WarSclerotic

U.S. and Israel at odds — still? – Right Turn – The Washington Post.

By Jennifer Rubin  |  03:00 PM ET, 02/03/2012

Quick Iran curbs may obviate need for strike call: Israel – The West Australian.

MUNICH (Reuters) – Iran “will blink” if sanctions aimed at deterring it from building a nuclear bomb are imposed rapidly, meaning outside powers may never need to decide on possible armed action, an Israeli minister said on Friday.

Speaking to Reuters on the sidelines of a conference in Germany, Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon added that the key point of international concern should be the amount of enriched uranium Iran has managed to bury at a deep site at Fordow, its best sheltered nuclear site south of Tehran.

Ayalon was responding to a U.S. newspaper report that Defense Secretary Leon Panetta believed Israel was likely to bomb Iran within months to stop it building a nuclear bomb.

He added: “I don’t want to get into specifics because I don’t think we may necessarily reach that fork in the road of taking such a decision by all of us in the international community, if indeed sanctions will be imposed now, and the Iranians will stop completely their illegal activities now, then we may not even need to discuss such issues.”

The Washington Post reported on Thursday that Panetta was concerned about the increased likelihood Israel would launch an attack over the next few months. CNN said it confirmed the report, citing a senior Obama administration official, who declined to be identified.

Israel, widely believed to possess the Middle East’s only nuclear arsenal, views Iran’s uranium enrichment projects as a major threat and has not ruled out the use of military force to prevent Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Iran says its nuclear program is solely for peaceful purposes.

Washington and the European Union imposed tighter sanctions on Iran in recent weeks in a drive to force Tehran to provide more information on its nuclear program.

CRUNCH TIME

Iran has said repeatedly it could close the vital Strait of Hormuz shipping lane if sanctions succeed in preventing it from exporting crude, a move Washington said it would not tolerate.

Israel’s military intelligence chief said on Thursday he estimated that Iran could make four atomic bombs by further enriching uranium it had already stockpiled, and could produce its first bomb within a year of deciding to build one.

In Munich, Ayalon said Israel and the United States “absolutely” agreed not only on the goal of stopping Iran getting the bomb but also on how to reach that goal.

He said there had been “very, very positive steps” in toughening curbs on Iran including EU sanctions, although some of these might only take affect gradually over some months.

“It is not enough yet in the sense that the lead time is a little bit too much, I believe the crunch should be now. It is a matter of weeks and months that can make a difference,” he said.

“We know that Iran is actually accelerating its nuclear activities maybe to pre-empt sanctions, so this is why now is the time to do it, so the Iranians will blink. The Iranian regime, as fanatic, as radical, as dangerous as it is, it’s not irrational when it comes to its own political survival.”

“Now the dilemma will all be theirs. They will have the dilemma to stop or bear the consequences.”

Asked if Israel’s key concern was the amount of enriched uranium Iran was transferring to a site at Fordow from less well sheltered installations, he replied: “Absolutely.”

Nuclear facilities at Fordow, about 160 km (100 miles) south of Tehran near the Iranian holy city of Qom, are believed by some experts to be about 80 meters (260 feet) underground.

Experts say this is probably at or beyond the maximum depth that even very big conventional bombs can reach. Some say the United States is the only country with any chance of damaging the Fordow chamber using just conventional air power.

The vulnerability to air attack of the chamber at Fordow, beneath a former missile base controlled by the elite Revolutionary Guards Corps, came into sharper focus on January 9 when the United Nations nuclear watchdog confirmed that Iran had started enriching uranium at the site.

The same day a State Department spokeswoman declared that if Iran was enriching uranium to 20 percent at Fordow this would be a “further escalation” of its pattern of violating its obligations under U.N. Security Council resolutions.

Ayalon said Israel saw “continued enrichment not just to 3.5 percent but also at 20 percent, which is clearly not for civil use but for military use.”

“We see them also trying to expedite hardening their installations so they will reach an immunity zone, where some action may not be as effective, and this is why the time is so much of the essence.”

Iran’s move to make uranium refined to a fissile purity of 20 percent — compared with 3.5 percent normally used to fuel power plants — has raised concern in Israel and the West as this moved it closer to weapons-grade material of 90 percent.

(Reporting by William Maclean and Michele Sani)

Iranian attack on America and allies increasingly likely – intelligence chief | World news | The Guardian.

(Hitting the fan… Finally! –  JW )

Washington openly blames Iranian supreme leader Ali Khamenei for first time over Saudi ambassador plot

James Clapper, the US intelligence chief, who has warned that an Iranian attack on America and its allies is increasingly likely. Photograph: Jacquelyn Martin/AP

The head of US intelligence has warned that there is an increasing likelihood that Iran could carry out attacks in America or against US and allied targets around the world.

The warning from the director of national intelligence, James Clapper, reflects rapidly rising tensions over Iran’s nuclear programme after the US and EU announced embargoes on the Iranian oil trade in the past few weeks, Israel leaked details of its preparation for a possible conflict and both the west and Iran boosted their military readiness in the Gulf.

The US plans to send a third aircraft carrier to the region in March, while Iran’s military has threatened to block the entrance to the Gulf in the strait of Hormuz and is planning to hold naval exercises there in the next few weeks involving a host of new weapons.

Presenting his annual “worldwide threat assessment” to Congress, Clapper said an alleged plot to blow up the Saudi ambassador in Washington last year, which the US blamed on the Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, “shows that some Iranian officials – probably including the supreme leader Ali Khamenei – have changed their calculus and are now more willing to conduct an attack in the United States in response to real or perceived US actions that threaten the regime.”

Clapper added: “Iran’s willingness to sponsor future attacks in the US or against our interests abroad probably will be shaped by Tehran’s evaluation of the costs it bears for the plot against the ambassador as well as Iranian leaders’ perceptions of US threats against the regime.”

Western officials say that in the past year there has been a notable increase in activity around the world by suspected members of Iran’s Quds force, the external operations arm of its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which they say could reflect positioning of units capable of carrying out reprisal attacks against western and Israeli targets if Iran was itself attacked. “There have been a lot of reports recently of IRGC activity abroad,” one western official said. “There is a great deal of worry about the IRGC carrying out covert and deniable actions. But they may be overestimating how much they can hide their role. The US and others are very concerned about this.

“In this situation, there is a risk of miscalculation,” the official added, “or of rogue elements operating independently.”

US officials say that the alleged Washington bomb plot showed a new recklessness by an increasingly embattled Iranian regime. An Iranian-American was charged last October with planning to blow up the Saudi ambassador to the US while he ate at his favourite Washington restaurant, potentially killing many Americans at the same time.

The US has claimed authorisation for the attack came from the highest levels of the regime, but Clapper’s remarks marked the first time Washington has openly blamed the supreme leader.

However, a western official cautioned that there was no evidence a final decision had been taken to go ahead with the attack. “Our understanding is that this was at the stage of operational planning. The order was for everything to be put in place. There was not, as far as I know, a green light,” the official said.

In recent days, both the Thai and Azeri governments made a number of arrests of suspects allegedly linked to Iranian intelligence who are accused of planning to kill Israel diplomats and a rabbi. One possibility, western governments believe, is that the plots were intended as reprisals for a string of murders in Tehran of Iranian scientists linked to the country’s nuclear programme. Iran has blamed Mossad for the killings, an accusation that many western officials think is plausible.

After an Iranian threat last month to close the strait of Hormuz in response to oil sanctions, the US has deployed two aircraft carriers, the USS Abraham Lincoln and the USS Carl Vinson, in the region. A thirdis scheduled to head to the Gulf in March.

John Pike, a military analyst and the head of the GlobalSecurity.org thinktank said: “That almost never happens. They seldom even have two.”

He added that a fourth carrier, the USS John Stennis, was sailing away from the area but at a slow pace and could be back within a few days.

Tensions have been stoked further by leaked details of Israeli military preparations and cabinet deliberations on whether to strike Iran in the next few months, in an effort to set back its nuclear programme by a few years. Western officials confess they are unsure to what extent such reports represent an Israeli bluff to force urgent action by the US and its European allies, but say they do take the Israeli threats seriously.

One possibility is that Israel could launch air strikes at the height of the US presidential election campaign, on the grounds that the Obama administration would have to mute any politically risky criticism of a longstanding US ally.

Some observers believe the planned European and US oil embargoes, due to come into effect five months from now with potentially severe implications for the Iranian economy, along with a military build-up in the region, could themselves raise the risk of miscalculation on all sides.

“I don’t think they are playing Iran anything like as well as they think they are,” said Richard Dalton, a former British ambassador to Tehran. “The oil embargo tends to give those elements in Iran who want to have maximal defences, including nuclear defences, added weight to their arguments. Also they are poking Iran with a sharp stick but this is not accompanied by a new negotiating incentives.”

In a strikingly critical report, an influential Israeli thinktank, the Institute for National Security Studies, warned that the Israeli leadership could be rushing into a decision to attack without properly thinking of the implications. The authors said that Israeli society should “not assume that decision makers will automatically make correct choices based on a rational of an attack’s cost effectiveness”.

“Past experience has proven that such an in-depth discussion does not always take place,” the report said. It questioned whether a nuclear Iran was really an existential threat to Israel and warned that unilateral action would alienate the US and other Israeli allies.

“The image – not the first of its kind – will be of an Israel unilaterally violating the rules of the international game and launching a military campaign without legitimacy from the security council. This might increase Israel’s isolation as well contribute to its delegitimisation.”

Iran insists its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes. The west and Israel allege it is intended to give Iran at least the capacity to make a bomb, but Clapper conceded in his remarks : “We do not know, however, if Iran will eventually decide to build nuclear weapons.”

Feet on the ground, head in the sky – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

Amir Eshel is apparently in line to become the air force’s next commander. In that capacity, one wonders, will the officer who led the flyby at Auschwitz send his pilots to bomb Natanz?

By Amos Harel

For years, Maj. Gen. Amir Eshel has avoided the limelight. It’s hard to remember even one remark by the head of the Israel Defense Forces plans and policy directorate that drew politicians’ wrath. The same cannot be said for many of his General Staff colleagues.

That tactic was supposed to ensure Eshel’s smooth transition to becoming commander of the air force – the branch where he spent most of his military career. However, two developments threw spanners in the works. One was the fact that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seemed to favor appointing his military secretary, Maj. Gen. Yohanan Locker, as the next commander of the force. The second development is the reality-show atmosphere with which the media cover every high-ranking IDF appointment.

	Maj. Gen. Amir Eshel
	Photo by: Nir Kafri

Chief of Staff Benny Gantz’s solid backing for Eshel is, however, expected to tip the scales. Last Monday, Defense Minister Ehud Barak met separately with Eshel, Locker and a third candidate, Brig. Gen. Nimrod Shefer. Barak, who thought Eshel was a worthy candidate back in 2008 – though Maj. Gen. Ido Nechushtan was ultimately chosen – will likely go along with Gantz. Barring a last-minute surprise, Eshel’s appointment will be announced shortly and he will take over from Nechushtan in May.

Still, caution is necessary when making such statements. Less than a year ago, Haaretz ran a profile of Y., the Shin Bet security service’s deputy head. He was considered a shoo-in to succeed Yuval Diskin. But soon afterward, Netanyahu decided to appoint the second candidate, Yoram Cohen.

Eshel, 52, was drafted in 1977. Two years later, he completed a combat pilots’ course. He was the commander of F-16 and Phantom squadrons, and head of the Ramon and Tel Nof airbases, and of group squadrons. He also served as air force chief of staff during the Second Lebanon War and at the time that foreign sources reported Syria’s nuclear installation had been bombed by Israel.

Eshel rose to public fame outside the air force when he led a flyover of Israeli fighter planes above Auschwitz in 2003. In a rare interview, he told Haaretz in 2009, “Dan Halutz, who was the air force commander, came back from a visit to Poland and said the Poles had invited us to fly Israeli fighter planes as part of the event marking their air force’s 85th anniversary. Within two minutes I was in his office. I said to Halutz: Tell them we are accepting their invitation, on condition we do a flyby over Auschwitz. He almost fell out of his chair. He asked me: Where did you come up with that? I told him I had been thinking about the idea for years.”

The Israelis needed much persuasion to obtain the Poles’ cooperation. Ultimately, the planes flew fairly low over Auschwitz, as Nechushtan led a military delegation at a ceremony below. The planes were photographed above the entrance to Auschwitz in what was perceived as a symbolic demonstration of might by Israel and the IDF.

“I went to Poland to bring back that image,” Eshel said. “I told the pilots: For 800 years we did what we were told in that country. This time we will do what needs doing.”

That photograph hangs in the offices of many senior Israeli figures. Former air force commander Maj. Gen. Eliezer Shkedy distributed copies as a farewell gift to his General Staff colleagues, and added a dedication: “To remember. Not to forget. To rely only on ourselves.”

“The memory of the Holocaust frames everything we do,” Eshel says. “But it has to be a sober-eyed view. You can’t act from the gut here. It doesn’t dull our senses to the point of doing nonsense. Absolutely not. We are people with our feet on the ground, but it’s important to be cautious. What are 60 years in [the perspective of] history? Nothing, a comma.”

A talented man

With the exception of the Military Intelligence director, the head of the plans and policy directorate is the General Staff member who is closest to politicians. The weakness of civilian institutions gives this department great power. Chiefs of staff also rely heavily on this post.

Eshel has maintained good relations with former Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi, and with Gantz and Barak. He was also smart enough not to get involved in the Harpaz affair, which involved alleged attempts to influence the chief-of-staff appointment.

Maj. Gen. (res. ) Giora Eiland, who was policy chief a decade ago, is excited at the prospect of Eshel heading the air force.

“It will be a terrific appointment,” Eiland says. “Amir is one of the most talented people I know. He is apparently also an excellent pilot, but that’s not something I know much about. He is a superb policy chief and is responsible more than anyone for preserving our strategic ties with the Americans. He has so many strengths: He takes initiative, and he takes a broad view. He possesses extraordinary integrity. He will tell the prime minister the right thing and not be afraid of the consequences.”

Eshel apparently has no illusions of future promotions, of eventually becoming chief of staff. It has nothing to do with modesty. “Anyone who doesn’t know him well might think he is a little like Napoleon, because of his self-confidence,” Eiland says. “But the truth is that he is talented and collegial.”

The problem lies in the precedent set by another skilled pilot, Dan Halutz, whose performance as chief of staff in the Second Lebanon War may have blocked that promotion track for pilots for 50 years to come.

Eshel told Haaretz in 2009 that Israel’s big mistake in the 2006 war was that it missed its chance to make sharper, swifter moves.

“We could have scored a greater achievement. The big problem was that we did not understand the force at our disposal. We were in too much of a hurry to eulogize the outcome, though that does not absolve us of our mistakes.” Still, he added, “I don’t remember a time when we had this kind of deterrence against Hezbollah, even if that doesn’t guarantee that the border won’t blow up tomorrow morning.”

Even though Eshel, as air force chief of operations in the late 1990s, did more than most to tighten cooperation with the ground forces, he and his air force colleagues still firmly believe in air power. Israel, he says, must fight short wars, which may necessitate massive air power in minimal time, to attain the greatest possible achievements before the international community intervenes.

“I don’t want us to delude ourselves. There is no gimmick for every situation,” he said in that 2009 interview. “The other side is developing capabilities. The military threat to Israel is becoming more acute in all sectors. The nature of wars is changing. There is no longer an enemy who raises a while flag on the hilltop and surrenders.

“In fact, the whole question of what constitutes victory has to be examined. The Six-Day War was an unquestionable victory, but how long did it take them to start shooting again? [David] Ben-Gurion grasped the balance of forces between the sides well, the disparities of size. There is no knockout. We are looking for one, but it’s not to be had. Our enemies recognize our superiority in certain areas and are working hard to offset those advantages. They are using weapons for which we do not always have solutions we would like: missiles, rockets.”

Restraint on Iran

Some consider Eshel a moderate when it comes to Iran. But about a month ago, when he was sent to brief foreign correspondents, he warned that a nuclear Iran would give rise to a “global nuclear jungle” and spur a Middle East arms race. Under the cover of a nuclear umbrella, Hezbollah and Hamas would allow themselves to do things they do not dare do today, and Israel’s military maneuverability would be limited.

“When the other side has a nuclear capability and are willing to use it, you think twice,” Eshel explained. “You are more restrained because you don’t want to get into that ball game.”

Eshel declined to say anything about a possible attack, but told the correspondents, “We have the ability to hit very, very hard, any adversary.”

Regarding Syria, he agreed with those who are predicting that President Bashar Assad will fall. Israel’s primary concern is who will control the vast stores of biological and chemical weapons in Syria after the regime collapses, he said. Eshel told the foreign correspondents that despite Assad’s bitter fight against his opposition, his regime has spent about $2 billion on advanced antiaircraft systems over the past two years.

Speaking this week at a Herzliya conference, Nechushtan commented that military acquisitions by Israel’s neighbors constitute “a challenge to Israel’s aerial superiority.” This is the first time the IDF has admitted this publicly. Nechushtan added that concern that Syrian weapons systems could find their way into other hands – a reference mostly to Hezbollah getting its hands on antiaircraft missiles – “is making us anxious.”

In 2016, the first of the new F-35 fighter aircraft will arrive, following a deal struck two years ago. The F-35 “is not just another weapons system,” Eshel told Haaretz. “Since the 1950s, Israel always has had the world’s best fighter planes. This is perceived as a declaration. Fighter planes are a very significant component in a country’s strength.”

Long before the F-35s arrive, Israel will likely have to make a decision about attacking Iran. Will the officer who led the flyover at Auschwitz send his pilots to bomb Natanz and the enrichment facility at Fordo, near Qom? In the end, that will be up to the politicians. The air force commander’s opinion will be important, of course, but it will not be the deciding factor. It’s a reasonable guess that Eshel, if he is indeed appointed air force commander, will behave like Nechushtan: He will prepare the force for its mission as well as he can, but will not urge the cabinet to embark on such a controversial move.

Gantz’s General Staff

Chief of Staff Benny Gantz has managed to appoint more than a third of the General Staff members within less than a year: Yair Golan as GOC Northern Command, Nitzan Alon as GOC Central Command, Eyal Eisenberg as GOC Home Front, Ram Rothberg as commander of the navy, Uzi Moscovich as head of the teleprocessing branch, Kobi Barak as head of the technological and logistics directorate, and Yossi Baiditz as commander of the military colleges. Maj. Gen. (res. ) Shai Avital was brought back from retirement to head the newly created Depth Corps, and Noam Tibon was promoted to major general as head of Northern Command Corps.

All these appointments were approved by Defense Minister Ehud Barak, but most were Gantz’s initiatives. Gantz’s associates admit that they accepted Barak’s decision in the case of only one appointment: financial adviser to the chief of staff. The two compromised on a military advocate general candidate after a lengthy dispute.

There is another important appointment in the pipeline: the next deputy chief of staff, to succeed Maj. Gen. Yair Naveh. Gantz would very much like to see that post filled by the former GOC Northern Command Gadi Eizenkot, who is now on sabbatical. However, two of Eizenkot’s close friends, Col. (res. ) Gabi Siboni and Mossad head Tamir Pardo, were involved in publicizing the Harpaz. The two testified that they did so without the knowledge of Eizenkot, even though he had previously shown them a copy of the document (which he received from Ashkenazi ).

Eizenkot, who was Ehud Barak’s military secretary at the end of the 1990s, is highly regarded by the defense minister, though the Harpaz affair generated some tension between them. The state comptroller’s report on the Harpaz affair might affect Barak and Gantz’s decision about whether to appoint Eizenkot deputy chief of staff. The draft report will probably be disseminated next week.

Another possible candidate for deputy chief of staff is Maj. Avi Mizrahi, who completes his term as GOC Central Command this month. Eizenkot will have a leading role in Gantz’s immediate team if he is appointed deputy. Others who will likely be prominent are Maj. Gen. Golan, Maj. Gen. Amir Eshel and Military Intelligence chief Maj. Gen. Aviv Kochavi. (Amos Harel )

Gantz’s General Staff

Chief of Staff Benny Gantz has managed to appoint more than a third of the General Staff members within less than a year: Yair Golan as GOC Northern Command, Nitzan Alon as GOC Central Command, Eyal Eisenberg as GOC Home Front, Ram Rothberg as commander of the navy, Uzi Moscovich as head of the teleprocessing branch, Kobi Barak as head of the technological and logistics directorate, and Yossi Baidatz as commander of the military colleges. Maj. Gen. (res. ) Shai Avital was brought back from retirement to head the newly created Depth Corps, and Noam Tibon was promoted to major general as head of Northern Command Corps.

All these appointments were approved by Defense Minister Ehud Barak, but most were Gantz’s initiatives. Gantz’s associates admit that they accepted Barak’s decision in the case of only one appointment: financial adviser to the chief of staff. The two compromised on a military advocate general candidate after a lengthy dispute.

There is another important appointment in the pipeline: the next deputy chief of staff, to succeed Maj. Gen. Yair Naveh. Gantz would very much like to see that post filled by the former GOC Northern Command Gadi Eizenkot, who is now on sabbatical. However, two of Eizenkot’s close friends, Col. (res. ) Gabi Siboni and Mossad head Tamir Pardo, were involved in publicizing the Harpaz document. The two testified that they did so without the knowledge of Eizenkot, even though he had previously shown them a copy of the document (which he received from Ashkenazi ).

Eizenkot, who was Ehud Barak’s military secretary at the end of the 1990s, is highly regarded by the defense minister, though the Harpaz affair generated some tension between them. The state comptroller’s report on the Harpaz affair might affect Barak and Gantz’s decision about whether to appoint Eizenkot deputy chief of staff. The draft report will probably be disseminated next week.

Another possible candidate for deputy chief of staff is Maj. Avi Mizrahi, who completes his term as GOC Central Command this month. Eizenkot will have a leading role in Gantz’s immediate team if he is appointed deputy. Others who will likely be prominent are Maj. Gen. Golan, Maj. Gen. Amir Eshel and Military Intelligence chief Maj. Gen. Aviv Kochavi. (Amos Harel )

US anxiety grows over possible I… JPost – Iranian Threat – News.

By Baz Ratner / Reuters

Israel Warns US Jews: Iran Could Strike Here – ABC News.

Israeli facilities in North America — and around the world — are on high alert, according to an internal security document obtained by ABC News that predicted the threat from Iran against Jewish targets will increase.

“We predict that the threat on our sites around the world will increase … on both our guarded sites and ‘soft’ sites,” stated a letter circulated by the head of security for the Consul General for the Mid-Atlantic States. Guarded sites refers to government facilities like embassies and consulates, while ‘soft sites’ means Jewish synagogues, and schools, as well as community centers like the one hit by a terrorist bombing in Buenos Aires in 1994 that killed 85 people.

The head of Shin Bet, Israel‘s internal security service, told an audience at a closed forum in Tel Aviv recently that Iran is trying to hit Israeli targets because of what it believes are Israeli attacks on it nuclear scientists. Yoram Cohen said that Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, the same militant wing of the government linked to the recent alleged plot against the Saudi ambassador to the U.S., is working tirelessly to attack Israeli and Jewish targets abroad in order to deter Israel.

Local and regional law enforcement and intelligence officials in U.S. and Canadian cities, including New York, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and Toronto have been monitoring the situation closely for several weeks, and have stepped up patrols at Israeli government locations and Jewish cultural and religious institutions. They have issued awareness bulletins reminding officers to stay vigilant.

Federal officials in those cities told ABC News that they have also increased their efforts to watch for any threat stream pointing to an imminent attack on either Israeli facilities, Jewish cultural or religious institutions or other “soft targets.”

“When there is posturing like this, we always pay extra attention to any threat streams,” one federal official said.

“The thwarted assassination plot of a Saudi official in Washington, D.C., a couple of months ago was an important data point,” added the official, “in that it showed at least parts of the Iranian establishment were aware of the intended event and were not concerned about inevitable collateral damage to U.S. citizens had they carried out an assassination plot on American soil.”

“That was an eye opener, showing that they did not care about any collateral damage,” the federal official said.

After the disruption of the alleged plot, regional intelligence centers issued bulletins similar to the recent Israeli warning.

“In the past few weeks, there has been an escalation in threats against Israeli and Jewish targets around the world,” one regional document noted. “Open source has reported many demonstrations against Israel are expected to be concentrated on Israeli embassies and consulates. Such demonstrations have occurred internationally as well as domestically. These demonstrations could potentially turn violent at local synagogues, restaurants, the Israeli Embassy and other Israeli sites. … Law enforcement should be vigilant when making periodic checks at all Jewish facilities.

And the Israeli bulletin warned that Israel’s own passports might be used by terrorists intent on carrying out a plot.

“According to our evaluation there is a possibility that the forged passports will be used in order to pass as Israeli citizens at the security checks in Israel and around the world. Israeli security authorities may consider an Israeli citizenship as a [criterion] to proceed with a more lenient security check in secure sites such as airports, etc.,” the letter stated.

Israeli Military Strike Against Iran?

The Israeli security bulletin came in the midst of heated rhetoric on the part of the U.S., Iranian and Israeli political religious and military leadership and follows the recent assassination of a key scientist in Iran’s nuclear enrichment program. If the rhetoric is to be believed, there is a deep concern that Israel might launch a military strike against Iran during the spring of 2012.

The intelligence community assessment of that possibility, based on interviews conducted by ABC News, is considerably more nuanced, taking into account as it does the political will of the United States during an election year, the fragile nature of Great Britain’s coalition government , the willingness of other allies to join in an offensive, the roles of Russia and China and Saudi Arabia in such a confrontation, and whether Israel would really be willing to launch a unilateral strike.

“But in this situation, the political rhetoric is actually quite important,” one official told ABC News. “And that is why the official position — of the U.S, England, France, Canada, Israel and allies — is that nothing is off the table.”

An apparent shift in the Israeli/U.S. relationship has complicated matters, however, said the official. In the past, Israel would probably have given the U.S. a heads up were it to launch a strike. Now that might not be the case. Among the English-speaking allies of the U.S., say multiple intelligence officials, there is currently a very limited expectation of any early warning.

While much of the public attention has focused on Israel and the rifts within its leadership on how to respond to Iran’s nuclear weapons program, the reality for Iran’s leadership is also problematic. After threatening to strangle the world oil supply through the straits of Hormuz, Iran “has boxed itself into a corner,” said one Western intelligence official. “It would be quite humiliating for them to back down.”

The Israeli security letter sums up the resultant risks very clearly.

“In conclusion, we operate according to the information that Iran and Hezbollah are working hard and with great intensity to release a ‘quality’ attack against Israeli/Jewish sites around the world.”

US anxiety grows over possible I… JPost – Iranian Threat – News.

(OK.  So be afraid… Be VERY afraid… –  JW )

By Baz Ratner / Reuters

The 5th Fleet: Inside the U.S. Armada That Will Check Iran.

Rebels Say Syrian Army near Collapse — Naharnet.

Middle EastSyria

Join the conversation

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei Threatens Retaliation Against Attack – NYTimes.com.

By ROBERT F. WORTH

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — Iran’s supreme leader lashed out at the United States in a defiant speech on Friday, vowing to retaliate against oil sanctions and threats of war over Iran’s nuclear program, and asserting that any attack “would be ten times worse for the interests of the United States” than it would be for Iran.

The speech made during Friday Prayers and broadcast live to the nation came amid deepening American concern about a possible strike on Iran’s nuclear enrichment sites by Israel, whose leaders delivered blunt new warnings on Thursday about what they called the need to stop Iran’s nuclear program. Israeli leaders have issued mixed signals regarding their intentions, suggesting they are willing, for a short time at least, to wait and see if increasingly strict economic sanctions, including a European oil embargo, might deter Iran.

The Iranian supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, also issued an unusually blunt warning that Iran would support militant groups opposing Israel, in what some analysts said could be held up by Israel as a casus belli. Ayatollah Khamenei’s remarks, delivered from Tehran University, were his most public response to the mounting tensions between Western powers and Iran in recent weeks.

Ayatollah Khamenei said that Iran “had its own tools” to respond to threats of war and would use them “if necessary,” the semi-official Mehr news agency reported. He also said the threats would not stop Iran from continuing its nuclear program, which it has long maintained is for peaceful purposes only.

Ayatollah Khamenei referred to the sanctions as “painful and crippling,” according to Iranian news agencies, acknowledging the effect of recent measures aimed at cutting Iran’s central bank off from the international financial system. But he also said the sanctions would ultimately benefit his country. “They will make us more self reliant,” he said, according to a translation by Iran’s semi-official Fars news agency. “We would not achieve military progress if sanctions were not imposed on Iran’s military sector.”

In recent weeks, senior American and European officials have flown to Israel to counsel patience, warning that a military attack on Iran’s nuclear enrichment sites could backfire and strengthen what they called its determination to acquire nuclear weapons. But Israeli officials say they are worried that Iran may soon be immune to the threat of airstrikes as its enrichment facilities are moved into deep mountain bunkers.

Israel’s defense minister, Ehud Barak, said on Thursday that if sanctions fail to stop Iran’s nuclear program, Israel would need to “consider taking action,” according t a report in the daily newspaper, Haaretz.

United States Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta, in comments on Friday at Ramstein Air Base in Germany, echoed a similar sentiment.

“My view is that right now the most important thing is to keep the international community unified in keeping that pressure on, to try to convince Iran that they shouldn’t develop a nuclear weapon, that they should join the international family of nations and that they should operate by the rules that we all operate by,” he said. “But I have to tell you, if they don’t, we have all options on the table, and we’ll be prepared to respond if we have to.”

But Iran gave little indication it is willing to ease concerns over its nuclear program.

Iran told inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency this week that it would prevent access to sites and personnel that the West suspects of advancing the nation’s work toward nuclear arms capability, damaging what had been considered a major diplomatic opening.

“Disaster is too strong a word,” said a diplomat at the agency’s headquarters in Vienna who was briefed on the outcome of the recent talks. “Iran has refused to address the issue for three years now,” the diplomat said. “To be fair, you have to give them credit for at least discussing it. The dialogue is continuing — and that’s a good sign — although the agency would have liked to get an access pledge.”

The atomic agency, which is the nuclear proliferation monitor of the United Nations, has long tried to get Tehran to address what it calls evidence of the “military dimensions” of Iran’s nuclear program. Tehran has repeatedly dismissed the evidence as fabricated or taken out of context, and had refused to engage in substantive discussions or inspections.

Then, in November, the agency made public its most detailed summary of the weapons allegations, and Iran this year agreed to its first substantive talks on the topic. The inspectors went to Iran for a three-day visit that ended this past Tuesday.

“The agency expressed interest in all the areas of concern,” said the diplomat, who spoke on the condition of anonymity under the usual rules on politically sensitive topics. “The team asked for access in the future to different types of sites and personnel, and that was denied.”

But Iran did offer to continue the dialogue. The inspectors plan to return on Feb. 21.

Critics have accused Iran of using false promises and delaying tactics on the diplomatic front to buy time in the nuclear program for the making of atomic strides.