WarSclerotic

DEBKAfile, Political Analysis, Espionage, Terrorism, Security.

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report February 20, 2012, 9:14 PM (GMT+02:00)

Natanz nuclear site air defenses

After a high-ranking US delegation headed by White House National Security Adviser Tom Donilon failed in three days of tough talks (Feb.18-20) to dissuade Israeli leaders to back off plans for a military strike against Iran’s nuclear sites, the White House invited Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu for talks with President Barak Obama on March 5. He will try and break the stalemate which ended his advisers’ talks with Netanyahu, Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz.
The defense minister, addressing his Independence Party later Monday praised Israel’s security relations with the US as very good and very important for a strong Israel. The dialogue between the two governments, he said, is marked by openness, mutual respect, understanding and attentiveness. At the same time, Barak hinted at discord by adding, “Both are sovereign nations which are ultimately responsible for their decisions in relation to themselves and their future.”

debkafile reported earlier Monday, Feb. 20:

White House National Security Adviser Tom Donilon faced an acrimonious Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in two hours of stormy conversation in Jerusalem Sunday, Feb. 19, according to updates reaching senior US sources in Washington. The main bones of contention were Iran’s continuing enrichment of uranium and its ongoing relocation of production to underground sites.
Israeli officials declined to give out any information on the conversation. Some even refused to confirm it took place.
According to debkafile’s sources, Netanyahu accused the Obama administration of drawing Iran into resuming nuclear negotiations with world powers by an assurance that Tehran would be allowed to continue enriching uranium up to 5 percent in any quantity, provided it promised not to build an Iranian nuclear weapon. The prime minister charged that this permit contravened US administration guarantees to Israel on the nuclear issue and, moreover left Tehran free to upgrade its current 20 percent enrichment level to 90 percent weapons grade. This Israel cannot tolerate, said Netanyahu, so leaving its military option on the ready.
He warned the US National Security Adviser that no evidence whatsoever confirms Washington’s claim that Tehran intends suspending enrichment and other nuclear advances when negotiations begin. Quite the contrary: Even before the date was set, Iran started working at top speed to build up its bargaining chips by laying down major advances in its nuclear program as undisputed facts.
Tehran now claims to have progressed to self-reliance in the production of 20 percent-enriched uranium, the basis for the weapons grade fuel, in unlimited quantity. Once the talks are underway, Netanyahu maintained, there would be no stopping the Iranians without stalling the negotiating process. Going by past experience, Tehran would use dialogue as an extra fulcrum for its impetus toward weapon production without interruption.
Monday, Donilon and his delegation meet Defense Minister Ehud Barak.
The mission of this high-powered US delegation in Israel takes place to the accompanied of a resumed US media campaign for discouraging Israeli military action against Iran’s nuclear installations.
Sunday, Gen. Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint US Chiefs of Staff, offered this opinion to CNN: “Israel has the capability to strike Iran and delay the Iranians probably for a couple of years. But some of the targets are probably beyond their reach.”
Monday’s New York Times carried an assessment by “American defense officials and military analysts close to the Pentagon” under the caption, “Iran Raid Seen as a Huge Task for Israel Jets.” debkafile’s military sources report the main argument, dredged up from the past and long refuted, is that Israeli Air Force bombers cannot cover the distance to Iran without in-flight refueling.
That array of “analysts” apparently missed the CNN interview and therefore contradicted the assessment of America’s own top general that “Israel has the capability to strike Iran…”
Reality has meanwhile moved on. Four events in the last 24 hours no doubt figured large in the US delegation’s talks with Israeli leaders:
1.  Monday, the IAEA sent to Tehran its second team of monitors this month for another attempt to gain access to nuclear facilities hitherto barred by the Iranians. The inspectors will also demand permission to interview scientists which according to a list drawn up at the agency’s Vienna headquarters hold key positions in their nuclear program.
2. The Russian Chief of Chaff Gen. Nikolai Makarov estimated that the attack on Iran would be “coordinated” by several governments and “a decision would be made by the summer.”
3.  Moscow recalled Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kutznetsov from the Syrian port of Tartus to its home base at Severomorsk on the Kola Peninsula.
4. Turkey is beinding over backward to assure Iran that data collected by the US missile shield radar stationed at its Kurecik air base will not shared with Israel. It is especially anxious not to annoy Tehran after foreign minister Ali Akbar Salehi announced that the resumed nuclear talks with the five Permanent Security Council members and German (P5+1) would be held in Istanbul.
However, the Iranians certainly know exactly what is going on after watching the recent joint US-Israeli radar test which demonstrated that Israel is fully integrated in the missile shield radar network and that the US radar station in the Israeli Negev interfaces with its station in Turkey and Israel’s Arrow missile Green Pine radar.
When he visited Ankara last week, NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen assured his Turkish hosts that “Intelligence data collected within the missile defense system will not be shared with third countries. It will be shared with the allies within our alliance.”
His statement was quite accurate – except for the fact that the radar stations collecting the intelligence data are not controlled by NATO but by US military teams, both of which, including the Turkish-based radar, are integrated and coordinated with Israeli radar and missile interceptors.

Joseph Wouk analyzes (Israel vs Iran) vs the US.

Netanyahu to meet Obama at White … JPost – Diplomacy & Politics.

Lebanon news – NOW Lebanon -Israel under huge pressure to avoid Iran attack.

Now Lebanon

Iran threatens to cut oil to more EU nations.

Monday, 20 February 2012

Iran exports about 20 percent of its crude — some 600,000 barrels per day (bpd) — to the European Union, most of which goes to Italy, Spain and Greece. (File photo)

inShare

U.S. official to discuss Iran concerns in Israel – CBS News.

(The ignorant blather continues… – JW )

(CBS/AP)

JERUSALEM – A senior U.S. official was expected to continue voicing American concerns over the prospect of an Israeli attack on Iran during a visit to Jerusalem on Monday, as worry over the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program mounts.

CBS Radio News correspondent Robert Berger says U.S. National Security Adviser Tom Donilon brought what media reports describe as a clear message to Israeli leaders: Don’t attack Iran.

But Israel isn’t making any promises, adds Berger.

“We should remember that Israel and the U.S. are independent countries,” said Israeli Cabinet Minister Daniel Hershkowitz.

The U.S. wants to give sanctions on Iran more time, but Israel says time is running out.

“If we do not stop Iran now, later on it will be impossible,” warned Israel’s Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon.

Donilon’s arrival was the latest in a series of high-level meetings between Israel and the U.S. – all of which seem to follow the theme of Washington urging Jerusalem to hold fire.

Donilon was set to meet with Netanyahu late Sunday, and with Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak on Monday before leaving.

Meanwhile, The New York Times reported Monday that U.S. military intelligence officials have their doubts over Israel’s ability to effectively target Iranian nuclear sites with air strikes.

“All the pundits who talk about ‘Oh, yeah, bomb Iran,’ it ain’t going to be that easy,” Lt. Gen. David A. Deptula, who planned the American Afghan and Gulf War air campaigns, told the Times.

Other American defense officials say an Israeli attack meant to set back Iran’s nuclear program would be huge and highly complex.

The Times article suggests that an effective attack on Iran would require as many as 100 aircraft attacking at least four underground sites simultaneously, and they would have to refuel in midair to make the roundtrip.

Defense analysts fear the U.S. would be sucked into finishing the job – a task that the Times suggests would take weeks – and warn that an Israeli attack could spark Iranian retaliation against U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf.

“That’s the question with which we all wrestle. And the reason that we think that it’s not prudent at this point to decide to attack Iran,” the chairman of the U.S. joint chiefs of staff, Gen. Martin Dempsey, told CNN Sunday.

Dempsey said Israel has the capability to strike Iran and delay the Iranians “probably for a couple of years. But some of the targets are probably beyond their reach.”

Describing Iran as a “rational actor,” Dempsey said he believed that the international sanctions on Iran are beginning to have an effect. “For that reason, I think, that we think the current path we’re on is the most prudent path at this point.”

British Foreign Secretary William Hague also released a statement Sunday saying an Israeli attack on Iran would not be “a wise thing” and would have grave consequences for the entire region.

Both Dempsey and Hague urged Israel to give international sanctions against Tehran more time to work. It was not known whether their messages were coordinated.

Asked whether he believed Israel could be deterred from striking, Dempsey said: “I’m confident that they understand our concerns, that a strike at this time would be destabilizing and wouldn’t achieve their long-term objectives. But, I mean, I also understand that Israel has national interests that are unique to them.”

Hague delivered a similar message in Britain. Speaking to the BBC, he said Britain was focused on pressuring Iran through diplomatic means.

“I don’t think a wise thing at this moment is for Israel to launch a military attack on Iran,” he said. “I think Israel like everyone else in the world should be giving a real chance to the approach we have adopted on very serious economic sanctions and economic pressure and the readiness to negotiate with Iran.”

Both Israel and the West believe Iran is trying to develop a nuclear bomb — a charge Tehran denies. But differences have emerged in how to respond to the perceived threat.

The U.S. and the European Union have both imposed harsh new sanctions targeting Iran’s oil sector, the lifeline of the Iranian economy. With the sanctions just beginning to bite, they have expressed optimism that Iran can be persuaded to curb its nuclear ambitions.

On Sunday, Iran’s Oil Ministry said it has halted oil shipments to Britain and France in an apparent pre-emptive blow against the European Union. The semiofficial Mehr news agency said the National Iranian Oil Company has sent letters to some European refineries with an ultimatum to either sign long-term contracts of two to five years or be cut off. The 27-nation EU accounts for about 18 percent of Iran’s oil exports.

Israel has welcomed the sanctions. But it has pointedly refused to rule out military action and in recent weeks sent signals that its patience is running thin.

Israel believes a nuclear-armed Iran would be a threat to its very existence, citing Iran’s support for Arab militant groups, its sophisticated arsenal of missiles capable of reaching Israel and its leaders’ calls for the destruction of the Jewish state.

Last week, Israel accused Iran of being behind a string of attempted attacks on Israeli diplomats in India, Georgia and Thailand.

There is precedent for Israeli action. In 1981, the Israeli air force destroyed an unfinished Iraqi nuclear reactor. And in 2007, Israeli warplanes are believed to have destroyed a target that foreign experts think was an unfinished nuclear reactor in Syria.

Experts, however, have questioned how much an Israeli operation would accomplish. With Iran’s nuclear installations scattered and buried deep underground, it is believed that an Iranian strike would set back, but not destroy, Iran’s nuclear program.

There are also concerns Iran could fire missiles at Israel, get its local proxies Hezbollah and Hamas to launch rockets into the Jewish state, and cause global oil prices to spike by striking targets in the Gulf.

In a sign that the diplomatic pressure might be working, Iran’s foreign minister said Sunday that a new round of talks with six world powers on the nuclear program will be held in Istanbul, Turkey. Ali Akbar Salehi didn’t give any timing for the talks.

The last round of talks between Iran and the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany were held in Istanbul in January 2011 but ended in failure.

Why Diplomacy Will Really Work This Time (and Do You Want to Buy a Bridge?) | World Opinion and Editorial Right Side News.

The latest in the Obama administration’s campaign to convince an already skeptical public that Iran should not be attacked – by either the US or Israel, is none other than the Hon. Dennis B. Ross. In his February 6th appearance at The Aspen Institute he expressed confidence that “the emergence of crippling sanctions” were forcing “Iran to make a cost-benefit calculation,” that “Iran was being isolated in the region,” and so the “Iranians are increasingly aware the price they are paying.” Therefore opines Mr. Ross, Iran will hopefully drop its nuclear ambitions and make an impending Israeli attack unnecessary.

Mr. Ross, a former State Department advisor, NSC official and a special assistant to President Obama,  repeated this argument in his February 15^th op-ed in The New York Times entitled: “Iran is Ready to Talk.”

His opening line sets the tone, if not the accuracy: “Speculation about an Israeli strike against Iranian nuclear facilities is rife, but there is little discussion about whether diplomacy can still succeed, precluding the need for military action.” Since he is only one more in a long line of Obamites discussing this line in recent months, it is incredulous he can suggest “there is little discussion.”

The Obama administration is in full court press mode suggesting diplomacy is the way, the only way. On February 1^st, Radio Free Europe reported: “US Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said on January 31^st that a combination of Western sanctions and diplomacy could still persuade Iran to abandon nuclear work which could be diverted toward an atomic weapon.” William H. Luers and Thomas R. Pickering in a February 2^nd New York Times op-ed entitled “Envisioning a Deal With Iran” wrote: “As the dangers mount in the confrontation between the United States and Iran, both sides will have to raise the doors high for diplomacy to work, and to avoid conflict.” And David Ignatius wrote in his February 2^nd Washington Post column that “US officials see two possible ways to dissuade the Israelis from such an attack: Tehran could finally open serious negotiations for a formula to verifiably guarantee that its nuclear program will remain a civilian one…” These are only three examples of endless discussion which Mr. Ross must have missed by not reading, listening or viewing any American media vehicle in the last several months.

Cleverly, Mr. Ross admits from the start that “Many experts doubt that Tehran would ever accept a deal that uses intrusive inspections and denies or limits uranium enrichment to halt any advances toward a nuclear weapons capability, while still permitting the development of civilian nuclear power.”  But having said that, a basic truth to which there really is no reliably safe answer, he still claims: “But before we assume that diplomacy can’t work, it is worth considering that Iranians are now facing crippling pressure and that their leaders have in the past altered their behavior in response to such pressure.” When Iran has comparably “altered their behavior” in the past he doesn’t say. But no matter, declares Mr. Ross: “Notwithstanding all their bluster, there are signs that Tehran is now looking for a way out.” Again, the reader is left to guess the signs, since Mr. Ross doesn’t think it important to say what they are.

As proof of Iran’s growing isolation in the region, Mr. Ross points out: “Gone is the fear of Iranian intimidation, as the Saudis demonstrated by immediately promising to fill the gap and meet Europe’s needs when the European Union announced its decision to boycott the purchase of Iran’s oil.” And here, he offers the proof that “Even after Iran denounced the Saudi move as a hostile act, the Saudis did not back off.” Mr. Ross neglects to mention that Sunni Saudi Arabia has been in a tizzy about a nuclear Shi’ite Iran for sometime and not thrilled with the take-it-slow Obama approach. The Guardian (UK) reported last June 29^th that Prince Turki al-Faisal, a former Saudi intelligence chief and ambassador to Washington, warned senior NATO military officials that…  “We cannot live in a situation where Iran has nuclear weapons and we don’t…. If Iran develops a nuclear weapon,” he said, “that will be unacceptable to us and we will have to follow suit.”

“Beginning in 2010, Washington worked methodically to impose political, diplomatic, economic and security pressure, making clear that the cost of noncompliance would continue to rise while still leaving the Iranians a way out,” Mr. Ross explains. “This strategy took into account how Iranian leaders had adjusted their behavior in the past to escape major pressure — from ending the war with Iraq in 1988 to stopping the assassinations of Iranian dissidents in Europe in the 1990s to suspending uranium enrichment in 2003.”

Mr. Ross fails to mention that Iran, who was attacked first by Iraq, accepted a UN brokered ceasefire after eight years of bloody combat and destroyed infrastructure, a loss of over half a million soldiers and civilians on both sides, and the pre-war borders completely restored. He also fails to point out that assassinations of Iranian dissidents in 1990’s was reduced owing to more pro-active measures by international law enforcement agencies and the fact that most of the targeted dissidents were already successfully killed. And his contention that Iran suspended uranium enrichment in 2003 is repeating the same canard promoted in the now infamous National Intelligence Estimate which was wrong when written and subsequently proven wrong by even the latest International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) report. Iran merely hid their uranium enrichment operations, blithely lied about it, and certain American intelligence officials blindly bought it since it served their political line.

Mr. Ross maintains that “The Obama administration has now created a situation in which diplomacy has a chance to succeed.” Although he admits that “It remains an open question whether it will.” But meanwhile, he is suggesting that Israel should take a gamble on national survival of a potential Iranian nuclear attack just in case Mr. Obama & Co. can pull it off. Given their foreign policy record thus far, that is a scary contention.

Then to fully cover his proverbial posterior, Dennis Ross admits that “Still, it is unclear whether Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, whose regime depends so heavily on hostility to America, is willing to make a deal on the nuclear issue.” In other words, everything I’ve written until now is basically wishful thinking.

And should anyone think otherwise, Mr. Ross continues with his copout clause: “Of course, Iran’s government might try to draw out talks while pursuing their nuclear program.”  Simply put, they will continue their ongoing, and thus far highly successful, strategy of lying through their teeth while smiling at the Western dupes who want to believe them at almost any cost – especially if Israel will be the one to pay.

Iran’s standard ploy to date is to offer to negotiate predicated on a reduction of sanctions as confidence building measures, or just a pre-condition for negotiations, period. This is also standard operating procedure by the US State Department where diplomacy rarely, if ever, works, but lots of photo-op’ed meetings take place before the ultimate explosion – frequently both figuratively and literally. So the Mullahs can easily stretch out “negotiations” while they are able to cross every one of the Obama administration’s “red lines.”

As Jennifer Rubin aptly noted in her November 7^th Washington Post blog: “Our time line on sanctions seems to be lagging the timeline on the Iranians’ nuclear program. How many weeks or months will it take to get those more exacting sanctions? And even if passed, are we too late to impede the Iranians from completing their work?” At this rate, the answer seems all too obvious.

The author is a veteran journalist specializing in geo-political and geo-strategic affairs in the Middle East. His articles have appeared in such publications as The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Times, Insight Magazine, Nativ, The Jerusalem Post and Makor Rishon. His articles have been reprinted by Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and in the US Congressional Record.

The Associated Press: Syrian army reinforcements head to Homs.

BEIRUT (AP) — A Syria-based activist says three columns of army reinforcements including tanks are heading toward the restive central city of Homs.

Mustafa Osso says the regime appears to be preparing to storm rebel-held neighborhoods in the city before a referendum is held Feb. 26 on a new constitution.

Osso told The Associated Press Monday he does not think the regime will be able to retake Homs through military force as residents plan to fight until “the last person.”

His comments came as the government kept up shelling of the rebel-held Baba Amr neighborhood of Homs. It has been under assault for more than two weeks.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP’s earlier story is below.

BEIRUT (AP) — Gunmen in Syria staged a guerrilla-style ambush that killed a senior state prosecutor and a judge Sunday in an attack that suggested armed factions are growing bolder and more coordinated in their uprising against President Bashar Assad’s regime.

The roadway slayings — reported in an opposition-dominated northern region by the Syrian state news agency — came a day after a deadly hit-and-run attack on a political figure in the heart of the pro-Assad city of Aleppo.

The targeted killings have not reached Assad’s inner circle, but they indicate a growing shift toward violent tactics by the opposition as it brings aboard more military defectors and seeks to tighten control over the small pieces of territory in its hands.

The fears of a looming civil war have neighboring Jordan racing to finish a refugee camp near the Syrian border to handle a possible exodus of people fleeing for safety.

Meanwhile, Egypt became the latest Arab nation to publicly snub Assad by ordering the withdrawal of its ambassador in Damascus.

The Syrian government has offered some concessions, including proposing a referendum next week that could allow more political voices to challenge Assad’s Baath Party. But the opposition demands nothing short of Assad’s resignation. And the regime has not eased off its attacks on the opposition forces, which it describes as “terrorists” carrying out a foreign conspiracy to destabilize the country.

In Homs in central Syria, government forces sent in reinforcements as they shelled the rebel-held Baba Amr district that has been under near constant barrage for nearly two weeks, said the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. The group said at least 14 people were killed Sunday across Syria, half of them by government troops.

“I’m worried that Syria is going to slide into a civil war,” British Foreign Secretary William Hague told the BBC on Sunday.

The U.N. last gave a death toll for the conflict in January, saying 5,400 people had been killed in 2011 alone. But hundreds more have been killed since, according to activist groups. An opposition group, Local Coordination Committees, says more than 7,300 have been killed since the uprising began more than 11 months ago.

There is no way to independently verify the numbers, since Syria bans almost all foreign journalists and human rights organizations.

The latest assassinations came on a road in the northwest province of Idlib, which has become a patchwork of areas held either by the government or mutinous soldiers who have safe-haven bases in nearby Turkey.

The state news agency SANA said gunmen opened fire on a car carrying Idlib provincial state prosecutor Nidal Ghazal and Judge Mohammed Ziadeh, who were killed instantly. The driver also was fatally wounded.

Idlib has witnessed intense clashes between troops loyal to Assad and army defectors who attack and then melt into the rugged mountains. In June, the town of Jisr al-Shugour became the first area to fall into the hands of rebels, who were accused by the government of killing scores of people and setting government buildings on fire. Syrian troops loyal to Assad retook the area shortly afterward.

On Saturday, SANA said gunmen shot to death Jamal al-Bish, a member of the city council of the nearby northern city of Aleppo. The city has been a center of support for Assad since the uprising began.

The back-to-back slayings follow the Feb. 11 killing of a Syrian army general in the first assassination to take place in the capital city of Damascus. Brig. Gen. Issa al-Khouli, a doctor and the chief of a military hospital in the capital, was shot as he left his home. Last month, the head of the Syrian Arab Red Crescent branch in Idlib was shot to death while on his way to Damascus.

In Cairo, Egyptian state news agency MENA said Foreign Minister Mohammed Amr decided to withdraw the country’s ambassador to Syria. The report gave no reason for the decision, but Arab governments have been pulling back diplomatic backing for Assad in protest against his refusal to back regional peace efforts.

Earlier this month, the six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council, led by powerful Saudi Arabia, said it would withdraw its ambassadors and expel Syrian envoys from the oil-rich region. Tunisia also has pulled its ambassador from Damascus.

In Damascus, a funeral was held for a man killed a day earlier when Syrian security forces fired bullets and tear gas at thousands of people marching in a funeral procession that turned into one of the largest protests in the capital.

The Local Coordination Committees said security forces pressured the parents of the victim, Samer al-Khatib, to bury him early so that his funeral would not turn into an anti-government protest.

Activist groups called for a one-day strike in Damascus to express support for other cities in revolt. But there was little response. Residents in the capital told The Associated Press that businesses were open as usual on the first day of the work week. School and universities also were operating.

Calls for strikes in the past did not succeed in tightly controlled Damascus, where government forces and informers keep a close eye on all activities. The capital has been mostly quiet since the uprising began.

Bassem Mroue can be reached on twitter at http://twitter.com/bmroue

UN nuclear inspectors to press Iran on weapons – Houston Chronicle.

US Army War College Prof: Iran A Menace to Region – Middle East – News – Israel National News.

Iran tests new medium-range missile

Israel news photo: Iranian government

Iran is a “menace” to the entire Middle East and must not be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons, according to Prof. Stephen Blank, a professor at the Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. War College.

In an op-ed article for the Washington-based Politico website, Blank said that it has become clear “that Tehran menaces all its neighbors and rivals – not just Israel. His concern is that ‘states driven by deep ethno-racial hatreds do not necessarily know when to stop,” implying that “wiping Israel off the map” would not satisfy Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s appetite for power.

He noted that Iranian-backed terror has stretched worldwide, including an Iranian plot last year to hire a Mexican cartel agent to attack Saudi Arabia’s and Israel’s embassies in Washington.

More recent plots and attacks include those on the wife of an Israeli diplomat in India last week, a foiled attack in Georgia, the botched bomb plot in Bangkok, and the Iranian scheme to blow up a Chabad school near Baku.

Iran’s “policies appear driven both by anti-Semitism and aggressive, perhaps even neo-imperial, designs on the governments (if not the territory) of its neighbors,” Prof. Blank wrote. “Tehran is likely to increase these terrorist activities, based on the belief that nuclear weapons could provide an umbrella and that its regional enemies are weak and irresolute.”

He is concerned with the threat to the Gulf States, which are afraid that if the regime of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad obtains nuclear capability, it will try to carry out its grand design to rule the Middle East as an Islamic Empire under its power.

Oil may be the most important factor. If Iran were to control the Gulf States, it would have a stranglehold on the world’s oil supplies.

Tehran previously has jealously guarded what its claims as its territory. Besides demanding sovereignty over several Gulf Island states, “Iranian forces blew up an Azeri oil exploration ship in the Caspian Sea, claiming it was in Iranian territorial waters,” the professor noted.

He added that Iran staged several cyber attacks on Azeri Internet sites last month. “The necessity of thwarting Iranian nuclear weapons should, therefore, be evident since it threatens its entire region.”