WarSclerotic

Analysis: US ‘leaks’ on Iran mean… JPost – Diplomacy & Politics.

By REUTERS/Handout

Yossi Klein Halevi, in an article on The New Republic‘s website earlier this month entitled “Why Israel Still Can’t Trust That Obama Has its Back,” argued that Washington seems more concerned about warning Israel, than stopping Iran.

“Even when he seemed to be warning Tehran, he was really warning Jerusalem,” Halevi said about US President Barack Obama’s AIPAC speech. “His goal these last days hasn’t been so much to deter them but us.”

A mere look at the headlines in some key Iran-related stories in the media over the last few weeks proves Halevi’s point. These are stories whose conclusions are that Israel cannot stop Iran’s nuclear program, or that such an attack would actually get Iran to speed up its program, or that it would suck the US into a war.

The thrust seems more about stopping Israel, and a concern about what Israel might do, than about Iran.

Thursday’s piece in Foreign Policy magazine by Mark Perry about Israel’s ties with Azerbaijan just proves the point. There was something off-putting about the whole tone of the piece, as if the bad guy in this story was not Iran, trying to acquire nuclear weapons, but rather Israel, for establishing close ties with Baku and securing the use of air bases near the Iranian border in order to more effectively carry out an attack if needed.

According to the article, “We’re watching what Iran does closely,’ one of the US sources, an intelligence officer engaged in assessing the ramifications of a prospective Israeli attack confirmed.’But we’re now watching what Israel is doing in Azerbaijan. And we’re not happy about it’.”

And this is just the latest in a series of high profile stories, based – in most cases on unnamed American sources – warning about a possible strike. Either Israel doesn’t have the ability to carry it out (The New York Times, February 19); or – according to the conclusions of a classified war simulation – will drag the US into a wider conflict and cost hundreds of American lives (The New York Times, March 19); or an attack would only further accelerate Iran’s bid for the bomb (Reuters, March 29).

According to the logic in the last piece, if Israel attacked, then Iran – which essentially developed its program in contravention of the Non Proliferation Treaty it signed, and despite international inspectors – may chose not to let those inspectors back in and, as a result, have an easier time pursuing nuclear weapons.  Now that is an interesting bit of logic: Don’t attack, because if you do then Iran won’t let back in the inspectors who were so impotent in the first place that Teheran is now on the cusp of nuclear capability.

And this constant drumbeat of Israel-must-not-take-action articles is not only in press reports. A report Wednesday by the Congressional Research Service—the US Congress’s non-partisan “think tank” – said Iran could recover from a strike and rebuild its centrifuge workshops within six months, meaning that such a strike would be futile.  It is “unclear what the ultimate effect of a strike would be on the likelihood of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons,” the report read.

These reports and stories are not being made up out of whole cloth. Rather they are fed by sources intent on sending a clear message: Do not attack.

That a spate of these reports are coming out just a couple weeks after Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu met Obama in the White House shows that despite the smiles and the talk then about understanding and hyper-close coordination, the US and Israel are not seeing eye-to-eye on the Iranian “military option” issue.

The US wants Israel to wait, and what this constant drip of stories indicates is a sense in Washington that its efforts to convince Israel to do so are failing.  As a result, a more public route is being use by some in Washington to get that message across and try and tie Jerusalem’s hands.

Israel’s plan to attack Iran put on hold until next year at the earliest – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

( I could be wrong, but this has the feeling to me of pure, unadulterated disinformation. – JW )

Damning U.S. war simulation forces Ehud Barak to reconsider attack plans; Americans pledge more money for Iron Dome antimissile system.

By Amir Oren

At 8:58 P.M. on Tuesday, Israel’s 2012 war against Iran came to a quiet end. The capricious plans for a huge aerial attack were returned to the deep recesses of safes and hearts. The war may not have been canceled but it has certainly been postponed. For a while, at least, we can sound the all clear: It won’t happen this year. Until further notice, Israel Air Force Flight 007 will not be taking off.

According to a war simulation conducted by the U.S. Central Command, the Iranians could kill 200 Americans with a single missile response to an Israeli attack. An investigative committee would not spare any admiral or general, minister or president. The meaning of this U.S. scenario is that the blood of these 200 would be on Israel’s hands.

	The base in Parchin where Iran conducted nuclear tests.
	Photo by: Google Earth, GeoEye

The moment the public dispute over whether to attack Iran is put in those terms, Israel has no real option to attack in contravention of American declarations and warnings.

That’s the negative side. The complementary positive side was presented this week, on Tuesday evening. At 8:20, Pentagon spokesman George Little announced that the Defense Department would be seeking more money to help Israel fund the Iron Dome antimissile defense system.

Noting that support for Israel’s security was a top priority for U.S. President Barack Obama and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Little said that, given the Iron Dome system’s success in intercepting 80 percent of the rockets fired from Gaza this month, the Defense Department “intends to request an appropriate level of funding to support such acquisitions, based on Israeli requirements and production capacity.”

Thirty-eight minutes after that, Defense Minister Ehud Barak publicly thanked both Panetta and himself (“The decision was the result of contacts between the Defense Ministry and the Pentagon” ).

Israelis may be the world champions of chutzpah, but even biting the hand that feeds you has its limits when the bitten hand is liable to hit back. When Barak thanked the Obama administration “for helping strengthen Israel’s security,” he was abandoning the pretension to act against Iran without permission before the U.S. presidential elections in November.

For all intents and purposes, it was an announcement that this war was being postponed until at least the spring of 2013.

IDF to Remain on Full Alert Over Passover – Defense/Security – News – Israel National News.

IDF Chief of Staff Benny Gantz

Flash 90

The IDF on Tuesday broke with Israeli tradition and ordered all units to cancel the long-customary Passover leaves and remain on full alert over the holiday.

Over the years, an army-wide break during Passover became a tradition followed by all major military units, including the Air Force, Navy and intelligence corps.

But this year soldiers will have to divide their vacation days among themselves in order to ensure that their units remain at full strength.

Senior military officials insisted the decision did not stem from any planned military operations set to occur on – or immediately after – the holiday.

IDF chief of staff Benny Gantz said Wednesday he gave the order saying he “does not accept” the notion of an army-wide vacation during Passover.

According to reports, many soldiers who received the news Tuesday did not believe the timing of the decision was arbitrary and dismissed Gantz’s explanation as obfuscation.

Military analysts say the decision does not necessarily reflect plans to undertake a major operation, but likely stems from ongoing security concerns originating in Hamas-run Gaza.

Israel averted at least one major terror attack intended to be staged from Sinai in recent months, killing the alleged planner in an airstrike.

That strike led to a spike in hostilities with Gaza’s terror gangs, who fired at least 200 rockets into Israel over a period of four days.

Israeli airstrikes on rocket launching cells firing from densely populated civilian killed 26 Gazans, of whom at least 21 were terrorists.

Critics say that Israel’s airstrikes-for-rockets strategic posture vis-a-vis Gaza has only served to perpetuate the now simmering security situation in Israel’s south.

A growing cadre of senior security officials and former IDF chiefs have called for a major Gaza incursion to uproot the terror infrastructure there.

Gantz himself has described such an operation as “increasingly inevitable.”

Analysis: US thwarting Israeli strike on Iran – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Obama betraying Israel? US making deliberate effort to hinder Iran strike by leaking classified info, intelligence assessments, says Ron Ben-Yishai in special Ynet report

Ron Ben-Yishai

The United States is leaking information to the media in order to avert an Israeli strike in Iran: The US Administration recently shifted into high gear in its efforts to avert an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities by the end of the year. The flood of reports in the American media in recent weeks attests not only to the genuine US fear that Israel intends to realize its threats; moreover, it indicates that the Obama Administration has decided to take its gloves off.

Indeed, in recent weeks the Administration shifted from persuasion efforts vis-à-vis decision-makers and Israel’s public opinion to a practical, targeted assassination of potential Israeli operations in Iran. This “surgical strike” is undertaken via reports in the American and British media, but the campaign’s aims are fully operational: To make it more difficult for Israeli decision-makers to order the IDF to carry out a strike, and what’s even graver, to erode the IDF’s capacity to launch such strike with minimal casualties.

The first and most important American objective is to eliminate potential operational options available to the IDF and the State of Israel. I have no intention of detailing or even hinting to the options which the US government aims to eliminate by exposing them in the media. A large part of the reports stem from false information or disinformation, and there is no reason to reveal to the Iranians what’s real and what isn’t. However, it is blatantly clear that reports in the past week alone have caused Israel substantive diplomatic damage, and possibly even military and operational damage.

Israeli F-16 (Photo: Gettyimages)

Another Administration objective is to convince the Israeli public that an Iran strike (including a US attack) will not achieve even the minimum required to justify it; that is, a delay of at least 3-5 years in Iran’s nuclear program. A lengthy postponement would of course justify the suffering on Israel’s home front, while a six-month delay – as argued by a US Congress report – does not justify the risks.

The six-month figure was meant for the Israeli public, so that it would press Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barakto avoid a strike, whose futility the Americans are trying to prove in every way possible. At the same time, the campaign aims to erode the validity of demands voiced by many members of Congress and Senate – both Democrats and Republicans – who criticize the American president’s inaction.

The Congress report published Wednesday is maligned by several inaccuracies, in terms of both analysis and information. However, this makes no difference. The aim was to make headlines in the Israeli and Washington media, rather than an in-depth analysis, which isn’t possible as Congress researchers in Washington do not have access to all the relevant information, fortunately.

Congress in Iran’s service

The third objective of the recent publications is to scare the Israeli public via an apocalyptic account of possible retaliation by Iran and its “clients.” This effort also aims to press Israeli decision-makers not to act (including the mention in the Congress report of the accurate fact that Israel’s home front is not adequately prepared to sustain a blow.) Some observers would argue that these reports are not damaging, but rather, grant the Israeli threat validity, thereby serving Western representatives in upcoming negotiations with Iran. So what’s wrong with that?

The damage has to do with the revelation of secret information and assessments that would require an expensive, risky intelligence effort for the Iranians to acquire. Indeed, the Iranians already realize that the West and Israel possess plenty of up-to-date information on Iran’s nuclear project, including centrifuge workshops in Tehran homes. The Ayatollah regime can also predict possible attack routes and methods by Israel and the US.

A map of Iran’s nuclear facilities 

However, any rookie intelligence officer knows that there is a huge difference between unconfirmed estimates and solid facts or IDF aims and capabilities. Any Iranian intelligence analyst who reads the latest US Congress report or the Foreign Policy report will find invaluable information there. The overwhelming majority of the information has already been published, yet instead of forcing the Iranians to piece together all the assessments themselves, the Congress report offers them everything in one place, including detailed analysis.

Fortunately, as noted, Congress researchers and those who leaked the information to them apparently have some trouble in terms of reading comprehension.

Betraying an ally

To sum up, the American publications caused the following damage:

• Iran now has a decent picture of what Israel’s and America’s intelligence communities know about Tehran’s nuclear program and defense establishment, including its aerial defenses.

• The Iranians now know about the indications that would be perceived by Washington and Jerusalem as a “nuclear breakthrough”. Hence, Iran can do a better job of concealment.

• The reports make it more difficult to utilize certain operational options. These options, even if not considered thus far, could have been used by the US in the future, should Iran not thwart them via diplomatic and military means.

Needless to say, this is not how one should be treating an ally, even if this is a relationship between a superpower and a satellite state. The targeted assassination campaign currently undertaken by the US government also sharply contradicts President Obama’s declaration at the AIPAC Conference, whereby he and the US recognize Israel’s sovereign right to defend itself by itself. One cannot utter these words and a moment later exposes Israel’s vulnerabilities and possible strike routes to its enemies.

Indeed, there is a difference between legitimate persuasion efforts and practical steps to thwart Israeli plans and eliminate them.

For a total of seven years, I served as Yedioth Ahronoth’s reporter in Washington, so I know very well that with a few exceptions, the US Administration knows how to prevent leaks to the media if it so wishes. This is the case even when dealing with former officials, and most certainly when dealing with current government officials. What we are seeing here is not a trickle of information, but rather, a powerful current, a true flood that leaves no doubt as to the existence of an orchestrated media campaign with clear aims.

There is another interesting aspect to this story from an American point of view: In 2002, when President George W. Bush sought to embark on war in Iraq, US intelligence agencies provided him with all the “evidence” that Saddam Hussein is developing large quantities of nuclear and chemical weapons. Following the war, when no traces of such weapons were discovered in Iraq, a Congress inquiry found that US intelligence officials were so eager to satisfy their president that they cut corners and relied on unsubstantiated information.

Given American media reports in recent days, one must wonder whether history is repeating itself. Could it be that the US intelligence community is providing President Obama with what he needs for political reasons – that is, information meant to curb an Israeli or American strike on Iran?

‘Azerbaijan granted Israel access to air bases on Iran border’ – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

Foreign Policy quotes U.S. diplomats as saying that ‘Israel is deeply embedded in Azerbaijan’ and says intelligence officials worried that Israel’s military involvement in Azerbaijan would complicate efforts to reduce Israeli-Iranian tensions.

By Haaretz

Israel has been granted access to air bases in Azerbaijan on Iran’s northern border, Foreign Policy reported Wednesday, quoting senior U.S. diplomats and military intelligence officials.

“The Israelis have bought an airfield,” a senior U.S. administration official told Foreign Policy’s Mark Perry, “and the airfield is called Azerbaijan.”

	Israeli F-16I fighter jets
	Photo by: IDF Spokesperson’s Unit

According to the report, U.S. intelligence officials are worried that Israel’s military involvement in Azerbaijan would make it more difficult for the U.S. to reduce Israeli-Iranian tensions. Apparently now, military planners must prepare for a war scenario that would also involve the Caucasus.

“We’re watching what Iran does closely,” said a U.S. intelligence officer involved in assessing the consequences of a potential Israeli strike on Iran. “But we’re now watching what Israel is doing in Azerbaijan. And we’re not happy about it.”

In February, Israel signed a $1.6 billion arms deal with Azerbaijan, committing to sell drones and anti-aircraft missile defense systems to Baku. According to a retired U.S. diplomat, the deal left Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan “sputtering in rage,” since Israel had previously canceled a contract to develop drones with the Turkish military.

The report said that the Azeri military has four abandoned, Soviet-era airfields that could be available to Israel and four air bases for their own aircraft, quoting the International Institute for Strategic Studies’ Military Balance 2011.

U.S. officials told Foreign Policy that they believe Israel has been granted access to these air bases through a “series of quiet political and military understandings.”

“I doubt that there’s actually anything in writing,” said a former U.S. diplomat who spent his career in the region. “But I don’t think there’s any doubt – if Israeli jets want to land in Azerbaijan after an attack, they’d probably be allowed to do so. Israel is deeply embedded in Azerbaijan, and has been for the last two decades.”

The report states that Israel’s embassy in Washington, the IDF, the Mossad, and the Shin Bet were all asked to comment on the story but failed to respond. Also, the Azeri embassy to the U.S. did not respond when asked about Azerbaijan’s security agreements with Israel.

Earlier this month, Azerbaijan authorities arrested 22 people suspected of plotting to attack the Israeli and American embassies in the capital Baku. Iran’s Revolutionary Guards was reportedly behind the plan to attack Israeli and U.S. targets in the country, according to Azerbaijan’s national security ministry.

Washington Watch: Arabs to Netany… JPost – Opinion – Columnists.