didn’t meet all the Israelis in attendance, I talked with quite a few and didn’t encounter a differing view. And it was not a hard-line group: Supporters of Prime Minister Netanyahu were in a distinct minority in the Israeli delegation, a fact that occasioned humor on both the Israeli and American sides.

Secretary Panetta’s speech was far from the only source of Israeli concern. Just last week, General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, gave a remarkably frank interview. He said that the United States was convinced that sanctions and diplomatic pressure was the right path to take on Iran, along with “the stated intent not to take any options off the table.” But, he continued, “I’m not sure the Israelis share our assessment of that. And because they don’t and because to them this is an existential threat … it’s fair to say that our expectations are different right now.”

In December of 2009, Brookings’ Saban Center for Middle East Policy organized a day-long crisis simulation of an Israeli strike on the Iranian nuclear program. (Full disclosure: I was part of the U.S. government team.) At the outset, some participants protested against what they saw as an improbable hypothesis underlying the exercise—namely, that the Israelis would proceed without informing the United States in advance. On the basis of what I heard this weekend, they should consider changing their minds. The more Israel believes that giving the United States advance warning of a strike would trigger American demands to call it off, the less likely it is to provide that warning. When General Dempsey was asked whether he thought Israel would notify the United States in advance of a strike on Iran, he bluntly responded, “I don’t know.”

Of course, Israel’s beliefs about American intentions toward Iran may well be mistaken.  But it is a fact that they hold those beliefs and will continue to do so unless the Obama administration can persuade them that the use of military force remains a live option.

On November 22 at Brookings, National Security Advisor Tom Donilon delivered a speech designed in part to do just that. Toward the end of a comprehensive assessment of multilateral efforts to impede Iran’s nuclear program, Donilon declared that “Even as the door to diplomacy remains open, we’ll take no option off the table.” And he continued, “Our focus and purpose are clear: Pressure is a means, not an end, and our policy is firm.  We are determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and all that flows from that.”

I asked an Israeli journalist what he made of Donilon’s speech. “Very clear,” he replied, “but not convincing.” As far as I can tell, his judgment echoed the vast majority of Israel’s governing class. I do not claim to understand the intricacies of the relationship between the United States and Israel, and I know nothing about the ongoing private conversations between their senior officials. But one thing is clear: There is a chasm between the message U.S. officials say they’re sending and the message Israeli officials say they’re receiving. And if the two countries continue not to understand each other, the results could be catastrophic.

William Galston is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a contributing editor at The New Republic