WarSclerotic

Mitt Romney is cheered by evangelicals when he criticizes Barack Obama’s stand on Israel, saying he more afraid of Israel attacking Iran than he is of Iran going nuclear – latimes.com.

The Republican presidential candidate, who frequently attacks the administration for failing to back Israel’s government more aggressively, ratcheted up his criticism a notch. He responded with ridicule when asked what he would do, if elected, to strengthen U.S. relations with the Jewish state.

“I think, by and large, you can just look at the things the president has done and do the opposite,” Romney said, to laughter and applause from members of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, an evangelical Christian political organization.

UN pulls out of Syria as fighting flares.

Demonstrators take part in a protest against the Assad regime in Yabroud, near Damascus, yesterday. Photo: Reuters

THE UN military observers sent to Syria to monitor an April 12 ceasefire that never took hold have suspended their mission, veteran peacekeeper Norwegian Major-General Robert Mood says.

Speaking of intensified violence over the past 10 days, the risk to observers and the ”lack of willingness by the parties to seek a peaceful solution”, he said the mission is ”suspending its activities.”

”There has been an intensification of armed violence across Syria over the past 10 days,” the mission chief said. ”This escalation is limiting our ability to observe, verify, report as well as assist in local dialogue and stability projects – basically impeding our ability to carry out our mandate.

Mission chief, Major-General Robert Mood: ‘There has been an intensification of armed violence.’ Photo: Reuters

”The lack of willingness by the parties to seek a peaceful transition … is increasing the losses on both sides: innocent civilians, men women and children are being killed every day. It is also posing significant risks to our observers.”

Meanwhile, Syrian rebels have held meetings with senior US government officials in Washington as pressure mounts on America to authorise a shipment of heavy weapons, including surface-to-air missiles, to combat the Assad regime.

A senior representative of the Free Syrian Army met the US ambassador to Syria, Robert Ford, and special

co-ordinator for the Middle East, Frederick Hoff, in the past week at the US State Department, sources said.

The rebel emissaries, armed with an iPad showing detailed plans on Google Earth identifying rebel positions and regime targets, also met senior members of the National Security Council, which advises President Barack Obama on national security policy.

The rebels have compiled a ”targeted list” of heavy weaponry, including anti-tank missiles and heavy machineguns, that they plan to present to US government officials in the coming weeks.

The consultations come before this week’s G20 summit in Los Cabos, Mexico, where British and US officials are expected to make a last-ditch attempt to get Russian President Vladimir Putin to intervene in the Syria crisis.

Privately, Western diplomats admit they now harbour scant hope of forcing a change of heart on Russia, which has steadfastly refused to bow to US and British pressure to do more to arrest Syria’s slide into sectarian civil war. While there remains little appetite for direct Western military intervention, advanced contingency plans are already in place to supply arms to the rebels.

The move is expected to gather force following the expected failure of the Annan peace plan and the meeting of the Syria contact group scheduled for June 30 in Geneva.

Senior Middle Eastern diplomatic sources said Libyan-supplied weapons, paid for by Saudi Arabian and Qatari government funds and private donations, had already been stockpiled in expectation of the ”inevitable” intervention needed to end the Assad regime.

”The intervention will happen. It is not a question of if but when. The Libyans are willing to provide the anti-tank weapons, others are prepared to pay for it,” a source said.

Obama just doesn’t get it – Israel Opinion, Ynetnews.

Op-ed: Islamists taking over while Western liberals, led by president, still deep in ideological slumber

Shaul Rosenfeld

In February 2011, a few weeks after Egypt’s uprising erupted, when the Arab Spring was supposedly just around the corner and meant to bring us a new Middle East in the undying spirit of Shimon Peres, Thomas Friedman of the New York Times stood at Tahrir Square and delivered his own, no less immortal vision.

Friedman, whose name is mentioned by Israel’s finest colleagues without forgetting to note that he is “the world’s most important journalist,” examined the Cairo square with his sharp eyes, and found no hint of Islamic inspiration or influence, and certainly no Islamic forces behind the scenes patiently waiting for the reward that Tahrir’s “Facebook kids” will hand over to them.

What he did see using his incredibly developed journalist prowess was genuine de-colonization of Egypt, the rise of progressive democratic forces that will forever change Egypt’s dictatorial face, an Egyptian Pharaoh (Mubarak) removed from power with the vigorous encouragement of President Obama, and an Israeli Pharaoh (Netanyahu) who, being a lowly man, cannot grasp the significance of the regional change. So much for Thomas Friedman’s interpretation.

As we know, much water, and mostly blood, has flowed through the Middle East ever since then. In Tunisia, which was meant to pave the way for positive change, we saw the establishment of an Islamic Brotherhood-led government after the victory of the Ennahda party, which has made the sources of its authority clear to all.

Meanwhile, Libya of the post-Gaddafi lynch mostly makes sure that Gaza’s arms warehouses are well stocked. In Syria, they make sure to meet the daily massacre quota. In Egypt, the Islamic Brotherhood and the Salafis are taking over parliament. The Brotherhood’s Mohammad Morsi is about to succeed the terrible Mubarak who slipped into a coma, while the Tahrir kids bemoan their “stolen revolution.”

Yet in New York, the “world’s most important journalist” still does nothing but write about the march of folly of those who, unlike him, have yet to recognize this great Mideastern era.

Overdose of wishful thinking

Yet Friedman is no more than an example of an allegory for the way many in the West, including its leaders and journalists (led by Obama) formulate their doctrine in line with the ideological color of their worldview, and as result of an overdose of wishful thinking. For them, reality is no more than a burdensome nuisance.

According to this mechanism, the Egyptian people’s deep desire for democracy, equality, civil rights and respect for women and minority rights is attested to by the tens (or hundreds) of thousands of people in Tahrir Square, and not, heaven forbid, by the mood of the more than 80 million citizens of this country.

According to polls undertaken in Egypt in 2008 and in 2010 by Gallup, some 95% of Egyptians want Islam to have greater influence in politics, 64% want Islamic Law to be the basis for legislation, 54% support public segregation of men and women, 82% support stoning as punishment for adultery, and 84% endorse the death penalty for those who shun Islam.

In 1979, in the name of noble human rights ideals, Jimmy Carter abandoned the Persian Shah, paved Khomeini’s way to Tehran, and with his own hands turned Iran from America’s most important ally in the Persian Gulf to an Islamic Ayatollah republic.

In 1991, in the name of lofty democratic ideals, and with the encouragement of the West, Algeria too decided to play the democratic game. The government called elections, the Islamic FIS party won a majority, the election results were dismissed, and the country found itself in a bloodbath that lasted for more than a decade and claimed some 100,000 victims.

In 2006, in the service of these same ideas, the Bush Administration forced Ariel Sharon and the Palestinian Authority to hold democratic elections. The vote indeed took place, Hamas won the jackpot, and we all know Gaza’s history ever since then.

Yet since the outset of 2011, equipped with the same divine ideals of spreading democracy to all, including the Levant, and utilizing an amazing inability to foresee the future, Obama, Friedman and the finest liberal forces in the West continue to joyfully market their goods, while refusing to wake up from the ideological slumber they’ve slipped into many years ago.

US military intervention in Syria – “Not if but when”.

DEBKAfile Special Report June 16, 2012, 3:51 PM (GMT+02:00)

As the violence in Syria continued to go from bad to worse in scope and intensity, US official sources had this to say Saturday, June 16,  about planned US military operations in the war-torn country:
“The intervention will happen. It is not a question of ‘if’ but ‘when.’”

A Syrian Free Army rebel delegation is now in Washington to talk about their requests for heavy weapons from the Obama administration. In their meetings with US Ambassador to Syria Robert Ford and the State Department’s expert on Syria Fred Hof, the rebel leaders handed in two lists for approval: types of heavy weapons capable of challenging Bashar Assad’s armed forces and selected targets of attack to destabilize his regime.
debkafile’s Washington sources disclose that the administration is very near a decision on the types of weapons to be shipped to the Syrian rebels and when. Most of the items Washington is ready to send have been purchased by Saudi Arabia and Qatar and are ready for shipment.
The White House is also close to deciding on the format of its military operation in Syria. Some sources are defining it as “Libya lite” – that is, a reduced-scale version of the no-fly zone imposed on Libya two years ago and the direct air and other strikes which toppled the Qaddafi regime.
Following reports of approaching US military intervention in Syria and a Russian marine contingent heading for Tartus port, the UN observer mission in Syria has suspended operations and patrols. Its commander Maj. Gen. Robert Mood said, “Violence has been intensifying over the past 10 days by both parties with losses and significant risks to our observers.”

He said the risk is approaching an unacceptable level and could prompt the 300 observers to pull out of the country.
Friday, June 15, debkafile reported:

A contingent of Russian special forces is on its way to Syria to guard the Russian navy’s deep-water port at the Syria’s Mediterranean coastal town of Tartus, Pentagon officials informed US NBC TV Friday, June 15. They are coming by ship. According to debkafile’s sources, the contingent is made up of naval marines and is due to land in Syria in the coming hours.

In a separate and earlier announcement, US Defense Department sources in Washington reported that the US military had completed its own planning for a variety of US operations against Syria, or for assisting neighboring countries in the event action was ordered – a reference, according to our sources, to Turkey, Jordan and Israel.
The Syrian civil war is now moving into a new phase of major power military intervention, say debkafile’s military sources. Moscow, by sending troops to Syria without UN Security Council approval, has set a precedent for the United States, the European Union and Arab governments to follow. They all held back from sending troops to Syria because all motions to apply force for halting the bloodshed in Syria were blocked in the UN body by Russia and China.

According to US military sources, in recent weeks, the Pentagon has finalized its assessment of what types of units would be needed and how many troops. The military planning includes a scenario for a no-fly zone as well as protecting chemical and biological sites. The U.S. Navy is maintaining a presence of three surface combatants and a submarine in the eastern Mediterranean to conduct electronic surveillance and reconnaissance on the Syrian regime, a senior Pentagon official said.

Senators urge Obama to set conditions in Iran talks – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Letter sent by 44 US senators urges president to reconsider talks with Islamic Republic unless it agree to immediately shut down nuclear facility, freeze uranium enrichment

Yitzhak Benhorin

WASHINGTON – Forty four US Senators, both Republican and Democratic, sent a letter to President Obama Friday, urging him to reconsider talks with Iran unless it agrees to take immediate steps to curb its uranium enrichment activity.

“Steps it must take immediately are shutting down of the Fordow facility, freezing enrichment above five percent, and shipping all uranium enriched above five percent out of the country,” the senators wrote in the letter, which was initiated by Senators Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) and Roy Blunt (R-Mo.).

Referring to a third round of talks between Iran and the 5+1, scheduled for Moscow on Monday, the senators wrote: “Were Iran to agree to and verifiably implement these steps, this would demonstrate a level of commitment by Iran to the process and could justify continued discussions beyond the meeting in Moscow.

“On the other hand, if the sessions in Moscow produce no substantive agreement, we urge you to reevaluate the utility of further talks at this time and instead focus on significantly increasing the pressure on the Iranian government through sanctions and making clear that a credible military option exist,” they wrote, adding that “as you have rightly noted, ‘the window for diplomacy is closing.’ Iran’s leaders must realize that you mean precisely that.”

Earlier this week, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that world powers will outline to Iran a “very clear path” to resolve the impasse over its suspect nuclear program at talks in Moscow.

During a joint appearance with President Shimon Peres at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy in Washington on Tuesday, Clinton said “there is a unified position being presented by the P5+1 that gives Iran, if it is interested in taking a diplomatic way out, a very clear path that would be verifiable and would be linked to action for action.

“I am quite certain that they are under tremendous pressure from the Russians and the Chinese to come to Moscow prepared to respond. Now whether that response is adequate or not we will have to judge,” she added.

Former Iran negotiator: Islamic Republic unlikely to accept West’s offer in upcoming round of nuclear talks – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

Hossein Mousavian, who was a senior member of Iran’s nuclear negotiating team between 2003 and 2005, dismisses West’s proposal as ‘diamonds for peanuts.’

By Reuters | Jun.15, 2012 | 11:24 PM | 4

Iran’s heavy water nuclear facilities near the central city of Arak. Photo by AP /ISNA,Hamid Foroutan

By Reuters | Jun.15,2012 | 11:24 PM | 7

A former Iranian negotiator on Friday dismissed as “diamonds for peanuts” a proposal by world powers that Tehran halt higher-grade uranium enrichment and close an underground nuclear site in exchange for reactor fuel and civil aviation parts.

Hossein Mousavian, now a visiting scholar at Princeton University in the United States, said he did not believe Iran would accept the offer when the two sides hold a new round of discussions in Moscow on June 18-19.

It will be the third meeting since diplomacy restarted in April after a 15-month hiatus.

“I do not expect too much, said Mousavian, a senior member of Iran’s nuclear negotiating team in 2003-05. If the major powers are not ready to move on the critical issues of gradually removing sanctions on Iran and recognizing its right to refine uranium, “I’m afraid the Moscow talks also would fail,” he told Reuters in a telephone interview.

Mousavian held his post before conservative President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took over from his reformist predecessor Mohammad Khatami in 2005. Western envoys who know Mousavian say that at the time he appeared to be genuinely interested in reaching a deal with the West.

The six powers – the United States, France, Germany, Britain, China and Russia – want to make sure Iran does not develop nuclear bombs. The Islamic Republic wants a lifting of sanctions and recognition of what it says are its rights to peaceful nuclear energy, including enriching uranium.

European Union officials said on Monday that Iran had agreed to discuss a proposal to curb its production of higher-grade uranium at the meeting in the Russian capital, an apparent attempt to reduce tensions ahead of the talks.

The development followed more than two weeks of wrangling between Iranian diplomats and Western negotiators over preparations for the closely watched round of negotiations.

Mousavian said Iran was ready for a “big deal” on the decade-old nuclear dispute, but political constraints in the United States ahead of November’s presidential election and other factors meant the other side was not.

“President Obama has very limited room to maneuver in an election year,” Mousavian said. Barack Obama’s Republican opponents have attempted to paint him as soft on enemies of the U.S.

In the immediate term, the powers want Tehran to cease enriching uranium to 20 percent fissile concentration, because such production represents a major technological advance en route to making weapons-grade material.

They put forward a proposal on how to achieve this at a round of talks in Baghdad in May, in which Tehran would stop production, close the Fordow underground facility where such work is done, and ship its stockpile out of the country.

In return, they offered to supply the Islamic state with fuel for a medical research reactor in Tehran, which requires 20-percent uranium, and to ease sanctions against the sale of commercial aircraft parts to Iran.

No agreement was reached in Baghdad but the seven countries agreed to continue discussions in Moscow.

“I believe this is diamonds for peanuts,” Mousavian said, adding that Iran already had fuel rods. “Therefore this is not something great to offer Iran.”

The International Crisis Group think-tank said the powers’ offer “was deliberately ungenerous” and likely to have been meant as an opening bid in what they regarded as a longer process of negotiations.

But a U.S. nuclear expert, David Albright, said Mousavian’s comments showed the “difficulty of negotiating” with Iran.

The agreement sought by the powers in Moscow would be a small but important step which does not solve the Iran nuclear issue, said Albright, of the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) think tank. “Iran should expect only a small incentive in return – the fact of the matter is that these actions are equivalent to peanuts for peanuts,” Albright said in an email.

Mousavian said, however, that Iran was ready for confidence-building measures regarding its enrichment of uranium to 20 percent, which it started in 2010 and has since expanded.

He said his own proposal was that Iran would agree to eliminate such material from its stockpile, either by converting it to fuel, exporting it or lowering its enrichment concentration to 3.5 percent – the level usually required for power plants.