Archive for July 5, 2012

Iran submarine plan may fuel Western nuclear worries

July 5, 2012

Iran submarine plan may fuel Western nuclear worries.

Iran’s announcement that it plans to build its first nuclear-powered submarine is stoking speculation it is moving closer to potential atom bomb material. (Reuters)

Iran’s announcement that it plans to build its first nuclear-powered submarine is stoking speculation it is moving closer to potential atom bomb material. (Reuters)

Iran’s announcement that it plans to build its first nuclear-powered submarine is stoking speculation it could serve as a pretext for the Islamic state to produce highly enriched uranium and move closer to potential atom bomb material.

Western experts doubt that Iran — which is under a U.N. arms embargo — has the capability any time soon to make the kind of sophisticated underwater vessel that only the world’s most powerful states currently have.

But they say Iran could use the plan to justify more sensitive atomic activity, because nuclear submarines can be fuelled by uranium refined to a level that would also be suitable for the explosive core of a nuclear warhead.

“Such submarines often use HEU (highly enriched uranium),” former chief U.N. nuclear inspector Olli Heinonen said, adding Iran was unlikely to be able source the fuel abroad because of the international dispute over its nuclear program.

It could then “cite the lack of foreign fuel suppliers as further justification for continuing on its uranium enrichment path,” Heinonen, now at Harvard University’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, said.

Any move by Iran to enrich to a higher purity would alarm the United States and its allies, which suspect it is seeking to develop the capability to make nuclear bombs and want it to curb its nuclear program. Tehran denies any atomic arms ambitions.

It would also likely further complicate diplomatic efforts to resolve the decade-old row over Tehran’s nuclear program and may add to fears of a military confrontation.

Several rounds of talks between Iran and six world powers this year have so far failed to make significant progress, especially over their demand that the Islamic Republic scale back its controversial enrichment work.

“Iran is using this submarine announcement to create bargaining leverage,” Shashank Joshi, a senior fellow and Middle East specialist at the Royal United Services Institute, said.

“It can negotiate away these ‘plans’ for concessions, or use the plans as a useful pretext for its enrichment activity.”

Iranian deputy navy commander Abbas Zamini was last month quoted as saying that “preliminary steps in making an atomic submarine have started.”

He did not say how such a vessel would be fuelled, but experts said it may require high-grade uranium.

Iran now refines uranium to reach a 3.5 percent concentration of the fissile isotope U-235 — suitable for nuclear power plants — as well as 20 percent, which it says is for a medical research reactor in Tehran.

Nuclear weapons need a fissile purity of 90 percent, about the same level as is used to fuel U.S. nuclear submarines.

“This is a bald excuse to enrich uranium above 20 percent,” Mark Fitzpatrick, director of the International Institute for Strategic Studies think-tank in London, said.

A Western diplomat agreed that it could provide another possible justification for making highly enriched uranium, adding Iran could also use medical isotope production as an excuse.

“What it all means to me is that they could enrich above 20 percent, or even just say they intend to, and then point to some or all of these ‘justifications’,” the envoy said.

Iran says its nuclear program is for purely peaceful energy and medical purposes and that it is its right to process uranium for reactor fuel under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, a global pact to prevent the spread of atomic arms.

An Iranian lawmaker this week said parliament planned to ask the government to equip Iran’s naval and research fleet with “non-fossil” engines, Press TV state television reported in an apparent reference to nuclear fuel.

While nuclear submarines generally run on highly refined uranium, merchant vessels can also operate on low-enriched fuel, Mark Hibbs of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace said.

The six powers — the United States, France, Germany, Britain, China and Russia — want Iran to halt 20 percent enrichment. If Iran not only rejected this demand but also started enriching to even higher levels, it would risk dramatically raising the stakes in the dispute.

The United States and Israel have not ruled out military action to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, sparking fears of a possible escalation into a new Middle East war.

The submarine statement and this week’s missile tests by the Islamic Republic signaled Iranian defiance at a time when the West is stepping up the sanctions pressure on the major crude producer with a European Union oil embargo.

“I see this as an effort to demonstrate Iranian resolve at a time when sanctions are getting unprecedentedly tight,” Joshi, of the Royal United Services Institute, said.

It is difficult and very expensive to make atomic submarines. “There is no way that Iran could build a nuclear-powered submarine,” Fitzpatrick said.

Such submarines — which the United States, Russia, China, France and Britain have — can be at sea without refueling and stay under water for much longer periods than those using diesel, experts said.

Naval reactors deliver a lot of power from a small volume and therefore run on highly enriched uranium but the level varies from 20 percent or less to as much as 93 percent in the latest U.S. submarines, the World Nuclear Association, a London-based industry body, said on its website.

Iran’s announcement is another statement “that they are capable of producing the most-advanced and prestigious military technology and, as usual, there is little truth in what is being claimed,” military expert Pieter Wezeman, of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute think tank, said.

‘Hezbollah setting IDF up for another Goldstone’

July 5, 2012

‘Hezbollah setting IDF up for another Goldston… JPost – Defense.

07/05/2012 18:06
Senior IDF officer says destruction in Lebanon will be extensive due to Hezbollah establishing command posts and bases in villages; potential attack on Iran could spark conflict with Hezbollah.

Hezollah operatives film IDF movements Photo: IDF Spokesperson

The Goldstone report which criticized Israel’s operation against Hamas in the Gaza Strip in 2009, will pale in comparison to what will happen to Lebanon in a future war with Hezbollah, a senior IDF officer in the Northern Command said on Thursday.

“The destruction will be greater in Lebanon than in Israel and the amount of explosives which will fall there will be far more than what will fall here…We will need to be strong and aggressive,” the officer said.

Brig.-Gen. Herzi Halevy, commander of Division 91, clarified the remark and told reporters that the destruction will be extensive due to Hezbollah’s decision to establish its command posts and bases inside villages and towns throughout Lebanon.

Halevy, who commanded over the Paratroopers Brigade during Operation Cast Lead in 2009, said that Israel will take immediate action – from the air and on the ground – in a future war that will cause “extensive damage but not as a punishment but rather to hit the enemy where it is.”

“The damage will be far greater [in Lebanon] than the Second Lebanon War,” Halevy said.

“The past six years have been the quietest along the border in more than 40 years,” Halevy said in a briefing marking six years since the Second Lebanon War. “But we understand that there is more than one catalyst that can potentially break the quiet.”

Halevy said that a potential attack against Iran’s nuclear facilities – no matter by who – or the ongoing uprising in Syria could spark a potential conflict between Israel and Hezbollah.

The IDF has spent the past year upgrading its defenses along the border. A few weeks ago, it complicated the construction of a concrete wall between the Israeli border town of Metula and the Lebanese town of Kfar Kila. The IDF decided to build a wall along that section of the border to minimize friction between the sides.

Since the war, in addition to Hezbollah’s extensive rearmament and procurement of tens of thousands of rockets and missiles, the IDF has detected a concerted effort by the guerrilla group to gather intelligence on Israeli military positions along the border.

The IDF released photos on Thursday showing Hezbollah operatives with surveillance gear along the border filming IDF movements and deployments.

In a film recently captured by the IDF, two cars are shown arriving near the border. Men wearing hoodies are seen exiting the cars and surveying the border. One of them is holding papers. IDF assessments are that that the group was possibly planning an attack against Israel along the border.

“They brings operatives from northern Lebanon to teach them about the South and the terrain where they will be expected to operate in a future war,” another officer in the Northern Command said.

Moscow may hand Iran S-300, breach arms embargo if Assad ousted

July 5, 2012

Moscow may hand Iran S-300, breach arms embargo if Assad ousted.

DEBKAfile Special Report July 5, 2012, 1:21 PM (GMT+02:00)

 

The Russian S-300 aid defense system

Moscow has removed the gloves in its defense of Syrian ruler Bashar Assad.  Wednesday, July 4, senior official Ruslan Pukhov warned: “If the Syrian regime is changed by force or if Russia doesn’t like the outcome, it most likely will respond by selling S-300s to Iran.”
Pukhov, who sits on the Russian Defense Ministry’s advisory board and heads a defense affairs think tank in Moscow, added: “The fall of the Syrian government would significantly increase the chances of a strike on Iran. Resuming S-300 shipments to Iran may be a very timely decision.”
Moscow has since 2010 withheld the S-300 air defense system from Iran at the request of the US and Israel.  The Pukhov statement indicated that, just as that was the correct decision for the time, the strategic situation in the Middle East with regard to Syria and Iran has since changed, and so providing Iran with these weapons would be the timely decision now.
Kremlin strategic thinking on the region shifted radically in August 2011.
On August 8, two weeks before NATO and Arab forces drove the Libyan rebel invasion of Tripoli to oust Muammar Qaddafi, Russia’s ambassador to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, warned in an interview to the Russian Izvestia, “NATO is planning a military campaign against Syria to help overthrow the regime of President Bashar Assad with a long-reaching goal of preparing a beachhead for an attack on Iran.”
To this day, Moscow is certain that the same Western-Arab coalition will sooner or later intervene militarily in Syria and then move against Iran.
Sources in Washington and Jerusalem found evidence of that suspicion in comments made by Russian President Vladimir Putin during his visit to Israel on June 25. He is reported to have scattered vague threats indicating that Syrian President Bashar Assad’s overthrow would be treated by Moscow as violating Security Council resolutions and elicit Russia’s exit from the international arms embargo on the Syrian regime.  Putin was not specific.
Russian S-300 missiles batteries would make the targeting of Iranian nuclear sites by US and Israeli warplanes difficult because that weapon is reputed to have a near-zero miss ratio for intercepting ballistic and cruise missiles – even when they come in at very low altitudes.

In late 2009, Moscow began sending Iran some of the technical accessories for the S-300 batteries while withholding the actual missiles and their control and radar systems, debkafile‘s military and intelligence sources report.  During 2010 and the first half of 2011, Iranian teams were trained in their use at bases in Russia. Moscow continually assured Tehran that with patience, US-Israeli pressure would abate and the missiles could be released.

In any case, Israeli air crews are at bases in Greece training in counter-measures since developed to outwit the S-300, debkafile’s military sources disclose.
Tehran has tried to manufacture homemade equivalents to the S-300 on its own – drawing on the knowhow of Iranian military personnel trained in their use in Russia to form designer and construction teams working from blueprints provided during their training.
China, which has received these systems from Russia and is replicating them, was quietly approached by Iran for assistance. Beijing is reported to have handed over some of the technical materials but not the key blueprints for enabling their manufacture.
That is why Iranian generals often report progress in producing an air defense system similar to the Russian model and declare it will be operational by mid-2013, but have never displayed a homemade prototype.

The centrifuges continue to spin

July 5, 2012

Israel Hayom | The centrifuges continue to spin.

As part of its “Great Prophet 7” exercise on Tuesday Iran launched dozens of surface-to-surface missiles with ranges of up to 1,300 kilometers (807 miles) in efforts to prove just how far its weapons can go and that it possesses response capabilities. Iran is trying to prove its might not only with conventional missiles but with its potential nuclear capability as well. The objective of the missiles Iran showcased — for the benefit of the West and Israel in particular — is to bring Tehran to its goal of long-range nuclear capability.

On Sunday, a European embargo on Iranian oil exports went into effect. Tehran is trying to put on a “business-as-usual” façade, but the fact is that despite its denials, it has decreased its oil production, which constitutes a blow to the economy. Iran’s oil minister Rostam Ghasemi claims that Iran has found alternative buyers for its oil, but, following in Europe’s footsteps, India, South Korea and Japan have decided to trim their Iranian oil imports by 20 percent. Western diplomats have reported in recent months that the Iranian economy was ailing, and that it would only get worse from here.

But the ailing economy does not influence the centrifuges in Natanz and Fordo. The nuclear facilities do not stop, even during nuclear talks with the West. These talks have so far done nothing more than add stamps to participants’ passports: Geneva, Vienna, Istanbul, Baghdad and Moscow have been the destinations over the last three years. Plenty of trips and meetings, but “no results” as was reported in the French weekly L’Express.

“[Russian President] Vladimir Putin has no interest in resolving the Iranian issue,” one French diplomat involved in the talks was quoted as saying. Perhaps that is why after the latest round of talks between Iran and Western powers in Moscow, the world decided to stop lying to us about the talks’ potential. “The talks have been productive” we were told after Istanbul (in March) and Baghdad (in May), but after Moscow they were finally called a “failure.”

David Ignatius, a senior columnist for The Washington Post, believes that the technical nuclear talks held in Istanbul on Wednesday will fall apart. The gap between the two sides is too wide to be bridged. Iran has no intention of giving up uranium enrichment, or relocating its already enriched uranium to another country or decommissioning the nuclear facility in Fordo — the West’s main demands.

This week, Iranian parliament members urged their government to take a stronger stance against the West, to punish the U.S. and its allies and to withdraw from the nuclear proliferation treaty, thus severing its cooperation with the IAEA. All of which, according to Ignatius, could expedite a possible U.S. military response.

On Tuesday it was reported that U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf were reinforced.The increased U.S. presence was one of the reason for Iran’s missile show. What Iran didn’t put on display, and no less dangerous, are the centrifuges that continue to spin. Because while we’ve been busy with our own internal affairs, this is what has been going on in Iran.