Archive for December 30, 2011

Arab League monitor in Syria: We don’t aim to topple Assad

December 30, 2011

Arab League monitor in Syria: We don’t aim… JPost – Middle East.

Syrian anti-Assad protest.

    BEIRUT – An Arab League monitor told an angry crowd in Syria that his team’s job was only to observe, not to help them remove the president they have been rebelling against for nine months, live video on Al Jazeera showed on Friday.

“Our goal is to observe…it is not to remove the president, our aim is to return Syria to peace and security,” he said, speaking over a loudspeaker from a podium at a mosque filled with protesters in the Damascus suburb of Douma.
But the observer, who did not give his name, said he promised to convey the protesters’ sufferings.

“From what I have heard there is blood being shed,” he said. “That is for sure.”

A team of around 60 monitors has already arrived from a delegation that should ultimately number 150 and is expected to inspect Syria for about one month. They will check whether President Bashar al-Assad’s forces are implementing a peace plan that calls for an end to a crackdown on anti-government revolt.

Activists say they believe many monitors are pro-government or that they feel it is too difficult to communicate with the team away from government escorts. Inside the Douma mosque, the restless crowd seemed suspicious of the monitors.

A speaker from the mosque tried to calm the audience, pleading with them to let the monitor speak. But a man immediately broke the silence, shouting “My son is a martyr, they killed him,” rousing chants of “With blood and soul we will redeem the martyrs.”

The monitor, who asked the audience not to film him but who was broadcast on Al Jazeera Live, said: “We as monitors are not supposed to speak but the situation has forced me to say something: We are monitoring the elements of the protocol signed between the Arab League and the government.”

“This is a humanitarian mission to convey the existing problems and solve the crisis.”

The protocol requires that Syrian forces withdraw from cities and release detainees believed to still number in the thousands.

More than 5,000 people have been killed as the government tries to crush the protests. It says it is fighting Islamist militants steered from abroad who have killed 2,000 members of the security forces.

Syria forces fire ‘nail bombs’ as death toll mounts; hundreds of thousands demonstrate

December 30, 2011

Syria forces fire ‘nail bombs’ as death toll mounts; hundreds of thousands demonstrate.

Demonstrators protest against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in Amude. (Reuters)

Demonstrators protest against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in Amude. (Reuters)

As many as 32 people have been shot dead by the Syrian security forces, Al Arabiya reported citing Syrian activists at the Local Coordination Committees.

The dead people were mostly in Hama, Daria, Mudamiya in Damascus, Deraa, Telkakh and Baalaba in Homs.

More than 100,000 protesters performed a sit-in in Douma as the Arab observers toured the city, Syrian activists said.

Huge protests were organized in most of the Syrian cities after the activists called for a “Friday of Marching to the Freedom Squares.”

Syrian forces were accused of firing nail bombs Friday to disperse protesters as tens of thousands of people flooded streets across the country to make their voices heard to Arab monitors, according to AFP.

Protesters called for the ouster and prosecution of President Bashar al-Assad, whose autocratic regime has been blamed for the deaths of more than 5,000 people since pro-reform protests erupted in March.

“This Friday is different from any other Friday. It is a transformative step. People are eager to reach the monitors and tell them about their suffering,” activist Abu Hisham in Hama told Reuters.

Activists urged monitors, who started this week a mission to implement an Arab League peace plan, to protect civilians from the regime’s wrath.

“We urge you to make a clear distinction between the assassin and the victim,” activists of the Syrian Revolution 2011 said in a statement posted on their Facebook page.

“Our revolution which was launched nine months ago is peaceful,” they said.

Heavy clashes, meanwhile, broke out between Syrian security forces and army defectors in the Damascus suburb of Douma on Friday, Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said.

Huge demonstrations rocked northwestern Idlib province and Douma, a Damascus suburb where protesters clashed with security forces who fired “nail bombs” to disperse them, said the Observatory.

At least 24 protesters were hurt when security forces fired “nail bombs to disperse tens of thousands of demonstrators in Douma,” the watchdog said, adding that the protesters “hurled stones” in retaliation.

“An activist in the city told the Observatory that he was hurt by shrapnel from those bombs,” the Britain-based group said in a statement received by AFP in Nicosia.

The reported use of nail bombs could not be independently verified.

In Douma, security forces also fired “stun grenades and tear gas” at protesters as 60,000-70,000 demonstrators headed to city hall, where Arab League observers visited the previous day.

It was the “biggest ever demonstration” in the restive suburb since March, it added.

Further north in Idlib province, which borders Turkey, more than 250,000 protesters took the streets in various locations, the Observatory reported.

Protests also took place in Homs, which activists have dubbed the “martyr” city as hundreds have died there in a government crackdown on dissent over the past few months.

In the Damascus neighborhood of al-Kadam, security forces fired live rounds of ammunition at worshippers who emerged from midday prayers apparently to prevent them from joining the protests, said the Observatory.

Protests in Aleppo, Syria’s second city in the north and economic hub, was “brutally” crushed by regime loyalists, it added.

The Observatory’s Rami Abdul Rahman told AFP activists are determined to make their voices heard to the monitors despite the bloody crackdown which activists say has killed more than 100 people since monitors arrived Monday.

“The Arab League’s initiative is the only ray of light that we now see,” said Abdel Rahman.

The mission has been tainted by some controversy, with some opposition members unhappy with the head of the observers General Mohammed Ahmed Mustafa al-Dabi — a veteran Sudanese military intelligence officer.

Dabi this week ruffled feathers by saying Syrian authorities were so far cooperating with the mission and by describing his visit to Homs as “good.”

For some, Dabi is a controversial figure because he served under Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir who is wanted by the International Criminal Court for alleged war crimes committed in Darfur region.

“The observers must remain in the cities they visit to protect civilians,” said prominent human rights lawyer Haytham Maleh who is also a member of the main opposition Syrian National Council.

Speaking to Arab news channels, Maleh said the Arab League must increase the number of monitors to ensure they can verify Assad’s regime is implementing all the terms of the plan to end the violence.

Around 66 monitors are currently in Syria but there are plans to deploy between 150 and 200 observers.

“The presence of the observers in Homs broke the barrier of fear,” Abdul Rahman said in reference to some 70,000 demonstrators who flooded the streets of the central city Tuesday when the monitors kicked off their mission.

Western powers have urged Syrian to give them full access and Britain’s minister for the Middle East and North Africa Alistair Burt echoed those concern on Thursday.

Damascus must “meet fully its obligations to the Arab League,” including withdrawing security forces from cities, he said.

But Syria’s key ally Russia — which has resisted Western efforts to push through the U.N. Security Council tough resolutions against Damascus — said Friday it was happy with the mission so far.

“Judging by the public statements made by the chief of the mission (Sudanese general Mustafa) al-Dabi, who in the first of his visits went to the city of Homs … the situation seems to be reassuring,” the Foreign Ministry said on its website.

Activist video from Homs over the months has depicted a trail of death and destruction sowed by the military, with hundreds of killings of civilians reported.

“Unfortunately, reports show that the violence has continued in Syria over the past few days,” Britain’s Minister for the Middle East and North Africa, Alistair Burt, said, according to Reuters.

“I urge the Syrian government to meet fully its obligations to the Arab League, including immediately ending the repression and withdrawing security forces from cities. The Syrian government must allow the Arab League mission independent and unrestricted access …” Burt said.

In Brussels, a spokesperson for European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said the EU also “urges Syria to comply with the action plan of the Arab league in all its components” including “an immediate end of violence, the release of political prisoners, pulling the military out of cities.”

The mission has so far failed to end Syria’s nine-month orgy of violence in response to demands for Assad to step down, although it was never advertised as a peacekeeping operation.

An Arab League member from a Gulf State played down expectations for the mission.

Even if its report turns out to be negative it would not “act as a bridge to foreign intervention” but simply indicate that “the Syrian government has not implemented the Arab initiative,” the delegate told Reuters.

“The delegation is not meant to search or inspect anything other than this. It is not a fact-finding mission or an investigative committee … The commission is meant to tell the League if Syria has committed to withdrawing its military from cities and to check if those who were detained during recent events have been released, and if Arab and international media are able to report on the situation freely or not.”

Syria says it is fighting Islamist militants steered from abroad who have killed more than 2,000 of its security forces personnel. Activist sources do not dispute that there has been a significant toll among the security forces.

Imperial overdrive: Red alert over Iran — RT

December 30, 2011

Imperial overdrive: Red alert over Iran — RT.

(The view from Russia. – JW)

Published: 30 December, 2011, 19:05

A handout picture from US Navy dated February 21, 2007, shows the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis as it conducts operations in the Gulf (AFP Photo / US Navy / Ronald Reeves)

A handout picture from US Navy dated February 21, 2007, shows the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis as it conducts operations in the Gulf (AFP Photo / US Navy / Ronald Reeves)

TAGS: Conflict, Military, Nuclear, Politics, Iran, USA, Libya, War, Global economy, Syria

2011 will be remembered as the year the US, Britain, France and Israel went into Imperial Overdrive in North Africa and the Middle East. Will 2012 be remembered as the year those same Western Allies unleashed World War III?

­It is not news anymore to say that the West will soon attack Iran, maybe Syria. They have been threatening to do that for years now, certainly ever since the failed Israeli invasion into Southern Lebanon in mid-2006, when they were routed by Hezbollah.

So what is different today? For starters, general circumstances have changed dramatically in the Region. Genuine popular dissent inside key Muslim countries has been used by the Western Allies to train, fund and arm local criminal and terrorist organizations, dubbed “freedom fighters”, as their proxies.

Country after country has fallen victim to the CIA’s, MI6’s and Mossad’s “dirty tricks departments”, and other Western-style terrorist organizations. Results range from moderate “regime change” in Tunisia and Algeria; via horrendous “violence by our boys” in Egypt, Yemen and Bahrain; all the way to outright military attack, civil war and political assassination. Such as the one in Libya, where Hillary Clinton boisterously laughed when she learned Muammar Gaddafi had been murdered live on TV by “her thugs”.

The whole region has been set on fire. Not that other regions of the world are not on fire too; however the pyrotechnics used by the Global Power Elite vary in nature in each geography. For example, Europe, the US and Britain are being set alight using financial terrorism resembling a neutron bomb, which kills people off while leaving assets and banks standing.

Now in Iran the stage seems set for a final show-down. It has taken so long only because Israeli, British and US planners are not stupid; they know that messing with Iran is not like messing with Iraq or Pakistan or Afghanistan or Libya. Messing with Iran will bring Western Allies very dangerously close to messing with Russia and China. If I were in their shoes, I would not do that. Unless…

Unless World War III is what they are looking for. Now, why would they do that?  Perhaps, because they have realized that there is just no peaceful way of achieving their dream of World Government. Perhaps because they have understood that the financial quicksand they have backed themselves into is so devastating that it cannot be cleaned up with purely financial, monetary and “legal” measures, in which case…

Nothing beats a good war! Perhaps, because wildcard Israel is so very much in control (or should I say, out of control) that they are imposing the “Sampson Option” not only on themselves, but also on their controlled Western Allies and the whole planet if need be. “After me, the Flood!”

Things in the Strait of Hormuz are extremely dangerous and volatile. After being systematically threatened with unilateral military attack, invasion, and even nuclear strikes, now the Iranians are showing their muscle too. On 24th December, Iran began a 10-day spate of military maneuvers in the strait that has all but put the US, UK and Israel on red alert. A US aircraft carrier force is now in the area and their helicopters have flown dangerously close to Iranian forces. Any spark could set off a conflagration.

Meanwhile, Syria is falling into meltdown. Meanwhile, Israel is preparing “Cast Lead II” over and inside Gaza. Meanwhile, Hezbollah is ready to strike Israel with tens of thousands of very deadly short-range “Katyushka” rockets.

A key sign of impending war is an article just published in the January/February 2012 issue of Foreign Affairs, the official journal of the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). It carried the ominous title of Time to Attack Iran: Why a Strike Is the Least Bad Option, by Matthew Kroenig. This man was, until last July, special advisor to the Pentagon for “Defense Strategy on Iran” – Newspeak for “let’s beat the hell out of Iran”.

The CFR is the key Global Power Elite think-tank, founded in 1919 together with its London sister organization, the Royal Institute of International Affairs (also known as Chatham House). Its more than 4500 members are deeply embedded into the uppermost echelons of public and private power in the US, controlling banking, industry, media, academia, the military and government.

Key government posts are always controlled by one of their lot, irrespective of whether the Democrats or Republicans are in power. The CFR is integrated into an intricate network of similar organizations that includes the Trilateral Commission, Brookings Institution, American Enterprise Group, Project for a New American Century, Bilderberg and others. They all operate in streamlined coordination, consistency, synchronization and – most important – with a common purpose.

In his article, Mr Kroenig, assesses how “American pundits and policymakers have been debating whether the United States should attack Iran and attempt to eliminate its nuclear facilities,” concluding that, “The only thing worse than military action against Iran would be an Iran armed with nuclear weapons.”

He warns against “skeptics of military action (who) fail to appreciate the true danger that a nuclear-armed Iran would pose to US interests in the Middle East and beyond.”  

This reflects Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s recent remarks when addressing the Brookings Institution’s pro-Israel “Saban Forum” bringing together US and Israeli military strategists that repeated the usual Baby Bush “all options are on the table” threats.

Mr. Kroenig talks of the “dangers of deterrence” and gives the Obama Administration unequivocal advice: “The truth is that a military strike intended to destroy Iran’s nuclear program, if managed carefully, could spare the region and the world a very real threat and dramatically improve the long-term national security of the United States.”

As these pyromaniacs get ready to ignite the regional and global powder keg, one key question looms ever larger: what will Russia do?

­Adrian Salbuchi for RT

Adrian Salbuchi is a political analyst, author, speaker and international radio/TV commentator from Argentina.

Dangerous game

December 30, 2011

THE DAILY STAR :: Opinion :: Editorial :: Dangerous game.

This week’s escalation of rhetoric about the Strait of Hormuz by Iran might be entertaining for the most cynical of people, anxious to hear about something other than popular uprisings in Arab countries.

But it is an extremely dangerous game of brinksmanship, which could have catastrophic consequences. The actual closure of the Strait might be aimed at the United States, and depending on how the developments play out, such an act would truly be devastating, on the level of a Sept. 11 moment. But instead of one country bearing the brunt of the event, it would be the entire world, since 40 percent of global oil exports pass through this body of water.

With varying levels of intensity, the world will say no to this threat, but a cycle of such rhetoric could easily spin out of control.

When Tehran’s leaders want to blast the U.S., it is certainly their right to do so, provided that the blasting in question involves words, and not military operations. But when the rhetoric moves into the realm of issuing concrete threats about taking such a step as closing Hormuz, Tehran’s leaders should remember that they are playing with fire, and should consider their steps with extreme care.

If they are trying to avoid dealing with their own domestic problems, a “diversion” by using threats about the global economy could lead to something catastrophic. The threats and counter-threats will increase tension in the region, and the possibility that a simple incident on the ground sparks a larger conflagration.

There is already enough violence and tension in the Middle East, and wasted resources and possibilities for growth. The United States and Israel have been mulling the idea of attacking Iran already, to halt its nuclear program, although the former seems more inclined to follow a path of sanctions and negotiations to resolve the matter.

Iran should read the signals in its immediate vicinity, such as Saudi Arabia, and the news of the latest big-ticket deal involving advanced fighter aircraft from Washington.

Iran should also recall that the U.S. has just freed itself of the quagmire of Iraq. It will presumably focus more now on its military bases in the Gulf and its economic interests there. The U.S. will not stand by idly if Iran continues its bluster, or actually carries out one of its threats.

A military conflict over the Strait of Hormuz could rapidly disintegrate into widespread violence in a range of countries, whether it’s the scenario of Israel launching its own attack, or Iraq becoming even more unstable, as side-battles are fought there.

In short, no one will be safe from the fire. It is time for Tehran, as well as Washington, to view the situation soberly and determine how much of a risk each is willing to take – and how predictable the results of any action may be.tar.com.lb)

Why an Attack on Iran and Another War in Middle East are More Likely Than Not

December 30, 2011

Why an Attack on Iran and Another War in Middle East are More Likely Than Not – International Business Times.

By Jijo Jacob

The Middle East saber-rattling heightened Friday as Iran’s Revolutionary Guards fired salvos at the West and claimed the United States could not frighten them out of blocking the strategic Strait of Hormuz.

“The Islamic Republic of Iran does not ask for the permission of any country for implementing its defensive strategies,” a top leader of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) said, Fars news agency reported Friday.

Brigadier General Hossein Salami, Lieutenant Commander of the IRGC, was responding to the U.S. position that any move by Tehran to block the Strait would not be tolerated.

“The US is not in a position to affect Iran’s decisions … The Americans are not qualified to give us permission for carrying out our military strategy,” he said.

Iran’s alleged nuclear bomb has always induced bitter war rhetoric in the past, but of late, the cacophony has evolved into a sharper indicator of an impending military tussle, especially after the U.S. said in unambiguous terms it would not let Tehran develop a nuclear warhead.

In Tel Aviv, newspapers are taking it for granted that an attack on Iranian nuclear installations will take place soon. While reporting the visit of Martin Dempsey, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs, to Israel, the Jerusalem Post wrote as follows: “Dempsey will arrive in mid-January in a trip that comes as the U.S. escalates its rhetoric regarding U.S. military preparations to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities.”

Even as the U.S. served a stringent warning to Iran over its threat to choke off the Strait of Hormuz, Teheran is holding a 10-day military drill in international waters off the Strait.

The Triggers

For the United States, certain actions by Iran will set in motion an irreversible chain of events that could culminate in an attack on the fourth largest oil producer in the world.

The U.S. has reacted sternly and angrily to Iranian threats that it would block the Strait of Hormuz, a 6.4-km wide waterway between Iran and Oman through which more than a quarter of the world’s tanker-borne crude passes. The United States has said such an action by Tehran would not be tolerated as it undermines the navigation freedom.

A U.S. Fifth Fleet communiqué said: “Anyone who threatens to disrupt freedom of navigation in an international strait is clearly outside the community of nations; any disruption will not be tolerated.”

“Interference with the transit or passage of vessels through the Strait of Hormuz will not be tolerated,” said George Little, Pentagon press secretary.

For Israel and the U.S., Iranian nuclear bomb is the ultimate trigger for an attack. U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Pannetta said in a CBS interview that all options were on the table when it came to stopping Tehran from developing a nuclear bomb.”If they proceed and we get intelligence that they are proceeding with developing a nuclear weapon, then we will take whatever steps necessary to stop it,” said Pannetta.

Another strong indicator of a potential attack on Iran is the increasing military readiness of Israel. There is no doubt a nuclear-armed Iran is the nemesis of Israel and Tel Aviv will go an extra mile to ensure Tehran doesn’t get there.

A recent Jerusalem Post article says Israel is ramping up military readiness in view of an impending conflict in the Middle East. “Israel is moving forward with plans to hold the largest-ever missile defense exercise in its history this spring amid Iranian efforts to obtain nuclear weapons,” Yaakov Katz wrote in the Post.

“Last week,” Katz wrote, “Lt.-Gen. Frank Gorenc, commander of the U.S.’s Third Air Force based in Germany, visited Israel to finalize plans for the upcoming drill, expected to see the deployment of several thousand American soldiers in Israel.”

The article says the exercise “will include the establishment of U.S. command posts in Israel and IDF command posts at EUCOM headquarters in Germany–with the ultimate goal of establishing joint task forces in the event of a large-scale conflict in the Middle East.”

Unpredictable Element

The U.S. has made it amply clear the military option will be the last to be exercised and Iran has insisted its nuclear pursuit is for peaceful purposes. But the fact is that the role of Israel in the Middle East nuclear puzzle is largely an unpredictable element and there is far less clarity on Israel’s course of action than about the U.S. stance.

Earlier in the month, Reuters reported that two key U.S. senators said there were gaps in U.S. 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 Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.).

However, former presidential candidate John McCain has said that Israel knows what it is up to, but that the U.S. administration doesn’t have a clue as to what exactly Tel Aviv is planning to do. “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.”

Israel hasn’t clearly said it will attack Iranian nuclear installations soon, but they haven’t ruled that out as well. Neither has the U.S. done so. Analysts have pointed out that despite Israel being U.S.’s favored client state in the region, there have been occasions when Tel Aviv didn’t inform Washington about its drastic moves.

“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 in advance on all issues,” Reuters quoted a former U.S. government official as saying.

For Israel, a nuclear armed Iran is the end of the road and they will go a dangerous mile to preemptively strike Iran. When that happens, if it does, the rest of history is pretty much predictable. Iran has made it clear that an Israeli attack will set off retaliatory strike on Tel Aviv as well as U.S. military bases across the region. It will also close the Strait of Hormuz, snapping fragile balance and triggering irreversible military engagement.

Osirik Redux: Will History Repeat Itself?

December 30, 2011

Osirik Redux: Will History Repeat Itself? – Defense/Security – News – Israel National News.

Confidential documents released 30 years after Israel’s 1981 raid on Iraq’s Osirik reactor reveal Israel didn’t surprise just the Iraqis.
By Gavriel Queenann

First Publish: 12/30/2011, 9:19 AM

 

IAF F-16 (file)

IAF F-16 (file)
Israel news photo: Flash 90

Confidential documents released Thursday revealed Israel’s June 1981 attack on Iraq’s Osirik reactor didn’t just stun Saddam Hussein, but Israel’s firmest friends – including the Americans.

Files released by Britain’s National Archives under the 30-year rule show that the UK’s ambassador to Washington, Sir Nicholas Henderson, was with US defense secretary Caspar Weinberger as the news came in.

“Weinberger says that he thinks Begin must have taken leave of his senses. He is much disturbed by the Israeli reaction and possible consequences,” Sir Nicholas cabled London.

Britain’s ambassador in Baghdad, Sir Stephen Egerton, disclosed that the Iraqis had been just as surprised when the Israeli F15 fighters appeared in their skies.

“The diplomatic corps had a ringside view of the belated ack-ack and missile reactions to the raid when we were gathered for the Italian national day reception on the Bund,” he wrote.

“The raiders had gone but the fireworks were spectacular.”

At the time world reaction to the operation – codenamed Operation Opera – was a mix of shock and dismay. But despite high-prase for the audacity of Israel’s pilots, even Israel’s traditional friends were furious.

US officials, pride wounded at having been caught unawares, joined the world in condemning Israel for an act that would later be hailed not only as effective deterrence – but a blessing for world security.

The US condemnation came after then-British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher talked the Iraqis and their Arab allies down for pressing for sanctions against Israel – telling them the condemnation would not pass if they persisted.

The documents revealing the US surprise at Israel’s Osirik raid comes as officials in Jerusalem and Washington haggle over what “triggers” will prompt a raid on Iran’s nuclear sites.

Amid the debate some American officials are concerned history may repeat itself and that Israel may choose to go it alone.

US General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, acknowledged earlier this month that there are differences in perspective between the United States and Israel over the best way to handle Iran and its nuclear program.

Dempsey said the United States was convinced that using 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.”

He said, however, “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, I think probably that it’s fair to say that our expectations are different right now.”

The Israeli raid, by F15 and F16 jets, on Iraq’s French-supplied nuclear facility, followed intelligence reports that the reactor was on the point of producing weapons-grade nuclear material – despite Iraqi protests that it was developing nuclear power for peaceful purposes.

“I will not be the man in whose time there will be a second Holocaust,” Prime Minister Begin told his military chiefs.

US officials have to be wondering if Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who recently cast himself in Begin’s mold, will make the same decision should Iran reach the same point as Iraq in 1981.

Iran announces long-range missile test amid Strait of Hormuz row with U.S.

December 30, 2011

Iran announces long-range missile test amid Strait of Hormuz row with U.S. – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

Ten-day Iranian military drill overshadowed by Iran-U.S. verbal row over an Iranian threat to close the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf, through which 40% of the world’s ship-borne crude oil is passed.

By DPA

Amid a verbal row with the United States over blocking the Strait of Hormuz, a vital oil shipping route, Iran proclaimed on Friday that it will start testing long range missiles in the Persian Gulf.

“On Saturday morning the Iranian navy will test several of its long-range missiles in the Persian Gulf,” navy deputy commander Admiral Mahmoud Moussavi told Fars news agency.

Iran military rocket, AP, April 25, 2010. A Saegheh ground-to-sea missile is fired by Iran’s Revolutionary Guard during a military maneuver, April 25, 2010.
Photo by: AP

The testing of the missiles is part of ongoing navy maneuvers in the Persian Gulf and, according to Moussavi, the main and final phase is preparing the navy for confronting the enemy in a warlike situation.

The maneuver has been overshadowed by a verbal row between Iran and the US over an Iranian threat to close the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf, through which 40 per cent of the world’s ship-borne crude is passed.

The spark for the row was a Tuesday remark by Iranian Vice President Mohammd-Reza Rahimi that, “if Western countries sanctioned Iranian oil, then Iran would not allow one drop of oil to cross the Strait of Hormuz.”

Following his remarks, Iranian navy commander Admiral Habibollah Sayari said, although there was currently no necessity for Iran to close the strait, “it would be as easy as drinking a glass of water.”

After the U.S. Navy said it would not accept any Iranian disruption of the free flow of goods through Hormuz, Iran continued the war of words with Revolutionary Guard deputy chief Hossein Salami saying that the U.S. was in no position to tell Iran what to do.

Salami also called the U.S. “an iceberg which is to be melted by the high degree of the Iranian revolution,” and “a sparrow in the body of a dinosaur.”

Neither President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad nor the ministries of defense and foreign affairs have so far commented on the issue.

The only official comments on the matter came last week, before the exchange of words, from Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast, who said that closing the Hormuz has never been on Iran’s agenda.

However, he added: “if the region would face a warlike situation, then everything would then become warlike.”