WarSclerotic

Iran’s game of chicken regarding oil production – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

There is no certainty that sanctions wouldn’t strengthen the current regime, which would present them as a Western ploy against Iran, calling on the public to rally around the government.

By Zvi Bar’el

Iran’s representative to the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, Mohammad Ali Khatibi, warned the Gulf States against increasing their oil production to compensate for the decrease in Iranian oil production, on Sunday, saying “they will be held responsible for the consequences.”

Khatibi’s masked warning continued the line adopted lately by Iranian senior officials who said that “if Iranian oil would not be allowed to exit the Persian Gulf, then not a drop of oil from the other Gulf States would be allowed out as well,” and that “it’s very easy for Iran to block the Strait of Hormuz.”

	Iranian naval vessels near the Strait of Hormuz, Jan. 3, 2012.
	Photo by: Reuters

Iran indeed has the military capability to damage oil tankers in the Gulf, or strike oil facilities in neighboring countries such as Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

But despite these ominous warnings, Saudi Arabia – Iran’s main rival – has already declared that in the case of sanctions against Iranian oil exports, it would increase its oil production to make up for the shortfall,.Thus, they have calmed fears of a dramatic price hike.

Saudi Arabia produces roughly 10 million barrels per day, while Iran exports some 2.5 million barrels a day. According to Saudi Oil Minister Ali al-Naimi, his country can easily produce 12.5 million barrels daily to compensate for the shortage.

Threats aside, Iran is also trying to prevent sanctions being imposed by a diplomatic maneuver, declaring it would allow more officials from the International Atomic Energy Agency to inspect its nuclear facilities and see for themselves that it has no intention of developing nuclear weapons.

The inspectors are due in Iran by the end of this month, and any resolution involving sanctions may be delayed until after the visit.

European Union officials are set to discuss sanctions on January 23, mostly barring imports of Iranian oil, and perhaps forbidding deals with The Central Bank of Iran.

The EU is thus expected to join U.S. President Barack Obama, who declared sanctions on Iran last month.

A European initiative could come under strong opposition from some of the European states dependent on Iranian oil, or those who wish to see their Iranian debts paid.

Greece, for example, which is undergoing a deep financial crisis and importing a third of its oil from Iran, would not easily join sanctions that would put its economy in further peril, considering the favored conditions it receives from Iran.

Italian oil company ENI owes Iran large sums for drilling rights, paying them off with oil.

Spain is dependent on Iranian oil, and its economic situation isn’t rosy enough to allow it to pass by Iran’s favorable purchase terms.

And even if the European countries agree on sanctions, these would encumber Iran but not paralyze its economy without the participation of China, South Korea, Japan and Turkey.

Turkey and China have no intention of joining the sanctions, while Japan and South Korea are still examining the possible ramifications of joining the move.

Iran could easily offer these countries – especially China – attractive prices that would neutralize the European sanctions.

As for the sanctions on its central bank, Iran is set to use alternative monetary routes such as Russian or Turkish banks, which are already used to transfer revenues.

The move to apply swift sanctions also takes into consideration the upcoming elections to the Iranian parliament, scheduled for the beginning of March.

There is no certainty that the planned move would not have the opposite effect, and actually strengthen the current regime, which would lose no opportunity to present the sanctions as a Western ploy against Iran, calling on the public to rally around the government.

Netanyahu: Current Iran sanctions won’t curb its nuclear program – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

PM says further, more effective sanctions must be implemented against Iran’s central bank and oil industry; remarks made days after he said Iran beginning to fold in face of pressure.

By Jonathan Lis

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Monday that the current sanctions imposed on Iran were not effective enough to stop its nuclear program, and called for further sanctions on the Islamic Republic’s central bank and oil industry.

“As long as there will not be effective sanctions on Iran’s central bank and oil industry, there won’t be any effect on its nuclear program,” Netanyahu said during a discussion in the Knesset’s Defense and Foreign Affairs committee.

	Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
	Photo by: Olivier Fitoussi

He also warned against Iran’s advance into Iraq. “There is a lack of stability and under these circumstances we must strengthen our defense capabilities against aerial and ground attacks,” he said.

Netanyahu’s statement comes after he actually praised the current sanctions on Iran last week in an interview with The Weekend Australian. In that interview, he said Iran is beginning to fold due to the combination of sanctions and threats of military action on its nuclear facilities.

European officials have worked for several months on banning the purchase of Iranian oil, and are expected to agree to the measures at a meeting of foreign ministers on January 23.

Netanyahu also commented on the current talks with the Palestinians, saying he is prepared to drive to Ramallah and engage in talks with Abbas, but the Palestinian president refuses.

He blamed Erekat for breaking the agreement not to discuss the contents of the talks that have been taking place in Amman in recent weeks, and for raising additional conditions.

“Erekat wants to abandon the January 26 talks, but the Quartet scheduled 90 days for talks,” Netanyahu said. “We served Erekat with a 21-point document that anyone would agree to… but Erekat continues to pose conditions.”

Stopping Iran’s nukes – JPost – Opinion – Editorials.

    Iran seems intent on pushing forward with its nuclear program and there seems to be no surefire way of stopping it. If the current situation continues, we might have to face the horrific prospect of learning to live with a nuclear Iran.

It has been five years since the UN Security Council first demanded that Iran cease enriching uranium. But the Islamic Republic continues to defy international pressure and is stubbornly advancing with what appears to be a bid to acquire nuclear weapons in the coming year.

On November 8, the International Atomic Energy Agency released a report expressing “serious concerns regarding possible military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear program.” The most recent development is Iran’s announcement that it is beginning to enrich uranium in a new facility in Fordo, near the holy city of Qom.

The imminent opening of the new enrichment site further complicates a military option. Since the new facility is buried deep underground at a well-defended military site, it is considered far more resistant to air strikes than the existing enrichment site at Natanz. And even if a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities succeeded, the geopolitical fallout is liable to be nightmarish, although the prospect of a nuclear Iran is no less of a nightmare.

Covert actions, in contrast, carry much less of a risk, but are also less effective. For instance, last week’s assassination of Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, director of the Natanz uranium enrichment facility, undoubtedly dealt a blow to Iran’s nuclear program.

But the delay, if any, is only temporary since Roshan is obviously not the only person in Iran privy to nuclear know-how. And these sorts of operations have negative side effects. Theoretically, if the US was behind the killing of Roshan or one of the other four (or five, depending on which reports you believe) scientists killed since 2007 and this became known, the Obama administration might have a more difficult time putting together a unified front consisting of Russia, China and other countries against Iran.

Some say that targeted killings strengthen extremists, though it is difficult to claim today that there is any significant “moderate” opposition challenging the Islamic Republic’s leadership.

In contrast, cyber warfare or other non-lethal covert operations such as the Stuxnet virus are less likely to hurt American attempts to muster a broad coalition against Iran. Some of these operations can be presented by the Iranians as “accidents.”

Economic sanctions, meanwhile, have so far not changed Iranian nuclear policy, though they have caused some damage. Indeed, since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, there have been numerous attempts to influence Iranian policy through economic sanctions.

Arguably, such sanctions helped end Iran’s war with Iraq in 1988. At the same time, Iran’s economy has been forced to adapt to functioning under various Western boycotts while developing alternative trade ties with Russia, China and several South and Central American countries.

Still, Tehran’s threat to close the Strait of Hormuz, gateway to much of the world’s oil trade, could be a sign of its growing economic desperation. Iranians are plagued by inflation, unemployment and economic stagnation. And the economic situation will only worsen. Though a new round of Security Council-backed sanctions has been delayed due to opposition from Russia and China, the US and Europe have put in place their own penalties. Japan pledged to buy less Iranian oil while South Korea said it was looking for alternative suppliers. And even China can take advantage of a situation in which fewer countries are buying Iranian oil to put pressure on Tehran to lower prices.

A new US law that would penalize foreign companies that do business with Iran’s central bank and an oil embargo that EU foreign ministers plan to approve on January 23 could have an even bigger impact.

A combination of covert operations, economic sanctions and diplomatic pressure, while at the same time keeping the military option “on the table,” is the only way to convince Tehran to back down. And maintaining a broad coalition of countries behind the sanctions is the best way to make them effective.

‘Mossad agents on the ground kil… JPost – Iranian Threat – News.

    The London-based Sunday Times published what it claimed is an account of Iranian nuclear scientist Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan’s last minutes on earth and the final preparations of the alleged Israeli Mossad agents that took his life.

According to the Times‘s unverified account published Sunday, the covert assassination mission was complicated by unusual activity at the Iranian intelligence headquarters in Tehran last Wednesday morning, but having decided that his agents “would never escape anyway,” the on-the-ground mission commander gave the go-ahead anyway.

From that point, almost all the details are known. Men on a motorcycle sped up to the scientist’s car, attached a magnetic explosive device and sped away. Roshan was critically injured in the resulting blast and died later in a Tehran hospital.

In addition to the Times, TIME magazine and senior Iranian officials have all in the past week accused Israel of being behind most recent, and a string of killings targeting Iranian scientists over the past two years.

While Israel has not taken responsibility or fully denied involvement, two top IDF officers, Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Benny Gantz and Spokesman Brig.-Gen. Yoav Mordechai sent out cryptic messages that provided Israel’s accusers with fodder for their speculation.

Stressing that he did not know who assassinated the scientist, Mordechai wrote on his Facebook page last week: “I will definitely not shed a tear for him.”

Gantz, speaking to the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee last week, said that 2012 would be a “critical year” for Tehran. He added there may be more “unnatural” events in Tehran.

For his part, President Shimon Peres said that as far as he knows, Israel was not involved in the assassination.

‘Quds Force to aid Syria if outside forces… JPost – Middle East.

    Iran would provide aid to Syria if it came under attack by external forces, an Iranian Revolutionary Guards official told pan-Arab Al Arabiya news channel Monday, after the US accused the Guards’ Quds Force of providing weapons to the embattled regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad in order to suppress protests.

The unnamed Iranian source insisted that Iran – one of Syria’s strongest allies – has “not yet” interfered in Syrian affairs in the ten months of conflict between opposition groups and government forces, and in which over 5,000 people have been killed according to the United Nations.

The source said that Iran believes that the situation in Syria is different than “other countries that saw similar protests,” adding that the Revolutionary Guards “surround” Syria through their allies in Iraq and Lebanon.

The Iranian military official also said that “sources” in Syria have assured Tehran through official channels that the situation in Syria is “stable,” despite reports of continued deaths in clashes between anti- and pro-government forces.

At least 32 people were gunned down by security forces Sunday, Al Jazeera reported according to opposition groups. Syrian authorities say 2,000 members of the security forces have also been killed.

Qatar’s emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani became the first Arab leader Saturday to express interest in sending troops to stop Assad’s “killing.” Thani made the comments in an interview with CBS.

A senior US official said Saturday that the recent visit of of senior commanders in Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Quds Force to Syria is the “strongest indication yet” that Iran is supplying the Assad regime with weapons, according to AFP.

Maj.-Gen. Qassem Soleimani, head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps’ Quds Force, visited Syria this month, AFP reported. “We think this relates to Iranian support for the Syrian government’s attempts to suppress its people,” the senior US official said.

“We are confident that he was received at the highest levels of the Syrian government, including by President Assad,” the official said on condition of anonymity. “The US government believes Iran has supplied Syria with munitions” for use in the military crackdown.

The United States has long suspected Iran of supplying Damascus with weapons as Assad struggles to cope with mass protests against his rule.

Earlier in the week, Turkish customs officials intercepted four trucks suspected of carrying military equipment from Iran to Syria.

Pentagon denies ship movements related to Iran – World Watch – CBS News.

The USS Carl Vinson, a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, is seen near Hong Kong Dec. 27, 2011.

(Credit: AFP/Getty Images)

The Pentagon downplayed the arrival of another aircraft carrier strike group near the oil shipping lane that Iran has threatened to shut down amid increasing tensions between the nation and the United States, according to a Reuters report.

The group led by the USS Carl Vinson arrived Monday in the neighboring Arabian Sea to replace the strike group led by the USS John C. Stennis, which Reuters reported is expected to return to San Diego.”I don’t want to leave anybody with the impression that we’re somehow (speeding) two carriers over there because we’re concerned about what happened, you know, today in Iran,” Navy Capt. John Kirby, a Pentagon spokesman, told Reuters Wednesday, the same day that an Iranian nuclear scientist was killed by a bomb two motorcyclists magnetically attached to his car. “It’s just not the case.”

Meanwhile, a third strike group led by the USS Abraham Lincoln was in the Indian Ocean en route to join the Vinson.

The Persian Gulf and surrounding waters haven’t been calm for the U.S. military since Iran warned the Stennis group not to return after leaving in December. On Tuesday, the U.S. Coast Guard rescued Iranian mariners from a vessel in distress less than a week after the Navy saved Iranian sailors from a crew of suspected Somali pirates.

UK: No Plans for Western Military Action on Syria, Iran — Naharnet.

(Canceling the exercise with Israel, and now this.  All this over 24 hours.  I’m reading it as a disinfo operation in advance of an attack on Iran very soon.  Of course, I’ve cried “wolf” in the past and am not privy to what’s really going on, so I’m most likely wrong. – JW)

Western nations have no immediate plans for military action to stop the repression of protests in Syria or to halt Iran’s nuclear program, British Foreign Secretary William Hague said Sunday.

Asked if there was a possibility of a no-fly zone in Syria like the one imposed over Libya last year, Hague said there was “no serious prospect” of a U.N. resolution on the subject.

“We haven’t been looking at a no-fly zone,” Hague told Sky News, saying it would be only effective in tandem with other measures, and that the Syrian regime had not been relying on air power to repress protests.

“There is no serious prospect certainly at the moment of the United Nations Security Council agreeing any resolution at the moment, let alone agreeing a resolution comparable to anything that happened in Libya.”

But he said that if the current Arab League monitoring mission in Syria does not work “I hope they (the Arab League) will come to the U.N. and suggest a way forward that we can all get behind.”

Hague was also cool on suggestions by Qatar that Arab forces should be sent into Syria to stop the deadly 10-month crackdown on dissent by President Bashar Assad’s regime.

On Iran, Hague warned that Tehran’s “dangerous” nuclear drive threatened proliferation across the Middle East.

“We must not be put off further sanctions by bluster or statements from Iran,” Hague said, adding that he hoped European Union foreign ministers would agree new measures when they meet on January 23.

“If it continues it will produce nuclear proliferation across the Middle East, which will then be extremely dangerous for the people of Iran, for the whole region and for the peace of the world.”

Hague refused to rule out military action against Iran, but said Britain was not calling for it.

“We’ve never ruled anything out, we’ve not ruled out any option, or we’ve not ruled out supporting any option, we believe all options should be on the table, that is part of the pressure on Iran, he said.

“But we’re clearly not calling for or advocating military action, we’re advocating negotiation, meaningful negotiations, if Iran will enter in to them.”

The West accuses Iran of trying to produce a nuclear weapon, but Iran says its program is for civilian use.

DEBKAfile, Political Analysis, Espionage, Terrorism, Security.

DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis January 15, 2012, 3:31 PM (GMT+02:00)

Barak Obama

US-Israeli discord over action against Iran went into overdrive Sunday, Jan. 15 when the White House called off Austere Challenge 12, the biggest joint war game the US and Israel have every staged, ready to go in spring, in reprisal for a comment by Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Moshe Yaalon in an early morning radio interview. He said the United States was hesitant over sanctions against Iran’s central bank and oil for fear of a spike in oil prices.
The row between Washington and Jerusalem is now in the open, undoubtedly causing celebration in Tehran.
Nothing was said about the 9,000 US troops who landed in Israeli earlier this month for a lengthy stay. Neither was the forthcoming visit by Gen. Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint US Chiefs of Staff, Thursday mentioned.

The exercise was officially postponed from spring 2012 to the last quarter of the year over “budgetary constraints” – an obvous diplomatic locution for cancellation.  It was issued urgently at an unusually early hour Washington time, say debkafile‘s sources, to underscore the Obama administration’s total disassociation from any preparations to strike Iran and to stress its position that if an attack took place, Israel alone would be accountable.

Israel’s Deputy Prime minister further inflamed one of the most acute disagreements in the history of US-Israeli relations over the Obama administration’s objections to an Israel military action against Iran’s nuclear sites in any shape or form. Yaalon ventured into tricky terrain when he pointed out that US Congress had shown resolve by enacting legislation for sanctions with real bite. But the White House “hesitated.” He went on to say: “A military operation is the last resort, but Israel must be ready to defend itself.”
The friction was already fueled last week by the deep resentment aroused in Israel by Washington’s harsh condemnation of the assassination last Wednesday, Jan. 11, of the nuclear scientist Prof. Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan, and absolute denial of any US involvement.

Although Tehran has since accused the United States of the attack, the White House treated it as the defiant sign of an approaching unilateral Israeli military operation against Iran to which the administration is adamantly opposed.

Friday, Jan. 13, the Pentagon announced the substantial buildup of combat power around Iran, stationing nearly 15,000 troops in Kuwait – two Army infantry brigades and a helicopter unit – and keeping two aircraft carriers the region: The USS Carl Vinson, the USS John Stennis and their strike groups.

Debkafile‘s military sources report that a third aircraft carrier and strike group, the USS Abraham Lincoln, is also on its way to the Persian Gulf.
This massive military buildup indicates that  either President Obama rates the odds of an Israel attack as high and is bolstering the defenses of US military assets against Iranian reprisals – or, alternatively, that the United States intends to beat Israel to the draw and attack Iran itself.

The official purpose of Gen. Dempsey’s visit next Thursday was supposed to be coordination between the US armed forces and the IDF. But his main object was another try to dissuade Israel’s government and military leaders from plans to strike Iran without Washington’s prior consent.
The “budgetary constraints” pretext for cancelling Austere Challenge 12 is hard to credit since most of the money has already been spent in flying 9,000 US troops into Israel this month. Although the exercise in which they were to have participated was billed as testing multiple Israeli and US air and missile defense systems, the exercise’s commander, US Third Air Force Lt. Gen. Frank Gorenc, announced that the event was more a “deployment” than an “exercise.”

Its cancellation leaves Washington and Jerusalem at loggerheads in four main areas:

1.  President Obama believes he is rushing through the sanctions against Iran’s central bank CBI and oil restrictions with all possible speed. He needs time to persuade more governments to support him. Israel sees little real progress in the crawling diplomatic bid for backers and is impatient for action. At the rate the sanctions are going through, they will not be in place before the end of 2012 and by then, Iran will have already acquired a nuclear weapon.

Israeli leaders also suspect that the Obama administration may be foot-dragging deliberately in the hope of encouraging Iran to enter into negotiations and so avoid a military showdown. They point out that all previous rounds of talks were exploited for Iran’s forward leaps in their nuclear weapon drive, free of international hassle.
2.  President Obama insists on the US acting alone in attacking Iran with no Israeli military involvement. This would leave him free to decide exclusively when and how to stage an operation. He is counting on the tightened military and intelligence cooperation he has instituted between the two armed forces and agencies to safeguard Washington against the surprise of a lone Israeli action.
But Israel has declined to make this commitment – even in the face of US officials’ efforts at persuasion.

3.  US military strategists are counting on an Iranian reprisal for an attack on its nuclear sites to be restrained and limited to certain US military assets in the region, Israeli targets and oil installations in the Persian Gulf, including a temporary and partial closure of the Strait of Hormuz, through which one fifth of the world’s oil passes.

They expect Israel to refrain from striking back for Iranian attacks and to leave the payback option entirely in American hands. US officials have said they fear an Israeli overkill would tip the entire American military operation into imbalance and generate unforeseen consequences.
The incoming US troops were therefore armed with the sophisticated missile interceptorTHAAD systems (easily transportable Terminal High Altitude Area Defense hit-to-kill weapons) to show the Israeli government that the US would stay on top of all the military moves against Iran – offensive and defensive alike.

On these three points, the US and Israel disagree. Neither Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, nor Defense Minister Ehud Barak or Deputy Prime Minster Yaalon, who are responsible for all decisions on Iran, are willing to put all their trust for defending Israel in American hands or relinquish unilateral military options against Iran. They believe US officials when they assert that the administration is prepared to prevent Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon, but they want to see proof of the pudding and actions to back up the rhetoric. In the light of credible intelligence that Iran is very close to achieving its nuclear goal, Israel is holding on to its military option over American objections.

U.S. Balances Israel Relationship as Tensions Rise Over Iran – Businessweek.

By Nicole Gaouette and Viola Gienger

Jan. 15 (Bloomberg) — U.S. coordination with Israel on Iran policy is intensifying as the Obama administration’s top military adviser prepares for his first trip to Tel Aviv since taking office in September.

President Barack Obama spoke to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by phone on Jan. 12 about Iran and reaffirmed the “unshakable” U.S. commitment to Israel’s security, according to a White House statement.

Rising tensions over Iran’s nuclear program has the Obama administration balancing how to dissuade Israel from military action against Iran without fueling doubts about its support for a politically important ally. Appearing Jan. 8 on the CBS program “Face the Nation,” Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said that continued pressure, not talk of air strikes, is the best way to forestall Iran’s nuclear program.

This week, Army General Martin Dempsey, the top military adviser to Obama and Panetta, will make his first visit to Israel as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “He is not delivering any specific message to the Israelis,” said a Pentagon spokesman, Marine Colonel David Lapan.

A White House spokesman, Tommy Vietor, declined yesterday to elaborate on Obama’s Jan. 12 call with Netanyahu.

According to a Jan. 12 White House statement that offered no details, the two leaders spoke about Mideast peace talks and “discussed recent Iran-related developments,” including Tehran’s nuclear program.

Nuclear Weapon

The U.S., its European allies and the International Atomic Energy Agency have said that while Iran halted its formal nuclear weapons program in 2003, there are indications it may still be trying to build a nuclear weapon. They have challenged the government in Tehran to prove that its nuclear research is intended only for energy and medical research, as Iranian officials maintain.

U.S. sanctions imposed last year seek to cut off dealings with Iran’s banking system, making it difficult for consumers to buy the country’s oil. European Union officials meet Jan. 23 to discuss plans for an oil embargo that may be delayed by six months to allow some members time to find alternate fuel supplies, according to two EU officials.

In response to the possibility of an embargo, Iran said last month that it would shut the Strait of Hormuz, a transit point for a fifth of the worldwide trade in oil.

Panetta and other U.S. officials have repeatedly warned Israel not to take action against Iran alone, including during the defense secretary’s October visit to Tel Aviv. Should Israel decide to undertake a unilateral military strike against Iran, Panetta said on “Face the Nation,” the first U.S. priority would be protecting American troops in the region.

No Decision

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said in November that Israel “has not yet decided to embark on any operation” against Iran.

Even as the U.S. urges Israel not to attack Iran and instead let sanctions work, the Obama administration has been communicating with Iran’s top leaders, warning them against any provocative action in the Strait of Hormuz.

White House spokesman Jay Carney declined at a Jan. 13 briefing to offer details on U.S. messages that are being delivered to Iran or describe what kinds of actions the U.S. may take in the event Iran imposes an oil blockade in response to U.S. and European sanctions for its nuclear program.

“We have a number of ways to communicate our views to the Iranian government, and we have used those mechanisms regularly on a range of issues over the years,” Carney said.

The U.S. has a “strong interest in the free flow of commerce and freedom of navigation” for oil shipped through the Strait of Hormuz, Carney said. “We have consistently communicated our views on that subject and concerns on those issues to the Iranians and to the international community broadly.”

In the event of hostilities, “we take no options off the table,” Carney said. “But we are engaged in the kinds of diplomatic efforts that you would expect in a situation like this.”

–With assistance from John Walcott and Roger Runningen in Washington. Editors: C. Thompson, Leslie Hoffecker

Israel and U.S. at odds over timetables and red lines for Iran – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

Although the U.S. has put pressure on Iran with more aggressive statements, an initiative to increase international sanctions and a clash over Iran’s threat to close the Strait of Hormuz, Jerusalem is not satisfied.

By Avi Issacharoff and Amos Harel

The two meetings this week between the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey and Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz have been scheduled for some time. But the immediate context cannot be ignored: growing tension over the Iranian nuclear program and what appears to be renewed (and increased) American concerns that Israel might attack Iran’s nuclear sites.

Dempsey and Gantz are expected meet first at mid-week in Brussels during the annual conference of NATO chiefs of staff, an event to which the Israeli chief of staff is always invited. Two days later Dempsey will arrive in Israel.

	U.S. President Barack Obama talks with Defense Minister Ehud Barak before delivering remarks at the 71st General Assembly of the Union for Reform Judaism, Dec. 16, 2011.
	Photo by: Pete Souza / Courtesy of the White House

Although Washington has ratcheted up pressure on Iran of late with a combination of more aggressive statements, an initiative to increase international sanctions and what appears to be an approaching clash over Iran’s threat to close the Strait of Hormuz, Jerusalem is not satisfied. Israel is not impressed by Iran’s deep economic crisis, which is increasing pressure on the regime as it prepares for parliamentary elections in March.

At the heart of the argument between Jerusalem and Washington are questions about timetables and red lines.

The start of uranium enrichment at the underground site near the city of Qom has raised the level of anxiety in Israel. In an interview with CNN two months ago, Defense Minister Ehud Barak said that less than a year remained to stop Iran’s nuclear plans. Barak thus presented Israel’s red line: From the moment most of the uranium is being enriched at a protected site, Iran will be in “immune space,” and the option of a military attack (at least by Israel) is off the table.

The American red line, however, is more distant – at the point were Iran has progressed in the development of a nuclear warhead rather than making do with nuclear capability. That line has not yet been crossed.

Do Barak and Netanyahu really intend to attack on their own, or is Israel only trying to prod the West into more decisive action? That is the million-dollar question.

It has been discussed intermittently for the past three years and it seems that Washington does not have a satisfactory answer to it. What is clear is that speculation about it in the American media – this time, surprisingly, without contributory Israeli chatter – raises the heat in Tehran as well. Apparently the risk of an imminent clash, first of all between American and Iranian ships in the Persian Gulf, is growing.

Hezbollah is contributing to this already tense situation. Over the weekend a Hezbollah terror strike against an Israeli target was averted in Bangkok, Thailand. This is the second such incident, following a warning of an attack by the same group on Israeli tourists in Bulgaria. Hezbollah is serving these days as the long arm of Iran, operated directly by the branch of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards known as Al Quds.

The context is not only the approaching anniversary of the assassination of Imad Mughniyeh, but also the killings of Iranian nuclear scientists in Tehran. Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah pledged yesterday that the killings would not stop the Iranian nuclear project.

Iran and Hezbollah are now also focusing their efforts on saving Syrian President Bashar Assad. Al Quds commander Gen. Kassem Suleimani recently visited Syria to help quash the revolt against the regime. Nasrallah knows that if Damascus falls, the demand to disarm Hezbollah – which he derided yesterday – will come up again more forcefully.