WarSclerotic

Iran says it test-fires missiles in war of nerves | Reuters.

(Reuters) – Iran said on Tuesday it had successfully tested medium-range missiles capable of hitting Israel as a response to threats of attack, the latest move in a war of nerves with the West.

Israel says it could attack Iran if diplomacy fails to secure a halt to its disputed nuclear energy program. The United States also has military force as a possible option but has repeatedly encouraged the Israelis to be patient while new economic sanctions are implemented against Iran.

The Islamic Republic announced the “Great Prophet 7” missile exercise on Sunday after a European embargo against Iranian crude oil purchases took full effect following another fruitless round of big power talks with Tehran.

Iran’s official English-language Press TV said the Shahab 3 missile with a range of 1,300 km (800 miles) – able to reach Israel – was tested along with the shorter-range Shahab 1 and 2.

“The main aim of this drill is to demonstrate the Iranian nation’s political resolve to defend vital values and national interests,” Revolutionary Guards Deputy Commander Hossein Salami was quoted by Press TV as saying.

He said the tests were in response to Iran’s enemies who talk of a “military option being on the table”.

On Sunday, Iran threatened to wipe Israel “off the face of the earth” if the Jewish state attacked it.

Analysts have challenged some of Iran’s military assertions, saying it often exaggerates its capabilities.

Senior researcher Pieter Wezeman of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute said Iran’s missiles were still relatively inaccurate and of limited use in conventional warfare. With conventional warheads, “their only utility is as a tool of terror and no more than that”, he said by telephone.

He added, however, that they could be suitable for carrying nuclear warheads, especially the larger ones.

The International Institute for Strategic Studies, said in a 2010 report that all Tehran’s ballistic missiles were “inherently capable of a nuclear payload”, if Iran was able to make a small enough bomb.

Iran denies Western accusations that it is seeking to develop nuclear weapons capability. The world’s No. 5 oil exporter maintains that it is enriching uranium only to generate more energy for a rapidly growing population.

OIL MARKETS ON EDGE

Iran has previously threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz, through which more than a third of the world’s seaborne oil trade passes, in response to increasingly harsh sanctions by the United States and its allies intended to force it to curb its nuclear research program.

Fars said dozens of missiles involved in this week’s exercises had been aimed at simulated air bases, and that Iranian-built unmanned drones would be tested on Wednesday.

Iran repeated its claim to be reverse-engineering the sophisticated U.S. RQ-170 drone that it says it brought down during a spying mission last year.

“In this drone there are hundreds of technologies used, each of which are valuable to us in terms of operations, information and technicalities,” General Amir Hajizadeh was quoted by the ISNA news agency as saying.

Wezeman said Iran had a large standing armed force, but that its weapons were generally outdated. “And those weapons only get older and older and they don’t have access to new technology because they are under a United Nations arms embargo.”

In his first comments since the European Union oil ban took force, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said sanctions would benefit Iran by lessening its dependence on crude exports.

“We must see the sanctions as an opportunity … which can forever take out of the enemy’s hands the ability to use oil as a weapon for sanctions,” Fars news agency quoted him as saying.

Negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program continued in Istanbul on Tuesday with a meeting of technical experts from Iran and six world powers.

The discussions follow a round of political talks in Moscow last month at which the sides failed to bridge differences or agree on a further round of talks at that level.

The experts have no mandate to strike agreements but the six powers – the United States, China, Britain, Germany, France and Russia – hope that by clarifying technical aspects of Tehran’s work they can open way for more negotiations in the future.

“We hope Iran will seize the opportunity of this meeting to show a willingness to take concrete steps to urgently meet the concerns of the international community,” EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said ahead of the meeting.

As a priority, the powers want Iran to stop enriching uranium to levels close to weapons-grade, ship out any stockpile, and close a secret facility where such work is done.

Iran denies its program has a military dimension and wants relief from economic sanctions before it makes any concessions.

IRANIAN CALL TO SHUT OIL LANES

On Monday, Iranian parliamentarians proposed a bill calling for Iran to try to stop tankers taking crude through the Strait of Hormuz to countries that support the sanctions.

However, the Iranian parliament is relatively weak, analysts say, and the proposal has no chance of becoming law unless sanctioned by Iran’s clerical supreme leader.

That is seen as unlikely in the near term given that Western powers have said they would tolerate no closure of the Strait while Iranian leaders, wedded to strategic pragmatism for the sake of survival, have said they seek no war with anyone.

“It’s a gesture at this stage,” said independent British-based Iran analyst Reza Esfandiari.

“They want to emphasize that Iran can make life difficult for Europe and America. I think this is more of an attempt to offset falling crude prices. Financial markets are very sensitive to such talk.”

On Tuesday, the price of Brent crude, which has been on a downward trend for the last three months, broke $100 for the first time since early June.

“A lot depends on nuclear talks,” said Esfandiari. “If there’s no progress and the initiative is deadlocked, then these kind of actions will intensify.”

(Additional reporting by Yeganeh Torbati in Dubai, Fredrik Dahl in Vienna and Justyna Pawlak in Brussels; Editing by Mark Heinrich and Kevin Liffey)

The Axis-Israel News – Haaretz Israeli News source..

It would come as a major surprise, even for the most optimistic of commentators, if anything more than yet another date for more negotiations comes out of the Istanbul talks.

Iranian Revolutionary Guards celebrate after launching a missile in an undisclosed location. Photo by AP

By Ari Shavit | Jul.03,2012 | 7:29 PM | 12

The “technical experts” meeting starting today in Istanbul between the representatives of Iran and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, along with Germany (P5+1) are just a last-gasp attempt to keep the diplomatic channel between the international community and Iran open. Yet the chance that these low to mid-level diplomats will succeed in achieving a breakthrough where the senior negotiators failed in three rounds of well-prepared talks is next to nil. You can blame the intransigence on Iran’s determination to build a nuclear weapon or on Barack Obama’s election circumstances which wont’ allow him any flexibility; it will be a major surprise, even for the most optimistic of commentators, if anything more than yet another date for more negotiations comes out of the Istanbul talks.

That doesn’t mean that the next act in the play is a military strike by the U.S. or Israel on Iran’s nuclear facilities. There is one more stage that has to play out before we cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war. As of the beginning of this week, Iran is facing the toughest set of sanctions and embargo regimes yet, and as they continue to cripple the country’s increasingly fragile economy, will they finally force Iran to back down? Is there a chance that sanctions will work where diplomacy failed?

I have a big piece in today’s Haaretz on the extent of Britain’s ongoing economic war against Iran, which while being very low-key, is second only to the American efforts. The British may have lost an empire and given up most of their military capability, but the City of London is still one of the world’s main financial hubs and it is the marine insurance capital of the globe, giving the British multiple levers with which to pressure Iran, including cutting off nearly all its foreign banking services and making it extremely hard – not only for Iranian ships, but for the ships of any other country carrying Iranian oil – to get the necessary insurance coverage.

One of the experts and diplomats I interviewed for my piece was Sir Richard Dalton, a former British ambassador to Iran and currently a fellow at Chatham House. Based on his knowledge of Iran, Sir Richard does not believe the sanctions will achieve their goal.

“They are relying too much on sanctions – they overestimate the impact on Iran’s bottom line of sanctions. They have to recognize that the only way out of the impasse is the sanctions’ suspension. You can’t simply bludgeon Iran to give up the position they have held for seven years. They have to find a way to put some substance and reciprocity. The sanctions are being used in an ineffective way because they are not offering Iran any incentive.”

My friend, Israeli analyst Amotz Asa-El, has an opposite view. He writes in Marketwatch that the sanctions are not only going to work, but that they will cause upheaval in Iran. He points to two main factors. The first, that while Iran is the world’s second-largest producer of oil, cutting them off from the world energy market has not caused the price of gas to rise, it has actually gone down and Iraq’s customers are finding it relatively easy to secure alternative suppliers. Not only is Iran exporting now less of its oil, but it is receiving far less income for the oil it is still managing to sell. The second factor is the collapse of the retail sector within Iran, due to the government’s shrinking ability to subsidize food prices and the absence of a free economy within Iran that isn’t based on petro-dollars. Asa-El predicts that this will lead to hyperinflation very soon and then –

“Watching their money evaporate between their fingers, a growing number of Iranians increasingly ask why they need a leadership whose adventurism’s main cheerleaders are Hugo Chavez and Bashar Assad. Moreover, the millions in Iran who believe the ayatollahs stole their votes three years ago have since seen people power drive other inept Middle East leaders from office.

Between the increasingly restless masses and the economically dilettante ayatollahs, change from within is on its way to Iran, either in the wake of next year’s election or before it, whether peacefully or not.”

But will there be sufficient time for that outcome to emerge? The buildup of additional American naval forces in the Persian Gulf and the official announcement that Austere Challenge, the joint U.S-Israel missile defense exercise set to take place this October in Israel, are clear indications that America is putting all the necessary pieces in place, in case Obama decides on an election-eve operation against Iran. In other words, the sanctions have about four months to force Iran to concede, and then its finger on the trigger and shoot when you see the whites of their eyes.

Israel Hayom | Report: IDF detonates spy device in Lebanon.

The devices were reportedly used to tap the lines of senior officials in the terror organization • Hezbollah statement on Daily Star: “The Islamic Resistance managed to locate an Israeli eavesdropping device on the resistance’s wired communication network in Zrarieh. As a result, the enemy detonated the device from a distance.”

.:Middle East Online::New Israeli Leader Balks on Iran:..

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has kept President Obama behind a hard-line strategy on Iran’s nuclear program via lobbying pressure from Congress and Washington’s neocons. But a new member of the Israeli government is complicating matters, writes Gareth Porter for Inter Press Service.

By staking out a policy line on Iran reflecting the views of the Israeli national security leadership, Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz has undercut the Benjamin Netanyahu government’s carefully planned strategy to get US President Barack Obama to threaten war against Iran if it doesn’t give up its nuclear program.

It could be the beginning of a process by which Netanyahu begins to climb down from a militarily aggressive policy that has provoked unprecedented dissent from high-ranking active and retired military and intelligence officials.

Mofaz, who brought his Kadima Party into the Netanyahu government in a May 9 deal, is a former Israeli chief of staff who had made threatening statements about Iran’s nuclear program as minister of defense in Likud Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s government from 2003 to 2006.

The new coalition government, which increased its majority in the Knesset from 94 to 120 seats, was billed by the government’s supporters as a “war cabinet” that would strengthen Netanyahu’s hand in using force against Iran should that decision be made.

But instead Mofaz has publicly contradicted the whole thrust of Netanyahu’s strategy by downgrading the threat from Iran and suggesting that a peace settlement with the Palestinians is actually more important.

The role of Mofaz in suggesting a more moderate Israeli policy line on Iran is at least in part the result of more senior Israeli national security figures speaking out publicly against the Netayahu threat of war on Iran, according to Yossi Alpher, a former head of the Jaffee Center for Security Studies at Tel Aviv University and a special adviser to then prime minister Ehud Barak in 2000.

In April, both former Shin Bet chief Yuval Diskin and the present Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) chief of staff joined former Mossad chief Meir Dagan in contradicting the official Israeli position that Iran was bent on obtaining nuclear weapons.

Alpher believes that the decision to bring Mofaz into the government reflects a policy adjustment by Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak to the views of the Israeli national security elite.

Alpher told IPS in an interview he believes the criticism by those senior military and intelligence officials of Netayahu’s Iran policy had “reached a critical mass.” “At some point it registered with Netanyahu and Barak,” said Alpher.

Netanyahu and Barak wanted to show the national security chiefs that they were being listened to by bringing someone who reflects their views into the leadership circle, Alpher said.

The result of that decision may be a much deeper shift in policy toward Iran than Netanyahu and Barak wish to acknowledge. Ever since late 2011, the impression of a heightened threat of an Israeli attack on Iran has been central to the crisis atmosphere over the issue. It has been the premise on which Israel has tried to reduce progressively Obama’s freedom of action on Iran with the ultimate objective of maximizing the likelihood of an eventual US attack on Iranian nuclear sites.

The strategy of pressure on Obama was to be carried out through a combination of Israeli demands regarding US diplomatic positions on Iran’s nuclear program and pressure from the US Congress at the prompting of the right-wing pro-Israel lobby organization AIPAC, which operates in close consultation with the Likud government.

The tandem of Israeli and Congressional targets of AIPAC would push for US demands in the negotiations with Iran that would ensure their failure. Netanyahu would then seek to force a shift in Obama’s red line on the Iranian nuclear program from evidence of intent to build nuclear weapons to evidence of determination to maintain a weapons nuclear capability. Allies of Netanyahu have suggested that the pressure on Obama to adopt a new red line would peak during the 2012 presidential election campaign.

Even after Mofaz joined the coalition government in May, the Netanyahu strategy continued to unfold according to plan. A resolution in the US House of Representatives originating in AIPAC that rejected “any US policy that would rely on efforts to contain a nuclear weapons capable Iran…” was passed 401 to 11 on May 18.

The Jerusalem Post reported June 7 that Israeli officials had revealed a three-pronged strategy to get Iran to halt its nuclear program: stiffening economic sanctions, getting the US and the P5+1 to demand a halt to all enrichment, and “upgrading the threat perception inside Iran” – an obvious reference to shifting Obama’s position on the use of force.

Just before the Moscow round of talks between the P5+1 and Iran on June 18 and 19, a letter from 44 senators, evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans, urged Obama to “reconsider talks with Iran unless it agrees immediate steps to curb its enrichment activity.” That letter, also drafted by AIPAC, called for a shift from further talks to “significantly increasing the pressure on Iran through sanctions and making it clear that a credible military option exists.”

The letter reiterated the demands that the Obama administration had already leaked to the news media in advance as its position in the talks with Iran: an end to 20 percent enrichment, shipment of all 20 percent enrichment uranium out of the country, and the closure of the Fordow enrichment site. But it also insisted that nothing should be offered to Iran in return for those concessions except further negotiation.

But as the third-round talks with Iran were ending in Moscow, Mofaz, who was in Washington to consult with US officials on the Palestinian issue, departed publicly and dramatically from Netanyahu’s policy on Iran. In a speech at the pro-Israel Washington Institute for Near East Policy on June 19, Mofaz startled the audience by suggesting that the greatest threat to Israel did not come from Iran, as Netanyahu has insisted since becoming prime minister, but from its conflict with the Palestinians.

Referring to the Palestinian issue – not the Iranian nuclear program – Mofaz warned, “Time is not in favor of Israel” and added, “This year – next year – we have to decide.”

Mofaz sounded more like the Obama administration than the Netanyahu government on the question of an Israeli military option. “We should ask ourselves how much we would delay the Iran program – for how many months, for many years,” he said, “and what will happen in our region on the day after.”

Even more significant, however, was his comment on the “time limit” on tolerance of Iran’s nuclear program as being when “the Iranian leader will take the last step to having a bomb.” Mofaz thus appeared to align himself with Obama’s red line rather than the Netanyahu and Barak position, which is that Iran must not be allowed to have much more of its enrichment capabilities in an underground site protected from an Israeli strike.

Brig. Gen. Shlomo Brom, who was deputy national security adviser in 2000, told IPS that the position on Iran and Palestine expressed by Mofaz – and especially his position on the “time limit”- were potentially significant. If Mofaz has sufficient clout in the government, Brom said, it would “increase the probability of a more positive position of this government” on Iran.

The Mofaz position that a Palestinian peace settlement is crucial and urgent – and that Iran is not – effectively reshapes the priorities of Israeli security policy. Netanyahu became prime minister in 2009 with a position that the threat from Iran made a Palestinian settlement unlikely, if not impossible.

Even before adding Mofaz, Netanyahu was unable to muster a majority in the nine-member Israeli “security forum,” which must approve a decision to go to war, according to a May 31 Ynet News report. Only Netanyahu, Barak and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman were said to be supporting an attack on Tehran’s nuclear facilities, at least in principle. The other six, including IDF Chief Gantz, Mossad Chief Pardo and Mofaz, were all opposed.

Netanyahu’s strategy of using AIPAC and Congress to pressure Obama may well continue, but the pretense that Israel may attack Iran if its enrichment program continues is likely to be quietly phased out once the US election campaign is over.

Gareth Porter is an investigative historian and journalist specializing in US national security policy. The paperback edition of his latest book, Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam, was published in 2006. [This article originally appeared at Inter Press Service.

Kenya arrests Iranian terror suspects – UPI.com.

NAIROBI, Kenya, July 3 (UPI) — Two Iranians arrested in Kenya who led authorities to a cache of explosives planned to attack Israeli, U.S., British or Saudi targets, officials said.

Suspects Ahmad Abolfathi Mohammad and Sayed Mansour Mousavi are believed to be members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards elite al-Quds force, the British newspaper The Telegraph reported Tuesday quoting Kenyan authorities.

A police source told the London daily the two were under surveillance as soon as they arrived in Kenya and were arrested June 19 in Nairobi.

“Our anti-terror officers were highly suspicious of them from the moment that they landed in country,” a police officer told the paper. “From what we saw, their intention was clear to plan and execute terrorism attacks. I cannot say against which countries, it could be any target, from any country.”

The Kenya radio station Capital FM said the two led authorities to a cache of 33 lbs of RDX explosives in Mombasa.

On June 27, the Iranians told a Kenyan court they had been tortured by Israeli agents while in police custody and demanded medical attention, the radio report said.

Nairobi’s Senior Principal Magistrate Paul Biwott denied the two bail and ordered they be escorted to a hospital for treatment at their own cost and set the next court hearing for July 23, the radio said.

Monday, Israel’s Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu accused Iran of being behind terror attacks in Africa, The Telegraph said.

“After Iran sent its agents to murder the Saudi ambassador on U.S. soil, the country has engaged in attacks in Azerbaijan, Bangkok, in Tbilisi, in New Delhi, and now we have just discovered a plot for a terrorist attack in Africa. The international community must fight against this major player in the world of terrorism,” the paper quoted Netanyahu saying.

US sends floating base for special forces to Gulf to thwart Iran – Telegraph.

US officials have revealed that a military build-up in the Gulf region includes the deployment of warships, F-22 stealth fighter jets and a new amphibious base to launch special forces attacks.

MPs said the move was designed to punish the EU after its embargo on Iranian oil exports came into force on Sunday Photo: AP

Lebanon news – NOW Lebanon -Iran and Hezbollah to defend Syria from “attack,” PFPL-GC chief says.

Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command leader Ahmad Jibril on Tuesday warned that Iran and Hezbollah will defend Syria from attacks. (AFP/Louai Beshara)

( Wow!  Is the US really that smart/good?  I never considered this.  Thank you, Galio.  – JW )

I think that in light of the discovery of the Flame virus on the highest level of Iranian government computers the capture of the RQ-170 by Iran was no accident.

In fact it was planned so that the Iranians would download the virus thinking they were hacking into the secrets of the drone. This allowed the CIA to effectively penetrate into the highest level of the Iranian government monitoring communications between key players.

US Flexes Muscles against Iran in Gulf – Defense/Security – News – Israel National News.

Iran will find its boats “on the bottom of the Gulf” if it tries to mine the Persian Gulf to prevent oil and gas tankers from sailing.

US Navy patrols Persian Gulf

US Navy

The United States has deployed ships and aircraft in the Persian Gulf region in a clear warning to Iran that “the military option is on the table” if Tehran tried to block the strategic waterway uses by oil and gas tankers, The New York Times reported Tuesday.

“Don’t even think about closing the strait. We’ll clear the mines,” a defense department official told the newspaper. “Don’t even think about sending your fast boats out to harass our vessels or commercial shipping. We’ll put them on the bottom of the gulf.”

Another administration official was quoted as saying, “When the president says there are other options on the table beyond negotiations, he means it.”

The deployment of more American warplanes in the Persian Gulf would give the United States a greater ability to strike deep within Iran in the event of a decision by President Barack Obama to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities.

The other side of the coin is the possibility that the American military force could cause Iran’s military generals to pull the trigger finger and try to block oil tankers from Saudi Arabia and elsewhere. a move that would cause the price of crude oil – and gasoline at the pump – to spiral upwards less than five months before the U.S. presidential elections.

In addition, the United States has deployed more warplanes have been deployed at two regional bases.

The Obama administration continues to stiffen sanctions in Iran, but Israel reiterated this week they are too little and too late.

Iran continues to try to try to show it is strong enough to defend itself and also to launch attacks on U.S. bases and on Israel. It announced Tuesdays that it successfully fired “tens” of missiles that can strike Israel and regional bases, but the claims were made by the Fars News Agency, linked with the Revolutionary Guards and often a source of unsubstantiated claims.

Iran also has threatened to pass a law that would block oil tankers on their way to countries that have joined the American embargo, but there is no indication of how it could enforce such a law.

One major factor working against Iran is that virtually all of the Gulf States are aligned with the United States and have a common interest with Israel to prevent Tehran from obtaining nuclear ability and advancing its dream of establishing an Islamic empire in the Middle East.

US military strength beefed up at Hormuz as nuclear talks with Iran fade.

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report July 3, 2012, 4:26 PM (GMT+02:00)

The USS Ponce

The Obama administration released details Tuesday, July 3, of a fresh buildup of its military forces in the Persian Gulf, stressing their task is to fend off any Iranian attempt to endanger international shipping by blocking or planting mines in the Strait of Hormuz.
Shortly after the announcement, senior US administration officials said the fourth round of nuclear negotiations between Iran and six world powers taking place in Istanbul Tuesday were most probably the last: Tehran has refused to give way on the key issues of the 20-percent grade enrichment of uranium and the closure of its underground nuclear facility at Fordo.
The new war drums sent oil past $100 for the first time in three weeks.

As for the Gulf buildup, US sources said counter-measures were in place in case the extra forces were targeted for Iranian aggression.
Tehran earlier threatened military reprisals for the oil embargo imposed by the European Union Sunday, July 1. The next day, the Prophet 7 missile exercise was launched by Iran’s Revolutionary Guards simulating attacks on “enemy air bases.”

The wording of the exercise’s mission was taken as strongly intimating that Tehran had US air bases in the Persian Gulf and Middle East, including facilities used the US Air Force in Israel and Turkey, well within the sights of its missiles. It was stressed that short-, medium- and long-range missiles were being put through their paces.

Tuesday, commanders of the Iranian exercise reported that dozens of missiles had been trained for several hours on mock “enemy bases” in several countries, stating that missiles capable of hitting Israel had been successfully tested.
The US has doubled the number of fast warships in Gulf waters that are capable of instantaneously responding to Iranian moves for closing the strategic Straits of Hormuz, through which a fifth of the world’s oil passes daily. More minesweepers are also on hand, as well as commando units for preventive action against the planting of mines in the sea lanes frequented by oil tankers on their way to and from Gulf export terminals.
debkafile’s military sources report that US, Saudi and other Gulf armies have been on high military alert since Thursday, June 28, on two counts: the escalating Syrian crisis and the potential threat to the strategic strait in response to the EU embargo. Iranian leaders have often threatened to treat this penalty as an act of war. As part of their new stance, Saudi forces moved up to the Jordanian and Iraqi borders.
According to our sources, the information released in Washington on the US Gulf buildup represents only a fraction of the concentration of strength gradually building up around Iran for five months since March. It was then that two squadrons of the F-22 Raptor stealth planes were moved to the United Arab Emirates air base at Al Dhafra and troops were flown in to two strategic islands, Masirah on the Gulf of Oman and Socotra at the meeting-point between the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean. Their numbers now are estimated at 40,000.  See the attached map.