WarSclerotic

Syrian Uprising Supported by New Libyan Regime.

US missiles ‘hit Iranian village’ | Mail Online.

(Nobody else is reporting this yet.  It may well be false. – JW)

Two American missiles struck a village in south-west Iran early today.

The news was given in a report by the country’s Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA).

IRNA had said yesterday that three people were injured when an earlier US missile struck an oil depot in Abadan.

The state-run news agency also said British and American jets had entered Iranian airspace several times.

The two rockets hit Manyuhi village near the border with Iraq’s Al-Faw Peninsula, an Iranian military commander told IRNA.

He gave no details of casualties or damage.

“In the border city of Arvand-Kenar, the invading American and British airplanes violated the airspace of the Islamic Republic of Iran three times,” the commander said.

“In two cases, two rockets… hit the Manyuhi village.”

The governor of Abadan told IRNA that three people, including a guard at the oil depot, had been released from hospital after receiving treatment.

Iran has strongly condemned the US-led military assault on Iraq.

Iran to show naval might in key oil-shipping area | Reuters.

(Reuters) – Iran will on Saturday start naval exercises in a region crucial for global oil supplies, state TV said, raising concern about a possible closure of the world’s No. 1 shipping route for crude in the case of military conflict between Tehran and the West.

Iran aims to flaunt its military might during the 10-day drill, dubbed “Velayat-e 90,” at a time of heightened Iranian-Western tension over Tehran’s nuclear programme that potentially could boil over into wider hostilities in the Middle East.

“The Velayat-e 90 naval manoeuvres will start on Saturday and will be held in a 2,000-square km span of sea,” Iranian navy commander Habibollah Sayyari told state television. “Velayat” is Persian for “supremacy.”

“The drill will display Iran’s defensive and deterrent power as well as relaying a message of peace and friendship in the Strait of Hormuz, the Sea of Oman and the free waters of the Indian Ocean,” said Sayyari.

Echoing the stance of others in Iran’s factionalised leadership, Sayyari said Iranian armed forces had the ability to shut the strategic strait through which 40 percent of the global oil supply flows, if ever the need arose.

“Iran’s military and Revolutionary Guards can close the Strait of Hormuz. But such a decision should be made by top establishment leaders,” he said.

Some analysts and diplomats believe the Islamic Republic could try to block the strait in the event of any war with the West over suspicions it is seeking atom bombs. Iran’s arch-foes Israel and the United States have not ruled out military action if diplomacy and sanctions fail to rein in Iran’s nuclear work.

Iran says it wants nuclear energy only for peaceful ends.

Crude prices briefly spiked on December 13 on media reports that Iran might close the Strait of Hormuz, only to drop more than 4 percent the next day on revived euro zone debt crisis worries.

The Iranian Foreign Ministry last week denied rumours about Tehran planning to seal off the strait but warned that the waterway could be threatened if the currently surge in nuclear tension ever escalated into war.

Iran has said in the past said that it would respond to any attack by targeting U.S. interests in the region and Israel, as well as closing the strait, the only access channel for eight U.S.-aligned, Gulf Arab states to foreign markets.

OIL-RELIANT ECONOMY

Military experts say Iran’s armed forces could not match U.S. military technology but could still cause havoc in shipping lanes, particularly using small craft for hit-and-run attacks.

Iran often announces advances in its military capabilities and tests weaponry in an apparent attempt to show its readiness for any strikes by Israel or the United States.

Some analysts doubt Iran would close the Strait of Hormuz if attacked. “Iran’s economy is reliant on petrodollars … Closure of the waterway will harm Iran more than others,” said an analyst who asked not to be named.

Oil earnings still comprise up to 60 percent of Iranian state income and the sanctions have put off an increasing number of international companies from doing business in Iran. Tehran publicly denies its economy suffers from sanctions.

The United States, Britain and Canada announced new measures against Iran’s energy and financial sectors last month and the European Union is considering a ban – already in place in the United States – on imports of Iranian oil.

“More sanctions on Iran’s oil industry means a crippled economy for the country,” said the analyst.

To ease international pressure, Iran has invited a team of senior U.N. nuclear officials to visit the Islamic state in January to discuss global concerns about the country’s nuclear aspirations. Such visits in the past by senior IAEA officials have failed to resolve the long-running nuclear row.

Tehran has been hit by U.N., U.S. and European sanctions since 2006 for refusing to halt its sensitive nuclear work.

(Writing by Parisa Hafezi and Hashem Kalantari; Editing by Mark Heinrich)

Israel Hayom.

Intelligence recently provided to the U.S. by Israel regarding developments in Iran, and threats of the use of force by the Israel Defense Forces against Tehran’s nuclear program, played a central role in the uptick of comments by senior U.S. defense officials against Iran this week.

Furthermore, the assessment in Israel is that several other U.S. allies in the Middle East have made it clear to Washington that if it does not seriously intend to stop Tehran’s nuclear march, these countries would have to conduct a reassessment of their strategic positions – a reassessment not necessarily in Washington’s favor.

The Israeli intelligence, as well as the messages by U.S. allies in the Middle East, apparently impacted U.S. defense officials this week.

Get the Israel Hayom newsletter sent to your mailbox!

Speaking in quick succession, both U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Chief of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey told U.S. media outlets that Iran’s drive for nuclear weapons would be a “red line” and that a military option against Iran “is executable.”

Speaking on CBS, Panetta said Iran could develop its first nuclear weapon within one year.

A Pentagon spokesman later clarified Panetta was speaking “hypothetically” and that the defense secretary was not suggesting there was new intelligence pointing to any secret nuclear facilities in Iran. In the interview, Panetta also refused to rule out military action to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons but unlike previous statements, he made no mention of the potential risks associated with a strike that he has warned of repeatedly.

“If they proceed and we get intelligence that they’re proceeding in developing a nuclear weapon, then we will take whatever steps are necessary to stop it,” Panetta said.

Panetta’s remarks stand in stark contrast to comments he made two weeks ago when, speaking at the Saban Forum, the U.S. defense secretary said he was more concerned about the potential backlash of an Israeli military strike against Iran.

“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 … there are economic consequences to that attack – severe economic consequences that could impact a very fragile economy in Europe and a fragile economy here in the United States,” Panetta said.

Meanwhile, Defense Minister Ehud Barak said, “The change in American statements on Iran are a very important development.”

Speaking on Israel Radio on Thursday morning, several days after returning from a series of meetings with top Obama administration officials, Barak said that “If any of my meetings with American officials contributed to this, then I’m happy about it. It is also important that the Iranians hear this, because it shows them that there are consequences,” Barak told Israel Radio.

Barak met with President Barack Obama just before the latter’s speech to the Union of Reform Judaism biennial last week.

“The Iranians are working to provide themselves with immunity against a military intervention. It is good that neither us, the Americans, as well as others, are working to deny them this immunity. It is good that the Iranians know that Israel and America will not allow them to get nuclear weapons,” Barak added.

On Wednesday, U.S. Chief of Staff Martin E. Dempsey meanwhile told CNN in an interview that he is formulating plans for a U.S. military attack on Iran, which would be launched should U.S. President Barack Obama decide to stop Tehran’s drive for nuclear weapons.

“My biggest worry is [the Iranians] will miscalculate our resolve,” Dempsey said during the interview.

The U.S. general confirmed that despite the recent loss of a U.S. drone in Iran – which was reported to have been used for surveillance in the country — U.S. spying efforts there have not ceased.

“If you are asking ‘are we gathering intelligence against Iran in a variety of means?’ the answer is of course,” Dempsey told CNN. “It would be rather imprudent of us not to try to understand what a nation who has declared itself to be an adversary of the United States is doing.”

In an angry response to the recent U.S. statements, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Wednesday, “They don’t want to let Iran flourish. They don’t want us to take advantage of all the opportunities that lie before us. All of our enemies’ moves are aimed at preventing development and progress in Iran.”

In the meantime, the U.S. is intensifying efforts at the U.N. Security Council to put pressure on Iran.

U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice urged the council to redouble efforts to implement sanctions against Iran, saying this “will show Iran there is a price to pay for its deception.”

She said stepped-up implementation can also slow down Iran’s nuclear program and buy time to resolve the Iranian nuclear crisis through diplomatic means.

The U.S. ambassador pointed to a report last month by the International Atomic Energy Agency which concluded that some alleged clandestine work by Iran could not be used for any other purpose than making nuclear arms.

“No one, after reading the November report, can reasonably believe Iran’s contention that its continuing uranium enrichment program is for peaceful purposes only,” she said, adding that the IAEA board’s censure of Iran showed that its “illicit nuclear activities are unacceptable.”

Rice called on the Security Council committee monitoring sanctions against Iran and its panel of experts to act “robustly” in implementing sanctions and investigating violations.

“In the face of Iran’s deception and intransigence, the international community must speak with one voice, making clear that Iranian actions jeopardize international peace and security and will only further isolate the regime,” she said.

Meanwhile, senior IAEA officials may visit Iran for talks over its nuclear program, the U.N. nuclear watchdog said on Wednesday, a day after an Iranian envoy suggested Tehran would be ready to discuss international concerns and remove “ambiguities” about its atomic activities.

Iran’s latest overture to the Vienna-based agency, which has long urged Tehran to address disputes about its nuclear agenda, coincides with the sharpening of international sanctions imposed on the Islamic Republic over its nuclear work.

“We’re working on a possible visit,” Gill Tudor, spokeswoman for the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said in an email response to a question. She gave no further details.

Iran’s ambassador to the IAEA on Tuesday told Reuters that Tehran had renewed its invitation — first issued in October — for a senior agency team to travel to the Islamic Republic.

Ali Asghar Soltanieh said the purpose would be “to work to remove any ambiguities with the aim of resolving the issues and to conclude and stop this endless process.”

Iran initially invited Herman Nackaerts, IAEA deputy director general and head of nuclear safeguards inspections worldwide, in October. But Iran’s angry reaction to the agency report the following month threw those plans into doubt.

Western diplomats tend to see such invitations as attempts by Iran, a major oil producer, to buy time and ease international pressure without heeding U.N. demands to curb activity that could be put to making atomic bombs and be transparent about its program to ease misgivings about it.

Israel’s Barak boosts Obama amid U.S. threats on Iran | Reuters.

(Reuters) – Israel’s defense minister extolled what he called Barack Obama’s resolve and risk-taking on Thursday, remarks likely to help the president’s re-election bid after the Pentagon beefed up warnings to Iran over its nuclear program.

The comments by Ehud Barak, lone centrist in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s conservative coalition, also appeared to dampen speculation the Israelis could defy U.S. remonstrations by attacking their arch-foe’s nuclear facilities unilaterally.

In back-to-back interviews this week, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and his top military officer, General Martin Dempsey, made unusually strong statements about U.S. willingness to use force to deny Iran the means of developing an atom bomb.

“The change of emphasis … is a very important development, because it makes clear a fact that was already known to us from closed-door (discussions),” Barak told Israel Radio. “It makes clear to Iran that it faces a real dilemma.”

Panetta said on Monday the secretive Iranian nuclear program — which the Islamic Republic says is purely peaceful — could potentially yield a bomb within a year, a move that would be a “red line for us and … obviously, for the Israelis.”

“If we have to do it, we will deal with it,” Panetta said on CBS television. Asked whether he meant military steps, he replied: “There are no options off the table.” [nL1E7NKCVS]

The hazy diplomatic code leaving open the possibility of preemptive air strikes, and often echoed by Israel, was honed on Tuesday by Dempsey, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff.

“We are examining a range of options,” he told CNN. “I am satisfied that the options that we are developing are evolving to a point that they would be executable if necessary.”

Barak sidestepped a question on whether Obama, whose testy ties with Netanyahu have not gone over well with pro-Israel voters in the United States, might see talking tough on Iran as a means toward securing a second term in the White House.

ASK BIN LADEN

But the defense minister, a former Israeli premier, advised against underestimating Obama and “the internal consistency that stems from being a leader … with the circumspection that comes from seeing, above, only the heavens and one’s own conscience.”

Citing Obama’s ideologically tinged 2009 speeches in Cairo and on the occasion of winning the Nobel Peace Prize, and this month’s U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, Barak said: “Ultimately you cannot deny he has a certain degree of consistency.”

“You may not like what he does (but) you discern a man who is capable and ready to undertake the fiercest of political risks to his survival, in order to make good on what he believes in,” said Barak, who met Obama in Washington last week.

“We are asked, sometimes, whether Obama is really a soft appeaser. To that, I say: ‘Go ask Osama bin Laden.'”

U.S. special forces killed the long elusive al Qaeda leader in a lightning raid on his Pakistan hideout last May.

Reputed to have the region’s sole nuclear arsenal, Israel sees an existential menace in Iran’s uranium enrichment, ballistic missile projects and vitriol against the Jewish state.

The Obama administration, which is spearheading international efforts to rein in Tehran through sanctions, has come out against the possibility of its main Middle East ally lashing out alone against the Iranians because of the risk of reprisals against U.S. Gulf assets and shocks to energy markets.

“My biggest worry is they (Iran) will miscalculate our resolve,” Dempsey said on CNN. “Any miscalculation could mean that we are drawn into conflict, and that would be a tragedy for the region and the world.

“We are trying to establish some confidence on the part of the Israelis that we recognize their concerns and are collaborating with them on addressing them,” added Dempsey, who has said there was no guarantee Israel would inform Washington in advance about any sneak attack on Iran.

Barak said Israeli-U.S. defense coordination was “absolutely fine” and played down tension between Obama and Netanyahu.

“They don’t have to love each other. It’s enough that they respect and understand that no one works as if they were alone, in a bubble.”

(Writing by Dan Williams)

Blog: Obama’s 2012 Iran Gambit?.

Neil Snyder

Israel’s Defense Minister praises Obama’s resolve, denies tensions with Netanyahu – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

Amid U.S. threats on Iran, Defense Minister says Israeli-U.S. defense coordination ‘absolutely fine,’ plays down tension between U.S president and Netanyahu.

By Reuters

Israel’s defense minister extolled what he called Barack Obama’s resolve and risk-taking on Thursday, remarks likely to help the U.S. president’s re-election bid after the Pentagon beefed up warnings to Iran over its nuclear program.

The comments by Ehud Barak, lone centrist in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s conservative coalition, also appeared to dampen speculation the Israelis could defy U.S. remonstrations by attacking their arch-foe’s nuclear facilities unilaterally.

	Defense Minister Ehud Barak and U.S. President Barack Obama at the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, July 2008
	Photo by: Daniel Bar-On / Jini

In back-to-back interviews this week, U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and his top military officer, General Martin Dempsey, made unusually strong statements about U.S. willingness to use force to deny Iran the means of developing an atom bomb.

“The change of emphasis… is a very important development, because it makes clear a fact that was already known to us from closed-door (discussions),” Barak told Israel Radio. “It makes clear to Iran that it faces a real dilemma.”

Panetta said on Monday the secretive Iranian nuclear program – which the Islamic Republic says is purely peaceful – could potentially yield a bomb within a year, a move that would be a “red line for us and … obviously, for the Israelis.”

“If we have to do it, we will deal with it,” Panetta said on CBS television. Asked whether he meant military steps, he replied: “There are no options off the table.”

The hazy diplomatic code leaving open the possibility of preemptive air strikes, and often echoed by Israel, was honed on Tuesday by Dempsey, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff.

“We are examining a range of options,” he told CNN. “I am satisfied that the options that we are developing are evolving to a point that they would be executable if necessary.”

Barak sidestepped a question on whether Obama, whose testy ties with Netanyahu have not gone over well with pro-Israel voters in the United States, might see talking tough on Iran as a means toward securing a second term in the White House.

But the defense minister, a former Israeli premier, advised against underestimating Obama and “the internal consistency that stems from being a leader … with the circumspection that comes from seeing, above, only the heavens and one’s own conscience.”

Citing Obama’s ideologically tinged 2009 speeches in Cairo and on the occasion of winning the Nobel Peace Prize, and this month’s U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, Barak said: “Ultimately you cannot deny he has a certain degree of consistency.”

“You may not like what he does (but) you discern a man who is capable and ready to undertake the fiercest of political risks to his survival, in order to make good on what he believes in,” said Barak, who met Obama in Washington last week.

“We are asked, sometimes, whether Obama is really a soft appeaser. To that, I say: ‘Go ask Osama bin Laden.” U.S. special forces killed the long elusive al Qaida leader in a lightning raid on his Pakistan hideout last May.

Reputed to have the region’s sole nuclear arsenal, Israel sees an existential menace in Iran’s uranium enrichment, ballistic missile projects and vitriol against the Jewish state.

The Obama administration, which is spearheading international efforts to rein in Tehran through sanctions, has come out against the possibility of its main Middle East ally lashing out alone against the Iranians because of the risk of reprisals against U.S. Gulf assets and shocks to energy markets.

“My biggest worry is they (Iran) will miscalculate our resolve,” Dempsey said on CNN. “Any miscalculation could mean that we are drawn into conflict, and that the region and the world.

“We are trying to establish some confidence on the part of the Israelis that we recognize their concerns and are collaborating with them on addressing them,” added Dempsey, who has said there was no guarantee Israel would inform Washington in advance about any sneak attack on Iran.

Barak said Israeli-U.S. defense coordination was “absolutely fine” and played down tension between Obama and Netanyahu. “They don’t have to love each other. It’s enough that they respect and understand that no one works as if they were alone, in a bubble.”

Iran navy to hold 10-day war gam… JPost – Iranian Threat – News.

    Iran’s navy will launch a 10-day war game in the Strait of Hormuz on Saturday, state television quoted Navy Commander Habibulah Sayari as saying on Thursday.

The war game, named Velayat-90, will be carried out over an area extending from east of the Strait of Hormuz to the Gulf of Eden, the report said.
“The maneuvers will be carried out with the intention of displaying the determination, defensive and deterrent power of the Iranian armed forces as well as relaying a message of peace and friendship in the Strait of Hormuz, the Sea of Oman and the free waters of the Indian Ocean,” Sayari said.

Iran often announces its military capabilities and tests weaponry at its periodic war game in an apparent attempt to show its readiness for any strikes by Israel or the United States.

The war games announcement comes amid increased US rhetoric against Iran’s pursuit of a nuclear program.

In an interview with CBS News on Monday, US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said that Iran will be able to assemble a nuclear bomb within a year, if not sooner.

When asked by CBS News anchor Scott Pelley if Iran could get a nuclear weapon by 2012, Panetta answered: “It would probably be about a year before they can do it. Perhaps a little less.”

He added that the Iranians may have a hidden facility somewhere already enriching fuel, meaning they may be able to develop a nuclear weapon even earlier.

In an interview with CNN on Wednesday, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey reiterated Washington’s resolve to stop Iran from becoming a nuclear power. “My biggest worry is they will miscalculate our resolve,” Dempsey said, referring to Iran. “Any miscalculation could mean that we are drawn into conflict, and that would be a tragedy for the region and the world.”

International suspicion of Iran’s nuclear program was fueled by a November 8 International Atomic Energy Agency report that stated Tehran appeared to have worked on designing a nuclear weapon.

In a bid to quell international suspicion, Iran announced Tuesday that it had invited an IAEA team to Tehran to inspect its nuclear program. On Thursday, the Islamic state’s ambassador to the IAEA said that an inspection could take place as early as January.

Syrian launches offensive against rebel ho… JPost – Middle East.

Israel concerned by increased Hezbollah violence in south Lebanon – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

Israeli experts believe the erosion of Bashar Assad’s regime may have caused Hezbollah to change its policy, agreeing with French assessment the Shiite group is to blame for strikes against UN force.

By Amos Harel

Israeli defense officials are worried about an increase in violent activity by Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, agreeing with a French assessment that the Shi’ite group is responsible for recent strikes against the UN force in the area.

Israeli experts are also probing possible connections between Hezbollah and the two recent firings of Katyusha rockets into Israel. These developments may indicate a change in Hezbollah’s policy and may be linked to the erosion of Bashar Assad’s regime in Syria.

	Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, center, addresses the crowd in a rare public appearance, in the Hezbollah stronghold of southern Beirut, Lebanon, Tuesday Dec. 6, 2011.
	Photo by: AP

Since the end of the Second Lebanon War in August 2006, Hezbollah has carefully avoided direct confrontations with Israel. The organization repeatedly threatened to launch reprisals for the killing of the head of its field operations, Imad Mughniyeh − an action it attributes to Israel. Apparent attempts by Hezbollah to strike Israeli targets overseas have been thwarted.

Hezbollah is also wary of direct conflict with the UN forces − the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon − even though the Shi’ite group continually tries to bypass UN monitoring and deploy its men south of the Litani River. This contravenes Security Council Resolution 1701, which ended the Second Lebanon War.

Ten days ago, a roadside bomb was detonated near a vehicle operated by a French UNIFIL battalion in Tyre; six soldiers were wounded. It was the third explosion of its kind since July; in one of the others, five people were wounded.

French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said in a radio interview last week that “we have reason to believe that these attacks come from Syria, but we don’t have solid proof of this.” When he was asked whether Hezbollah was responsible for carrying out these anti-UNIFIL attacks, Juppe said yes. Hezbollah, he added, is “Syria’s military arm in Lebanon.”

Israeli defense officials believe that Juppe is right. They say Hezbollah is trying to intimidate UNIFIL, particularly the French troops − considered especially assertive − so that they won’t monitor Hezbollah’s activities in southern Lebanon too closely. The attacks are apparently carried out by proxies, smaller organizations, so that they cannot be linked directly to Hezbollah.

In November, Katyusha rockets were fired at the Western Galilee, though no one was injured. This month a Katyusha landed in a Lebanese village near the border; one woman was badly wounded.

After the first incident, the Abdullah Azzam Brigades claimed responsibility − an extremist Sunni group named after a Palestinian cleric who was Osama bin Laden’s spiritual mentor.
Yet this attribution proved dubious. The identity of the group responsible for the attack on the Western Galilee remains unknown. Israeli officials have not ruled out that it was Hezbollah; again, via proxies.

The recent incidents could be important as a whole, indicating that Hezbollah is shedding its policy since the 2006 war. If this is so, the change stems from the worsening crisis in Syria, motivating Hezbollah’s leaders to take action, however constrained.

“Hezbollah is in a turbulent state,” an Israeli defense official said. “On the one hand, Assad’s regime faces collapse; on the other, Iran has been forced to cut back its financial aid to the organization due to the international sanctions that Tehran faces.

“Under such circumstances, Hezbollah is liable to make a mistake and pursue courses of action that would further complicate its situation.”