WarSclerotic

Blog: Israel’s calculus for Gaza eruption.

Leo Rennert

Sowell: Iran benefits as Obama drifts with political winds | The Town Talk | thetowntalk.com.

Obama, Iran and the 1939 Syndrome | IndepthAfrica.

On Tuesday EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton announcedthat the group of six global powers—permanent UN Security Council members the U.S., Britain, France, China, and Russia plus Germany—were resuming nuclear talks with Iran at an unspecified time and place.

She announced it just as Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu was in Washington trying to convince the U.S. leadership that neither diplomacy nor sanctions were coming anywhere near stopping Iran’s push to nuclear weapons.

Ashton had earlier—on February 14—received a proposal for talks from Iran’s nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili. On Tuesday she said, “Today I have replied to Dr. Jalili’s letter….” What opportune timing.

And what a further blow to Israel.

Typical headlines have been saying Netanyahu told President Obama on Monday that Israel hasn’t yet taken a decision on attacking Iran. Yet, as described here and here, an “unnamed American intelligence official” has conveyed a different impression to Israel’s Channel 2 news.

Channel 2 reported on Monday night that the official said, “U.S. intelligence services believe that, in principle, Israel has already made the decision to bomb Iran.” According to Channel 2, the official warned that such an attack would entail thousands of casualties and spark a regional war or even World War III—in short, an all-out catastrophe. An official Israeli source dismissed these statements as “scare-mongering and psychological warfare.”

Just as there is a dissonance between the mainstream version—which says Israel hasn’t yet decided—and this apparent desperate attempt to bypass the Israeli leadership and scare its population silly via its most popular news channel, there is a dissonance between Obama’s words this week and what we read elsewhere.

In his AIPAC speech on Sunday: “I firmly believe that an opportunity still remains for diplomacy—backed by pressure—to succeed.”

And in Tuesday night’s news conference: “[Iran] understand[s] that the world community means business. To resolve this issue will require Iran to come to the table and discuss…how to prove to the international community that the intentions of their nuclear program are peaceful.”

Meanwhile IAEA chief Yukiya Amano says Iran has “tripled” its monthly production of 20-percent-enriched uranium since the IAEA’s previous report in November. That was the report that was seen as dramatically confirming Israel’s insistence over the years that Iran had never stopped working on the bomb.

Amano also expressed serious concern about the IAEA being denied, again, access to Parchin—the site where Iran has “built a large containment chamber” to “conduct high-explosives tests” that the IAEA considers “strong indicators” of nuclear-weapons development. That was according to November’s report. What’s going on in the chamber now? No one knows.

No wonder administration officials are so worried Israel will attack and trying to scare the Israeli people out of their wits about what will happen if it does. Seemingly it would make more sense for the administration—and the Western world as a whole—to get seriously scared about Parchin and drop the hang-up with Israel.

On Tuesday it was reported that Iran now says it will let the IAEA into Parchin—at an unspecified date. Even if that transpires, it will obviously be after Iran has had enough time to “clean” the site.

But never fear, as Obama said yet again Tuesday night: “What we’ve been able to do…is mobilize unprecedented crippling sanctions on Iran. Iran is feeling the bite of these sanctions in a substantial way.”

Two problems with that. First, regarding Iran’s nuke program, they’re not having the slightest effect, as the tripling of uranium production since November—among other things—attests.

And second, while there has indeed been some ramping-up of sanctions since November so that ordinary Iranians—not the regime—have been hit by them, both the U.S. administration and the Europeans are leisurely about the pace.

As for the Europeans, their embargo on Iranian oil won’t even kick in until July. And as Bret Stephens noted in the Wall Street Journal, it was Obama who “fought tooth-and-nail against the very sanctions on Iran for which he now seeks to reap political credit.” And it’s Obama who is still delaying the sanctions on Iran’s central bank that the Senate passed 100-0 in December.

Again that dissonance—between the IAEA’s evident alarm and the U.S. and European governments’ ongoing nonchalance.

And if anyone still doubted that it was nonchalance—as well as delusion, cynicism, and denial—today’s decision by the Western powers to return to talks with Iran should put those doubts to rest. The Iran that has transparently been using such talks as delaying tactics for a decade; the Iran that regularly threatens another state with annihilation; the Iran that installs thousands of new, ever-more-sophisticated centrifuges in its underground Fordow facility as the Ashtons and Obamas of this world speak deplorable nonsense.

Israel’s Ynet News reports that Israeli “state officials” were “disappointed” with the Netanyahu-Obama meeting and quotes them saying:

The Iranians are charging at nuclear capabilities at full force and even the IAEA is falling in line with the Israeli intelligence evaluations. That is why the U.S. stance is problematic…. Right now we are certain the [administration] won’t do anything and we need to decide what to do…. The[administration] want[s] oil prices not to go up because it’s bad for their economy…. You have to consider the fate of the Western world…. It’s better to pay more for oil this year than to pay the cost for a nuclear Iran.

While not making a direct comparison, psychologically the current atmosphere in the West is the same as the one in 1939. Westerners who sought peace and coexistence had options but at the moment of truth they chose to sacrifice Czechoslovakia. We’ve been there. While being very careful with this analysis, we have the same psychological phenomenon.

It’s indeed a grim analysis but all too congruent with the facts. Consider:

• Obama and the Europeans do not really believe Iran can now be brought around by talks to cry uncle and give up the nuclear program in which it has invested enormously for decades.
• They do know that by resuming “diplomacy” with Iran, or at least putting it back on the agenda, they further isolate Israel as the lone “hawk” and slap it with a rogue-status—a destroyer of “peace”—if it does decide to act.
• Hence a collusion—tacit or not—of common interests emerges between the West and Iran of creating a pretense of diplomatic activity and thereby curbing Israel’s options.

Which means Netanyahu faces a true test as, once again, the Western world seeks abjectly for the easy way out.

P. David Hornik is a freelance writer and translator in Beersheva, Israel. He blogs at http://pdavidhornik.typepad.com.

PJ Media » Will the Iran Negotiations Be Too Big to Fail?.

On February 29, Secretary of State Clinton assured the House Foreign Affairs Committee — in absolute terms, three separate times – the Obama administration’s policy was not simply to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, but a nuclear weapons capability.  She assured Howard Berman (D-CA) “it’s absolutely clear that the president’s policy is to prevent Iran from having nuclear weapons capability.” She reiterated the policy to Eliot Engel (D-NY), and reiterated it again to Gary Ackerman (D-NY).

The “absolutely clear” policy lasted until the White House could get a hold of the New York Times. On March 2, unnamed “administration officials” told the New York Times that Clinton had “misspoken.”

The same day as the Times report, the Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg posted the transcript of his interview with the president, in which Obama repeatedly phrased his policy as preventing Iran from “getting a nuclear weapon.” At AIPAC, Obama used the same formulation: “obtaining a nuclear weapon.” At various times in the past, Obama has phrased his position as preventing Iran from “getting,” “obtaining,” “acquiring,” or “deploying” a nuclear weapon. Each verb connotes a policy that makes actual acquisition the red line, rather than a nuclear weapons capability.

The significance of the “capability” versus “acquisition” issue is that it impacts the timing of a U.S. military response. The administration argues that Iran is “rational” (in Gen. Dempsey’s view) and “self-interested” (as Obama told Goldberg), and that sanctions will thus eventually work. On the other hand, Israel believes Iran is already approaching a nuclear weapons capability, and building underground facilities impervious to Israeli attack, fundamentally changing the strategic and security situation even if the bomb is not manufactured until later. In Israel’s view, even if sanctions might arguably work — which is speculative — the time for them to work is running out.

Thus Israel believes the U.S. red line has been set at a point that will not be reached until it is too late for Israel to act. That would leave Israel dependent on a future decision by a U.S. president to go to war — based on a pledge to use “all options” that is (as Secretary Clinton would say) “unenforceable.” According to the Washington Post, a “senior administration official” said after the Obama-Netanyahu meeting, “Our red line is a nuclear weapon, and we didn’t change our policy” — which means the administration did not change its timing, leaving the U.S. red line at a point beyond Israel’s ability to strike.

The Wall Street Journal reported that U.S. officials said a red line of nuclear weapons “capability” would be too ambiguous. But the difference between (1) a red line set far down the field (indeed right next to the goal line), and (2) an ambiguous red line set at an earlier point, is that the former effectively incentivizes Iran to continue marching down the field, whereas the latter would make Iran nervous now, rather than later.

If faced only with the first alternative, a rational and self-interested Iran will likely decide to continue its present course, perhaps negotiating a “framework agreement” or a “joint statement” of principles that will later break down, and eventually present the U.S. with a fait accompli – which is exactly what happened with respect to North Korea.

IDF: We’re prepared for what’s coming – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Iron Dome system Commander says troops making tremendous effort to achieve successful results; ‘We have capability to keep going,’ he says

Yoav Zitun

Lieutenant Colonel Gilad Biran, the commander of the Iron Dome missile defense system told Ynet on Saturday that the troops operating the defense system have been working hard over the weekend to make sure that rockets are intercepted.

We are making a tremendous effort to achieve results. We are ready for what’s coming,” he said.

The missile defense system has intercepted some 30 rockets launched at Israel’s southern cities. “We have the capability to keep going if the situation persists,” Biran added.

However, Air Force officials stressed that the Iron Dome does not provide complete protection, and that citizens are urged to follow the safety instructions issued by the Home Front Command.

Iron Dome bttery in Beersheba (Photo: Herzl Yosef)

Defense Minister Ehud Barak and IAF Chief Major General Ido Nehushtan visited the troops operating the Iron Dome missile defense system, and told them: “We are acting defensively and offensive, and are making efforts to do it to the best of our abilities.”

Barak said: “We are currently showing a 90% rate of successful interception – about 30 out of 32 rockets. The Iron Dome does not only protect civilians, but also gives the political and military echelons more flexibility in responding to threats.

“We won’t let anyone harm our civilians. Those who try to launch a rocket or plan an attack will pay a heavy price, and no one will be granted immunity,” said Barak.

Thank you, Iron Dome – Israel Opinion, Ynetnews.

Op-ed: Without innovative anti-rocket system, IDF would be operating inside Gaza by now

Alex Fishman

The current escalation in the Gaza region was planned in advance. The IDF in fact set up an “ambush,” while the Southern Command prepared thoroughly days ahead of the current flare-up.

The Air Force deployed in advance the three Iron Domebatteries and covered the Gaza Strip skies with a reinforced presence of aircraft. The results are commensurate with these preparations: With the exception of several wounded civilians caught up in the fire while playing basketball, there have been no casualties thus far.

Moreover, all the rockets that were supposed to land in populated areas were intercepted. This impressive military balance sheet grants the political leadership flexibility and the ability to take decisions free from domestic and international pressure.

Indeed, the orders to the army are as follows: Should the rocket fire continue beyond the point Israel earmarked, the IDF will be given the green light to expand its activities against the Strip, including ground operations. This red line will be affected by the number of casualties and the stamina of a million and a half Israeli citizens in southern Israel whose daily lives are paralyzed.

Meanwhile, a lesson drawn from past experience prompted a change in the utilization of Iron Dome, with the new tactics resulting in an impressive outcome in intercepting barrages of five to six rockets.

Now, Israel is presenting Hamas’ government with a leadership dilemma: In an era where Hamas wishes to portray itself as a pragmatic political party in the eyes of the world, will it have the power and desire to restrain Islamic Jihad fire that also threatens Hamas’ own hegemony in the Strip?

Blatant Israeli message

In Israel’s view, Hamas’ responsibility for events is not only ministerial. The Shin Bet has identified the group’s duplicity a while ago. Hamas’ military wing never stopped its terror activity but is hiding behind the attacks of “subsidiaries” bearing different names.

Israeli officials decided not to make it easy on Hamas given the above the dilemma and keep pressing until the fire abates. The current round of fighting is a blatant Israeli signal: There is no immunity, even in Gaza, to Palestinian terror activity undertaken via the Sinai Peninsula. Indeed, Sinai is a major terror front, and Israel will not tolerate a situation whereby Gaza serves as a base for Sinai attacks.

And on a final note, something about Iron dome. This system has become a political-diplomatic tool, just like any other national defense system such as the fences on the Egyptian and Lebanese borders. At this time, our political leadership can order counter-terror operations in the Strip and sustain fire until taking a decision thanks to Iron Dome’s interception capabilities.

Hence, the system must not be undermined in the framework of the current budgetary battles. At this time, Israel possesses three batteries that are deployed, for the time being, in Ashdod, Ashkelon and Beersheba. A fourth battery needed to protect Gaza-region residents will only be received in July of this year.

Overall, Israel needs at least nine batteries. The fifth one will be received at the beginning of 2013 and a sixth one in the middle of 2013. This will exhaust the currently available budget. Yet those who curbed the flow of funds must realize that had it not been for Iron Dome, the IDF would be inside the Gaza Strip by now, with dozens of casualties on both sides.

Report: US considering military intervention in Syria – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Washington Post says US may arm opposition forces, send troops to guard a humanitarian corridor for rebels, or mount air assault on Syrian air defenses

Yitzhak Benhorin

WASHINGTON – The Obama administration and its allies and international partners have begun serious discussions about potential military involvement in Syria, the Washington Post reported on Sunday. On Monday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will meet with her Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrovin in New York to secure Russian support for Western plans in Syria.

The Washington Post said that possibilities include directly arming opposition forces, sending troops to guard a humanitarian corridor or “safe zone” for the rebels, or mounting an air assault on Syrian air defenses.

While Saudi Arabia and Qatar confessed their desire to arm the Syrian opposition, Washington still has concerns about the rebels. It is estimated that the US will lead efforts to impose a no-fly zone in Syria, if the decision is made, but that it would take Washington several weeks to reposition the forces.

It was also reported that recent US intelligence reports suggest President Bashar Assad commands a formidable army that is unlikely to turn on him, an inner circle that has stayed loyal and an elite class that still supports his rule.

At the moment, the US is focusing on providing humanitarian aid to Syrian civilians and opposition forces. The Americans understand that the Syrian conflict is unlikely to be resolved in a peaceful manner and that prospects of a civil war may affect the entire region.

Iron Dome intercepts Gaza rockets over Ashdod, as escalation continues for third day – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

IDF conducts three strikes in Gaza overnight and Sunday morning, killing two Palestinians; Iron Dome has intercepted 33 rockets since Friday.

By Gili Cohen , Yanir Yagna, Avi Issacharoff, Barak Ravid and Reuters

Ten rockets fired from the Gaza Strip were intercepted by the Iron Dome system in the Ashdod area on Sunday morning, as the escalation in Israel’s south continued for a third day.

Overnight and on Sunday morning, the IDF conducted three strikes in Gaza, in which two Palestinians, including a teenager, were killed.

	Iron Dome anti-rocket battery in action, March 11, 2012.
	Photo by: AP

A weapons manufacturing site and a rocket launching squad were among the targets of the IDF strikes.

More than 110 rockets have been fired at Israel from Gaza since Friday. 33 rockets have been shot down by the Iron Dome, which is designed to only intercept rockets identified as heading toward populated areas.

On Sunday morning, a rocket exploded in open territory in the Ramat Eshkol Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.

Schools was called off in Sunday in Ashkelon, Be’er Sheva, Ashdod and other regional councils in Israel’s south, affecting more than 200,000 students.

So far, 17 Palestinians, 16 of them militants, have been killed in the latest round of Israel-Gaza border violence that began on Friday.

A Thai worker in an Israeli community near the Gaza border was seriously wounded in a rocket attack on Friday.

The rocket salvos from Gaza began on Friday after the Israel Air Force launched a strike in Gaza that killed the leader of the Popular Resistance Committees, Zuhir al-Qaisi, who was believed to be planning a large terror attack on Israel’s southern border.

On Saturday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with regional council heads in Israel’s south and said Israel will continue to strike whoever plans attacks on Israeli citizens.

Barak: Iron Dome should be made national eme… JPost – Headlines.

No one wants another Gaza war – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

It may take a few more days before calm is restored, but neither Israel nor Hamas seem interested in an escalation that would lead to an Israeli ground operation in Gaza.

By Avi Issacharoff and Amos Harel

Fifteen Gazan Palestinians killed, more than 100 rockets and mortar shells fired at Israel from the Gaza Strip, nearly one million Israelis in the area under attack – the weekend numbers are the worst since Operation Cast Lead in January 2009. Nevertheless, while it may take a few more days before calm is restored, neither Israel nor Hamas seem interested in an escalation that would culminate in an Israeli ground operation in Gaza. Barring mass civilian casualties, the bets are on ending the latest round of violence within a few days.

This round, like so many before, began with specific intelligence on the Israeli side. This time, it was about a plan by the Popular Resistance Committees in the Strip to duplicate its successful operation last August, when eight Israeli civilians and military personnel were killed in an attack on Route 12, near Eilat.

	Children in a Be’er Sheva bomb shelter, March 10, 2012.
	Photo by: Eliyahu Hershkovitz

Israel responded by killing the plan’s mastermind – Zuhair al-Qaissi, a commander of the armed wing of the Popular Resistance Committees – despite knowing this would heat up the border with the Gaza Strip for a few days at the least.

A second terrorist died in the Israeli air strike that killed al-Qaissi. Most of the other 13 Palestinians killed in the course of the weekend belonged to launch units, and died while trying to fire rockets or on their way to launch sites.

Palestinian sources confirmed that all 15 deaths on their side were militants. The absence of civilian deaths greatly reduces the impetus on the Palestinian side to retaliate, although it must be noted that if the cross border violence continues, civilian casualties will be almost inevitable.

The good news is that Hamas has no interest in Operation Cast Lead, the sequel. The bad news is that Hamas has less control over the situation than in the past. Islamic Jihad, with avid support from Iran, has accumulated its own stores of deadly rockets. The resistance committees wants to get back at Israel for killing two of its leaders. The two groups were responsible for most of the fire directed at Israel in the past two days.

A report issued on Saturday by Palestinian Authority news agency WAFA points to a weakening of Hamas’ iron grip in the Gaza Strip. The news agency said Hamas asked Egypt to help rein in Islamic Jihad and the Popular Resistance Committees. Hamas does not want Gazans to view it as Israel’s “border guard,” but in the clash between the desire to maintain resistance to Israel and to remain in control of the Strip, Hamas has repeatedly chosen to avoid direct military confrontation with Israel.

For several months now, Hamas has faced growing opposition in the Strip. Islamic Jihad, once an ally in its conflict with the PA, is now the regime’s main challenger. Iran is the focus of the friction between Hamas and Islamic Jihad: While the former has slackened its ties with Tehran and Syria, Islamic Jihad leaders in the Strip have remained loyal to Tehran and to their patron in Damascus. At least 10 of the 15 people who died in the Israeli weekend air strikes were Jihad members; their funerals turned into recruiting sessions for the organization.

As in August, this time too Israel is conducting itself with extreme caution where Egypt is concerned. Since the fall of the Mubarak regime last year and the elimination of the last shreds of Egyptian control over Sinai, the peninsula has become the backyard of the Gazan terror organizations. The benefits for them are clear: operational freedom of action, a long and unprotected border with Israel, and plausible deniability – yesterday the resistance committees claimed yet again that they had nothing to do with planning a terror attack from Sinai.

With Egypt entering the equation, Israel’s room for maneuver declined dramatically. The Israel Defense Forces cannot take preemptive action within Egyptian territory, and if Jerusalem decides on a ground operation in the Gaza Strip, it risks further destabilizing its relations with Cairo.

Egyptian intelligence is supposed to be responsible for reimposing the cease-fire between Israel and Hamas, but today’s Cairo speaks and looks very different from that of a year ago. Egypt yesterday slammed Israel’s “dangerous escalation” in the Strip. The country’s Muslim Brotherhood-led parliament will not stand idly by if the situation there spirals out of control.