WarSclerotic

Peres: Iran running out of time – Israel News, Ynetnews.

President tells CNN Iranians continues to provoke world by pursuing nuclear weapon, do not take threat of military strike seriously

Attila Somfalvi

President Shimon Peres usually weighs his words carefully when it comes to the Iranian nuclear program, but in a Monday interview with CNN he voiced a more threatening tone.

Amid a new round of talks between Iran and the P+5 countries in Moscow, Peres told CNN’s Elise Labott that Iranis running out of time for a diplomatic solution vis-à-vis its nuclear program and warned the Islamic Republic leaders that they are making a grave mistake by thinking that a military offensive is not a viable option.

The president noted that Iran continues to mock the United Nations and world leaders by resuming its efforts to develop nuclear weapons. “You cannot provoke the world, assuming the world is made of fools only,” he said.

Must stay united. Peres and Obama (Photo: GPO)

Peres urged the international community to stay united on the Iranian issue, and called on the United States to step up its efforts to reach a solution. While Peres expressed his support in pursuing a non-military solution, including sanctions, he stressed that there must be a credible threat of a military strike for those options to be successful.

“If the Iranians will understand seriously that this is an option, maybe we shall not need it,” he said, adding that “If they think this is a bluff, then it may lead to a war.”

“For that reason, the warning must be credible, the sanctions must be credible. So let’s first of all use the non-military means, indicating to the Iranians, ‘Gentlemen, better you agree with a non-military confrontation than look for other options'”, Peres told CNN.

Asked whether he is expecting any positive outcome from the talks in Moscow, Peres said: “I am not sure that something will happen there for two reasons. (First,) the Iranians think this is just a warning, that people are not serious enough. And the second is they believe it can introduce a split in the coalition that President Obama has built.”

Peres refused to discuss the military options on the table but said that there are many different possibilities at hand. He also stressed the urgency of reaching an agreement, saying that Iran is continuing to build a bomb and enrich uranium while ignoring UN resolutions and the IAEA.

Russia, China, Iran plan to stage in Syria “biggest Mid East maneuver”.

DEBKAfile Special Report June 18, 2012, 8:31 PM (GMT+02:00)

Middle East military tensions around Syria shot up again Monday, June 18, with the news reported by the semi-official Iranian news agency Fars that a joint Russian-Chinese-Iranian exercise is to take place in Syria.

It was described as “the biggest of its kind ever staged in the Middle East” with 90,000 personnel, 400 air planes and 900 tanks taking part.
As part of its preparations, Beijing is reported to have asked Egyptian authorities to permit the passage through the Suez Canal in late June of 12 naval ships heading for the Syrian port of Tartus, where Moscow maintains a naval and marine base. debkafile reported earlier this week that Russian naval vessels with marines on board were heading for Tartus. The Iranian media did not itemize their contribution to the joint exercise.
debkafile stresses that this would be the first time that substantial Russian and Chinese military strength has ever been deployed in Syria or anywhere else in the Middle East. It means that the two powers are prepared to parade their unabashed partnership with the Iranian and Syrian armies for the shared purpose of obstructing US-European-Arab military intervention in Syria. A large-scale Russian and Chinese military presence in the embattled country would expect to deter the United States from leading a military operation against Bashar Assad and his regime.
No date was attached to the report but the exercise may possibly take place before the end of the month

The large-scale maneuver was announced in Tehran on the first day of the nuclear crisis talks in Moscow between Iran and the six world powers, their third attempt to resolve the crisis by diplomacy. However, Russian and Iranian sources close to the talks were pessimistic about progress. An Iranian delegation member complained the atmosphere was harsh and unconstructive. A Russian source saw no way of bridging US-led Western differences with Tehran when the parties reconvene Monday.
debkafile also notes that the big joint Russian-Chinese-Iranian exercise “at sea, air and land on Syrian soil,” ws released for publication shortly before US President Barack Obama was due to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin at the G-20 summit in Mexico.

‘Iran considering halting high-g… JPost – Iranian Threat – News.

By REUTERS

06/18/2012 15:12

Ahmadinejad says Tehran prepared for step if world powers meet needs for fuel, but unclear how much influence he has on talks.

Photo: REUTERS/Stringer

As talks over the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program were underway, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Monday that Tehran would be prepared to stop high-grade uranium enrichment if world powers agreed to meet its needs for the fuel.

“From the beginning the Islamic Republic has stated that if European countries provided 20 percent enriched fuel for Iran, it would not enrich to this level,” Ahmadinejad stated in comments published on his presidential website.

But it is not clear how much influence Ahmadinejad has over the negotiations and whether his remarks reflect Tehran’s position in the talks.

Talks with Iran began earlier Monday to try to end a decade-long stand-off and avert the threat of a new war in the Middle East.

Experts and diplomats said a breakthrough was unlikely at the meeting in Moscow, where the world powers are wary of making concessions that would enable Tehran draw out the talks and give it more time to develop a nuclear weapons capability.

Iran strenuously denies it has any wish to obtain such weaponry and says it only wants nuclear technology to generate electricity.

Israel has threatened to bomb Iran if no solution to the dispute is found, oil markets are nervous over the prospect of intensifying regional tensions and the frail world economy can ill afford a further increase in crude prices.

“The atmosphere was fine, business-like and good. We hope this translates into a serious political commitment by the Iranians to address our proposals,” a European Union spokesman said after the talks started in the Russian capital.

But a Western official made clear the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany were ready to deepen Iran’s diplomatic and economic isolation if no deal is reached.

“If Iran remains unwilling to take the opportunities these talks present, it will face continuing and intensified pressure and isolation,” a Western official said.

The Moscow talks follow two rounds of negotiations since diplomacy resumed in April following a 15-month hiatus.

The United States wants to halt Iran’s enrichment of uranium to 20 percent purity, a level which some experts consider to be a dangerous step towards achieving the ability to create the explosive material required to make a nuclear bomb.

Ahmadinejad’s comments on enrichment appeared intended to ease pressure from the world powers and encourage them to make concessions at the talks.

But the Iranian president, who stands down at elections next year, has fallen out of favor with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the man who has the ultimate decision-making power over the strategic nuclear program.

The American Spectator : Obama’s Stuttering Covert War.

By Jed Babbin on 6.18.12 @ 6:10AM

President Obama’s piecemeal approach to war reminds us of nothing at all. The Iraq withdrawal, the ongoing pullout from Afghanistan, the raid that killed Osama bin Laden and his now-publicized “kill list” program using drones to bomb individual terrorists appear disconnected from any overall strategy to end the threat of Islamic terrorism.

Obama’s approach to Iran is consistent with his overall incoherence. On one hand, he is doing everything possible to block an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear weapons program. On the other, as we learned seventeen days ago from the New York Times, Obama has engaged in a covert cyberwar against that same objective.

The president would argue that under our outdated laws, a cyber attack isn’t even an act of war. But Carl von Clausewitz’s “On War” defines war as “an act of force to compel our enemy to do our will.” The cyber attacks on Iran are clearly an act of force to compel Iran to stop enriching uranium, imposing our will and Israel’s. They were acts of war by any logical measure.

The problem that results from Obama’s lack of cohesion is twofold. First, a covert war is most effective when it is covert, not advertised on the Times‘ front page. Second, if the covert war is to compel a result that doesn’t disappear in a few weeks or months, it has to be carried out until the desired goal is achieved.

Covert operations such as the cyber attacks on Iran are authorized by “Presidential Determinations,” which are supposed to be shared with the chairmen and ranking minority members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees in recognition of Congress’s constitutional power over the conduct of wars. Presumably the Determination authorizing the covert cyber attack stated the objective of blocking Iran from achieving nuclear weapons.

But the cyber attacks, while they apparently delayed Iran’s progress for several months, didn’t achieve more than that.

Few nations have earned our wrath more convincingly than Iran. From the hostages taken at our Tehran embassy in 1979 to Iran’s complicity in the 9/11 attacks (determined last December by a federal judge) to its direct support (with the innovative “explosively-formed penetrator” weapon) of Iraqi insurgents which killed many U.S. troops, Iran has taken little care in even disguising its military actions against us.

If Obama means to end our covert war with the cyber attacks, he is intending to end or limit a conflict that cannot be ended or limited because Iran will not let it. If we are unwilling to do more, we could at least undertake a wider covert war.

Some Iran experts, including my friend Michael Ledeen, argue that we need not conduct a conventional war with Iran to stop its nuclear weapons program. They argue that support for the Iranian opposition is a better option and would have the necessary effects in time to stop Iran from becoming a nuclear power.

I have never believed that the Iranian opposition could be strong enough to topple the Tehran regime, and that military power would have to be employed to prevent the regime from producing nuclear weapons and the means of deploying them. Diplomacy won’t work. No negotiation has produced any change in the Tehran regime’s behavior since it came to power. The only questions remaining are whether covert operations can delay Iran’s nuclear weapons program indefinitely and whether we can obtain enough accurate intelligence on that program to determine when the clock has run out and prompt, decisive military action has to be taken.

Our intelligence community still lacks the detailed information that could enable us to determine when Iran will achieve the nuclear capability it is pursuing. Though our ability to launch more covert operations against Iran is limited only by technology and imagination, the persistent lack of actionable intelligence — which is not likely to be remedied in the coming months or years — raises the risk of indefinite delay of military action to an intolerably high level. If we — and the Israelis — limit ourselves to covert action indefinitely, Iran will eventually achieve its nuclear ambitions.

The mullahs likely knew where the Stuxnet worm cyber attack came from, but having our authorship of the attacks published effectively dared the Iranian regime to counterattack. We don’t know what form that response will take or how or when it will be made or if it will succeed. We do know that the leak to the Times makes it harder and more dangerous to do what is needed in Iran.

Though Obama has dipped his toe into the covert war waters, he or his successor next year face the same dilemma. Some combination of covert actions could have the effect of delaying Iran’s nuclear program substantially, but what should they be and how long can we rely on them?

The limitations on our covert operations are only three: technology, our willingness to engage in more and different kinds of such operations, and our politics. The Obama White House leaks on the cyber attacks on Iran, and the Obama “kill list” program of drone attacks, are evidence of a reckless political strategy that, if continued, could prevent any future covert operations from succeeding. No covert agent or special operations soldier should have to bear that burden.

We had a significant opportunity to support the Iranian opposition in 2009 when opposition protests shook the Tehran regime. Obama declined to support the opposition and what could have been a revolution fizzled. We have refused to even talk to the opposition, a position that should be reversed immediately. If there is a substantial revolutionary movement in Iran, we should provide it covert aid in terms of financing, communications equipment, training and arms. CIA paramilitary groups should be inserted into Iran to perform these tasks and to improve our intelligence-gathering there. Sabotage against Iranian nuclear facilities should become a commonplace occurrence.

Expanding our cyberwar operations against Iran is one of the best options. Offensive cyberwar is far cheaper, and easier, than the defensive. We can, and should, disrupt Iranian government and military functions as often as we can. Iran is reportedly developing a new computer language to make such attacks more difficult. Our cyber warriors should be tasked to infiltrate that project and plant malicious software — “malware” in cyber jargon — to gather information from and at our command disrupt or destroy the computer networks the new system runs on.

A future president — let’s hope one will take office next year — should consider the “bad luck” option. Covert operations need not be conducted only by special operations forces, CIA agents, or computer warriors. We have a significant variety of stealthy weapons and weapon platforms. That president would have the option of making an equally large variety of Presidential Determinations authorizing the use of those weapons against Iran’s nuclear facilities and its intelligence and military centers.

When a target such as those blew up in the dark of night, who is to say that it’s the fault of the Great Satan or just a bad luck accident? The Iranian regime could become the most unlucky in the world. Let’s make it so.

About the Author

Jed Babbin served as a Deputy Undersecretary of Defense under George H.W. Bush. He is the author of several bestselling books including Inside the Asylum and In the Words of Our Enemies. You can follow him on Twitter @jedbabbin.

World powers start nuclear talks… JPost – Iranian Threat – News.

‘Iran was involved in bomb plots on Isra… JPost – International.

By JPOST.COM STAFF

06/18/2012 10:47

Multinational investigation produces evidence that Iran was behind planned attack in India, Thailand, Georgia ‘The Guardian’ reports.

Photo: REUTERS/Parivartan Sharma

Evidence that Iran was involved in bomb plots against Israeli envoys earlier in the year has emerged from a multinational probe, British newspaper The Guardian reported Monday.

In February, Israel ambassadors were the targets of planned terror attacks in India, Thailand and Georgia.

According to the report, local Indian agencies informed ministers that a bomb attack in New Dehli, which injured the wife of the Israeli embassy’s chief security officer, was orchestrated by a an Iranian “security entity.”

The Guardian stated that European intelligence officials had told the newspaper that “they now found in difficult to judge Tehran’s ‘risk calculus.'”

“Until recently it was possible to see why they were doing what they have been doing … Now it has become very unpredictable. It’s very hard to see the logic behind [the February bombings], other than perhaps demonstrate an ability to cause problems in the event of war or a desire for revenge of some kind,” The Guardian cited an intelligence official as saying.

According to the report, a combination of police evidence, witness statements and court documents seen by The Guardian illustrates that the three attacks were, “conducted by a well coordinated network of about a dozen Iranians and prepared over at least 10 months.”

The evidence mentioned by The Guardian comprises the identification of at least ten Iranians suspected of involvement in the plots, money transfers to “key individuals” from Iran, the detection of Iranian phone connections and a flight of suspects to Iran after the attacks.

Following the attacks, Thai security authorities announced that they had discovered a “direct connection” linking the attacks against Israeli diplomats in Georgia and India with an Iranian terrorist cell apprehended in Bangkok.

The cell, which consisted of three Iranian nationals, intended to target Israeli diplomats, Thai Police Chief Prewpan Dhamapong said at the time.

Yaakov Katz contributed to this report

Alon Ben-Meir: Why Attacking Iran Is Becoming More Likely.

The negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program during the past few months have produced nothing more than a diplomatic dance in the face of persistent Iranian ploys for time coupled with intransigence on key issues.

In failing to reach a negotiated settlement, the conflict with Tehran is inching closer toward a point of no return, where Israel might decide that the circumstances warrant a unilateral attack against Iran’s nuclear facilities. Although there are other scenarios under which Israel may decide to attack Iran, chief among them is Israel’s fear that Iran is close to reaching what Israel’s Defense Minister Ehud Barak terms, “a zone of immunity.” Under such circumstances and given more time, Iran would be in a position to store much of its previous enriched uranium, as well as its high quality centrifuges, deep inside the mountain base of Fordow, thus becoming completely immune from aerial bombardment.

This objective, which Tehran is hard at work in seeking to achieve, limits how much time Israel would have before it acts. This Israeli concerns make the continuing diplomatic efforts coupled with sanctions advocated by the Obama administration unviable options and might in fact be extremely risky to pursue. The Netanyahu government is absolutely convinced that Iran will continue to play for time as it has over the past several years, during which time Tehran has considerably advanced its nuclear program in defiance of the IAEA and in spite of severe sanctions.

Netanyahu and his Defense Minister Barak, in particular, are not persuaded that any future talks will persuade Iran to give up its uranium enrichment program. Time has therefore become Israel’s worst enemy as Iran races to shield its main nuclear facilities to make them impregnable to air attacks. Unlike securing a “zone of immunity”, which the Israelis believe Tehran could achieve within a few months, other possible scenarios include: Iran mustering the technology to produce nuclear weapons, cyber-attacks being inadequate to slow the nuclear program, and requiring more time to work, thus denying Israel the luxury of time to assume the “wait and see” attitude.

Although a consensus exists among the Israeli defense and security establishment that an attack would at best delay Iran’s nuclear program by two to three years and might even push Iran to pursue nuclear weapons capabilities more vigorously than at the present, it is not a given that Iran would simply resume its nuclear activity following such an attack. Some Israeli officials argue that the changing regional and domestic political dynamics may force Tehran to rethink its nuclear weapons program. Moreover, as Barak speculated a couple of months ago, Iran’s potential retaliatory attacks against Israel or its allies, specifically the U.S., would have limited impact and the catastrophic regional repercussions many Western observers suggest would not necessarily come to pass. Although President Putin, for domestic political motivation, is eager for a foreign policy achievement and would be inclined to put more pressure on Iran, no one who understands the internal dynamics in Iran expects any breakthrough in the next meeting scheduled for June 18-19 in Moscow between the P5+I and Iran. As a result, feverish diplomatic maneuverings will follow along with a stiffening of the American and European sanctions that are in place already. Additionally, the current quiet military preparation for striking Iran by both the U.S. and Israel may well enter a new phase of readiness, albeit with differences in timing and the decision regarding if or when to strike, which remains a contentious issue between the two allies.

Undoubtedly, there is extensive cooperation between the United States and Israel regarding Iran’s nuclear program, including intelligence sharing and the coordination of cyber-attacks, all the while keeping Israel informed about the progress (or the lack thereof) in the negotiations with Iran. In recent weeks, a number of former and current American officials have visited Israel including: Michele A. Flournloy, former Undersecretary of Defense, David S. Cohen, Undersecretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence in the Treasury Department, and Wendy R. Sherman, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs. These and others are trying to assure Israel that the United States’ commitment to preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapon capabilities is solid and that the U.S. is prepared to use military force should it become necessary.

The Obama administration insists that Iran is at least two years away from reaching the so-called “point of no return,” providing the administration with more time for diplomacy and allowing the crippling sanctions to succeed. Moreover, having just concluded the war in Iraq and with the fighting in Afghanistan still continuing, there is little appetite to start new military operations, which could ignite regional conflagration. In addition, being that this is an election year, the President does not want to risk a military operation especially when there is more time to find new alternatives. Finally, neither the U.S. nor any of its close allies, especially Israel, faces direct, imminent or immediate danger from Iran, which U.S. collective intelligence agencies assure is not the case at this juncture.

The Netanyahu government sees the Iranian threat from a different perspective. Israel maintains, with some justifications, that the Iranian leadership has repeatedly threatened Israel existentially and even if Iran does not use a nuclear weapon against Israel, it poses a grave regional danger far greater than the potential consequences of an Israeli attack. A nuclear Iran would increase nuclear proliferation (the Saudi government has already threatened to develop its own nuclear weapons), heighten the risk of extremist groups of obtaining nuclear materials, and embolden Iran to throw its weight around in the region, pitting the Shiite bloc against Israel. That said, former Israeli officials from the intelligence and military communities argue that Iran knows only too well that Israel maintains second strike capabilities that could cause catastrophic damage to Iran and the Iranian leadership is not so irrational as to commit suicide. Nevertheless, Netanyahu insists that Israel’s national security concerns cannot be taken lightly and however remote the Iranian threat may be, Israel cannot afford to take the risk.

The Israeli position is further strengthened by the argument that the on and off negotiations between the P5+1 and Iran and through Turkish and Brazilian mediation nearly two years ago, have produced nothing of substance. This problem was compounded by the recent presumed agreement between the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Iran to allow inspectors to access the controversial Parchin military base, which has failed to materialize. Moreover, recent evidence revealed that a cleanup operation has taken place at the military site, which has heightened the suspicions of IAEA, the U.S. and Israel. Finally, Iran continues to refuse unfettered IAEA access at its suspected nuclear sites, with the intent of obfuscating its true nuclear goals. Israel views this as a pattern that Tehran has been pursuing almost with impunity while defying not only the IAEA but also four UNSC resolutions demanding a complete suspension of its enrichment program.

Although for Israel time is of the essence, should Iran come close to reaching the “zone of immunity” which would make attacking Iran more likely, clear and unequivocal evidence of Israeli intelligence findings must be produced for the whole world to see before Israel contemplates such an attack. A premature Israeli attack could not only have catastrophic regional consequences but could also subject Israel to world-wide condemnation, potentially crippling sanctions, and retaliatory attacks by Iran and its surrogates.

The United States is not oblivious to Iran’s intentions or to Israel’s legitimate concerns. Regardless of the differing assessments between Israel and the U.S., Israel would be well advised to fully collaborate with the American administration and act in concert to avoid any miscalculations that could potentially cost Israel dearly.

Coming Soon: Iron Dome 2.0 – Defense/Security – News – Israel National News.

Iron Dome in action (file)

Israel news photo: Flash 90

The IAF’s Aerial Defense Formation is already working on additional developments and improvements to the Iron Dome anti-missile defense system, the IAF Website revealed. The next stage of the Iron Dome will include advances in interception capabilities, and will respond to a wider range of threats.

“Soon, we will update the system to the Block 2 version,” said Lt. Col. Shabtai Ben-Bocher, Head of the Lower Layer Wing of the Shield Administration.

“The upgrade will provide the IDF with additional interception capabilities,” he said, “and a variety of improvements that we cannot reveal. Moreover, it’s important to note that the system is constantly upgraded with small-scale improvements.”

Col. Ben-Bocher explained that the original Iron Dome system was developed under severe time constraints, and that this made it necessary to leave some fixes and improvements for later. These improvements are being made now.

Once the development of the second stage is completed, a process expected to take less than a year, work on the third stage (Block 3) is expected to commence. The third stage will include the improvement of the system’s control capabilities.

Today there are three Iron Dome anti-missile batteries stationed in southern Israel, and a fourth battery is to become operational in the near future.

Iron Dome operates day and night and in all climate conditions to intercept short range rockets. It is capable of counteracting multiple simultaneous threats. Radars detect a rocket launch and transfer data regarding its route to the command and control system that calculates where it will hit.

If the location threatens lives or property and justifies interception, an intercepting missile is launched against the rocket. Assuming all goes well, the warhead of the intercepting missile explodes near the rocket, and the debris falls harmlessly to the ground.

Secret war on Iran’s nuclear program not working, expert says – Israel News, Ynetnews.

he ‘New York Times’ writes that Iran’s stock of uranium is growing quickly. Many Western diplomats believe that unless Tehran make three major concessions, nuclear talks won’t continue after the upcoming meeting in Moscow

Yitzhak Benhorin

WASHINGTON – There was no breakthrough in Istanbul or in Baghdad – will the Iranian nuclear talks grind to a halt in Moscow? Western diplomats said Sunday that if there was no progress on the Islamic Republic‘s nuclear program during Monday’s meeting between Iran and the six world powers, no date would be set for additional talks. Tehran continues to assert its right to enrich uranium.

The assessment that talks will not continue comes a day after approximately half of the US Senate called on President Barack Obama to cut the talks short unless the Tehran regime agrees to three major concessions: closing the Fordo uranium enrichment facility; halting uranium enrichment above 5%; and removing all uranium enriched to a higher level from Iran.

Meanwhile, the “New York Times” has reported “dramatic progress” in Iran’s nuclear program. According to the US paper, despite the assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists, cyber attacks and economic sanctions that include a ban on Iran’s oil exports, freezing the Islamic State’s assets, and cutting off the country’s banking activity (which brought Tehran back to the negotiating table), the Iranians have consistently managed to increase their enrichment capacity and are closing in on a nuclear bomb.

‘Iran is ready to make a deal – US balking,’ expert says (Photo: AP)

Experts quoted in the article warned that Iran’s stock of enriched uranium is growing quickly, which could shorten the time needed to create a small-scale nuclear arsenal. The “Times” interviewed Dr. Hossein Mousavian, a Princeton University researcher who served on Iran’s nuclear diplomacy team in negotiations with the EU and International Atomic Energy Agency.

According to Mousavian, Iran has indeed taken a hit from attempts to sabotage its nuclear project, but “the covert war has not been successful.”

Mousavian is the former head of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, but over the years was distanced from the inner circle. In a new book, he claims that Tehran would be prepared to reach an agreement on its nuclear program, but is concerned that the Obama Administration, which is caught in an election year, would refuse to keep Republicans from portraying the deal as a concession.

“The deal is very much possible,” Mousavian said. “Iran is ready. But if you want to keep the sanctions forever, want to keep playing games, there will be consequences.”

Over the weekend, Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney announced that he would take military action to keep Iran from going nuclear. In an interview on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” Romney added that he would “do so if necessary to keep them from becoming a nuclear threat to the world. I don’t think that as president I would need Congress’ approval to take military action. The president already has that authority,” Romney said.

Israel: Make military threats ag… JPost – Iranian Threat – News. 

By HERB KEINON

06/18/2012 02:34

3rd round of talks between Iran, world powers to begin in Moscow; officials say int’l community must make demands clear.

Photo: Heinz-Peter Bader/Reuters

On the eve of the third round of talks between Iran and the world powers expected to begin Monday in Moscow, Israeli officials urged the international community to better impress upon Tehran that they will face military action if their nuclear march is not stopped.

“Our position is that the international community needs to do three things for the talks to be successful,” an official said Sunday. “Make its demands crystal clear and tied to a clear timeline for implementation, ratchet up the economic and diplomatic pressure, and augment that pressure by making clear there is a credible military option.” The official, reflecting a position that has been percolating for weeks in Jerusalem, said there is a sense the Iranians are not yet convinced that when the US or others say that “all options are on the table,” they actually mean it.

Only if the regime in Iran believes that the continuation of the nuclear program is totally unacceptable, and the world will not allow it even if it means military action, will diplomacy work, the official said.

“We would like the international community to say that these are our demands, these are our sanctions, comply…or else, “ he said. “Just as we think the sanctions have to be beefed up, this position must be clearly stated.”

The official said there was a need for greater specificity when repeating the mantra “all options are on the table.”

In recent weeks differences between Israel and the US administration over the world powers’ negotiating strategy with Iran have come out into the open, with the group of nations negotiating with Iran known as the P5+1 – the US, China, Russia, France, Britain and Germany – focused on getting the Iranians to stop enriching uranium to 20 percent, while Israel maintains Iran must stop all uranium enrichment at any level.

In addition to ending all uranium enrichment, Israel is also calling for Iran to transfer all of the already enriched uranium in its possession out of the country, and to close down the underground nuclear facility at Qom.

Israel was critical of the two previous rounds of talks the P5+1 held with Iran this year – with one round held in Baghdad last month, and the other held in Istanbul in April – saying the demands on Iran were too low and were enabling the Iranians to continue their nuclear development even as they negotiated with the world.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, in an interview earlier this month with Germany’s Bild newspaper, said: “The P5+1 are so keen on getting any agreement that they have lowered the demands.”

Israel’s position on what demands should be made of Tehran was buttressed Friday by the US Congress, when a bipartisan letter signed by 44 senators was sent to Obama, urging him to end negotiations unless Iran halted all enrichment and closed the facility at Qom.

The Moscow talks are coming 10 days before the US is to implement a series of tough sanctions on Iran’s oil clients, and two weeks before the EU begins its embargo of Iranian oil.