WarSclerotic

IsraCast: Israel’s Final Countdown on Iran?.

Iranian President Ahmadinejad

 Is Israel’s final countdown for an air strike on Iran’s nuclear weapons sites already underway?

Ephraim Halevi, a former Mossad director has set the alarm bells ringing by telling the New York Times that if he were an Iranian he ‘would be very fearful of the next twelve weeks’. However IsraCast Analyst David Essing noted that Gen.(res.) Amos Yadlin, the former commanding officer of IDF Intelligence, has now said that although Israel’s ‘checklist’ for such an attack is just about complete, he believes that 2013 should be the year of decision.

Yadlin’s checklist for attacking Iran…

Amos Yadlin

Gen.(res.) Amos Yadlin knows a thing or two about attacking hostile nuclear targets; he was one of the pilots who bombed Saddam Hussein’s nuclear reactor in 1981 and he also served as the IDF’s commanding officer when Israel purportedly took out Bashar Assad’s secret reactor in 2007. Interviewed on Channel 1 TV, Yadlin said: ‘ You don’t need to be a former Mossad chief, like Halevi, to realize the Israeli leadership’s checklist for attacking Iran is just about complete. ‘All the necessary conditions were now checked with an affirmative V’.

This is the check list:

1. Failure of nuclear negotiations with Iran

2. Failure of sanctions to halt Iran’s nuclear weapons project

3. Failure of clandestine operations to bring Iran’s nuclear program to a halt

4. Failure of internal dissent to topple the regime

This being the current situation, Yadlin explained that Israel’s political leadership (Netanyahu and Barak) would be tending to the only remaining option – a military strike. In this vein, he noted that Barak had warned some four months ago that ‘Iran was approaching a zone of immunity’ in which Israel’s limited military capabilities could not eliminate the nuclear menace. Yadlin referred to the cascades of additionial centrifuges at the new Fordo facility near Qom that are spinning out more enriched uranium, the central component in the nuclear weapons program. So Israel’s political echelon was now debating the two very problematic decisions – ‘either bomb Iran or acquiesce in an Iran A-bomb’.

Iran feeling the heat…

The Iranian Missile Range

Yadlin then presented his personal position, what he called a ‘third way’. He contended that Iran was indeed feeling the heat despite its bluster. The good news was that since the EU embargo on Iranian oil went into effect on July 1, Iran has been losing $140 million dollars daily. In a year this would skyrocket to 10% of Iran’s annual GNP. In fact, Gen. Mohammed Ali Jafari, the commander of the elite Revolutionary Guards, has warned that Iran is entering ‘a sensitive and fateful period’. He referred to the ‘soft war’ being waged against Iran that includes economic sanctions, computer viruses, and espionage. Oddly enough, the high level commander made no mention of a military strike by Israel. The fact is the Iranians scoff at the notion that Israel would dare to attack Iran against the express will of the U.S., nor do they believe that President Obama will risk an American attack, if at all, before the U.S. presidential election in November.

One way or the other!…

But on this score, Halevi known for his understatement, has warned the Iranians ‘they have got their math wrong’ if they think more nuclear talks would dissuade Israel. On this score, Prime Minister Netanyahu has drawn his line in the sand by declaring that so far Iran has not backed down ‘one iota’. And secondly, when it comes to the reports that current security leaders, including Chief of Staff Benny Gantz and Mossad director Tamir Pardo, oppose a solo Israeli strike, the PM declared: ‘I will decide and I haven’t decided yet’. In any case, Netanyahu would need government approval to launch an attack. Yadlin noted that in the eight member security there were two former IDF chiefs-of- staff, Ehud Barak and Moshe Yaalon well versed in military matters. Yadlin believed that speculation about the security echelon differeing with the political leadership was ‘exaggerated’. The decision on an attack involved many military and political aspects – ‘not only if, how and when to attack but also what happens the day after’. Gen. Benny Gantz had also served as an IDF attache in Washington and was well aware of the potential backlash from the Obama administration. Therefore it was essential that a serious in-depth dialogue was being conducted behind closed doors before any proposal be brought to the full cabinet. (Another consideration would be to prevent security leaks -DE). Gantz had not made any public statement on the question and when the time came he could be expected to present his professional position to the cabinet before it voted on whether to launch a military operation against Iran.

What does it boil down to? If Ephraim Halevi gave the impression that Israeli fighter-bombers may soon be on the tarmack revving their engines to take off for Iran, it’s possible. In a subsequent interview with Channel 22 TV, Halevi said he did not think that Israel would attack Iran without the green light from the U.S. Go figure. For their part, the Iranians have been revving up their centrifuges with one official commentator even warning that Iran may enrich its uranium to fifty or sixty percent, a hair’s breadth from 90 percent weapons grade. Iran stands defiant in the face of the ‘soft war’. The visits by high level U.S. officials to Israel such as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta as well as additional military aid and fresh financial sanctions on foreign banks obviously make an impact on Jerusalem. Amos Yadlin thinks there are solid reasons for giving the U.S. more time and that 2013 should be the year of decision. In his view, a nu clear armed Iran is also an intolerable threat to America’s national security and no U.S. president, be it Obama or Mitt Romney, will allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. But if this is true, it could mean that Israel, by waiting too long, could forfeit its capability of self- defense and become entirely dependent on a U.S. defense umbrella, something Hillary Clinton has proposed for the Gulf states.

Official: Hezbollah attack more dangerous than Iran missiles – Israel News, Ynetnews.

In wake of ongoing debate over possible Israeli attack on Iran, security assessments indicate that biggest threat to Israel is not Islamic Republic’s missiles but rather Hezbollah’s ability to fire rockets at Israel

Attila Somflavi

The continuous debate over a possible attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities has sparked further discussion about the major security threats Israel currently faces.

While senior security establishment officials vehemently warn against the ramifications of a military strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, security and government assessments indicate that the biggest threat to Israel is a deadly response from Iran’s ally Hezbollah, whose leader Hassan Nasrallah has previously warned that its missiles and rockets could strike anywhere inside the Jewish state.

A government source said that “Hezbollah is the long arm of Iran,” adding that “this terrorist organization will undoubtedly barrage Israel with thousands of missiles. It won’t begin with Kiryat Shmona and end in Haifa, but will reach further into Israel. Hezbollah could cover Israel with rockets.”

According to additional assessments, Hezbollah has acquired medium-long range Scud missiles. However, IDF sources have asserted that it holds a significant list of targets which will enable the Israeli Air Force to hit long-range missile launch pads.

“In the event of a Hezbollah attack, there is no doubt that one of the first missions will be to destroy Hezbollah’s long-range missile launch pads, just as we did during the Second Lebanon War,” said an official source.

Iran has 300-400 Shahab missiles

When asked why Israel has yet to launch a preemptive strike on the targets, the source said that “a preemptive attack means instigating war. We can’t constantly be in a state of endless fighting.”

Security establishment officials estimate that Iran has between 300 and 400 Shahab-3 ground missiles that it can fire at Israel. However, if the Islamic Republic does decide to fire missiles at Israel, it would most likely not use its entire missile arsenal.

In recent years, Israel has accelerated the development of the Arrow missile defense system, designed to thwart long-range missiles in a US-backed “race” against Iran, Syriaand other regional enemies, a senior Israeli defense official said on Sunday.

“The accuracy and the reach will be greater,” the official said of Arrow, which has been operational since 2000 and is designed to blow up incoming missiles at altitudes high enough for non-conventional warheads to disintegrate safely.

In parallel with Arrow II, Israel is developing Arrow III, which is due to be operational in 2014 or 2015. Unlike previous generations of the interceptor, Arrow III will engage incoming missiles in space, using detachable warheads that, turning into “kamikaze” satellites, will seek out and slam into the target.

“The recent developments indicate that Israel has the means to handle a missile attack from Iran or from the Gaza Strip. The major problem Israel currently faces is the significant missile arsenal the Hezbollah holds and its ability to fire rockets at Israel for a long period of time,” said the official source.

Defense Ministry experts have estimated that in a war with Iran and Hezbollah, some 300 Israeli civilians will die. The forecasts are based on the number of missiles and rockets the enemy has, data accumulated in the wake of previous wars, and preparedness in the Israeli home front.

Israel’s EMP Attack Can Send Iran Back to the Stone Age – Op-Eds – Israel National News.

As Iran miscalculates Israeli resolve, it is clear that the diplomatic dance of deceit and empty bluster for years is over. The die is cast and Israel has crossed the Rubicon, since a significant spectacle of events is set to begin to work against Iran come October.

While the onus is on Iran to abide by its international obligations, the wild card is in Israel’s hand – with Electrnonic Magnetic Pulse (EMP) inscribed on it. Since diplomacy and sanctions were an abject failure, war has become inevitable and preparations for preventing Iran’s rapid nuclear progress have, thus far, accelerated.

Despite Israel’s highly advanced technology and strategic military advantage, Israel’s fear of an Iranian existential threat is understandable. In any case, Israel has done it the past with flawless precision when it destroyed Iraq’s Osiraq reactor in 1981 and a Syrian reactor being built by North Koreans in 2007. Both surprise attacks were immensely successful and kept Israel’s enemies scratching their heads in disbelief, stunning the world.

Iran has reached the ‘zone of immunity.’

There are five solid reasons that Iran has now entered what Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak termed as the “zone of immunity”:

First, Iran plans to ratchet up enrichment up to 60 per cent uranium which is now on the way to an 80-90 percent weapons grade.

Second, Iran has accelerated its forced projection and tested ballistic missiles delivery system in an EMP mode with North Korean assistance.

Thirdl, Iran’s stockpile of low grade enriched uranium can be converted to five nuclear weapons if refined further, according to the Institute for Science and International Security.

Fourth, satellite imagery shows mega-fortification of underground nuclear facilities impervious to U.S. super bunker buster bombs.

Finally, Iran has started the process of loading 163 fuel rods into the core of Bushehr nuclear power plant reactor.

In light of the latest developments, there is no question that Iran is now a de facto nuclear state – a “casus belli” for Israeli military action. Although the military option is unattractive and untenable, failure to act would be much worse if Iran got the atomic bomb.

A large majority of Israelis and Americans believes that Israel would be better off if the U.S. would lead the attack on Iran.

For the most part, Israel’s dilemma is focused singly on the use of electromagnetic pulse (EMP) without informing the U.S. Regardless of the consequences, the U.S. would have no choice but to support Israel. The stakes are simply too high to ignore this time. However, trust deficit and loss of U.S. credibility compels Israel not to depend on others to protect the Jewish people.

The reality on the ground is revealing: Iran needs only one or two nuclear bombs to start a thermonuclear war against Israel and the United States, to hasten what these religious nuts believe is the coming of the Islamic messiah.

Evidentially, a nuclear-capable Iran can unleash a single atomic bomb on Israel with simultaneous asymmetric proxy attacks in the U.S. and other western targets. But thanks to heaven – and Israel – the Islamic republic is not there yet.

In addition, intelligence sources have now indicated Iran is within two years of bringing the Islamic revolution to the U.S. in the form of an EMP attack.

So  the game-changer would be a significant EMP event that would take Iranians back to the Stone Age.

What would an EMP attack look like?

If Israel chooses one of its Jericho III missiles to detonate a single EMP warhead at high altitude over north central Iran, there will be with no blast or radiation effects on the ground.

Coupled with cyber-attacks, Iranians would not know it happened except for a massive shutdown of the electric power grid, oil refineries and a transportation gridlock. Food supply would be exhausted and communication would be largely impossible, leading to economic collapse. Similarly, the uranium enrichment centrifuges in Fordo, Natanz and widely scattered elsewhere, would freeze for decades.

Iran’s response to an EMP attack would be futile and uncannily tragic. Before the elite Qods force could mine the Strait of Hormuz and wreak havoc to Arab Gulf states oil refineries, the Fifth Fleet and U.S. military installations, Iran’s administrative-industrial-military complex infrastructures would have been laid to waste without the ruling clerical regime knowing about it

In this scenario, a rain of missiles from Lebanon’s Hizbullah, Hamas in Gaza would have to be endured by Israel. Frankly, one thing is certain- Israel won’t nuke Iran unless it unleashes chemical, biological or nuclear weapons to Israel’s enemies.

Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman has stressed that Israel would consider the transfer of Syrian chemical weapons to Hizbullah a “casus belli” and act “without hesitation or restraint.”

On a constructive note, Iranian Green opposition forces would have an opportunity to take to the darkened streets of Tehran and rid themselves of the fanatical regime.

Hence, if Iran doesn’t blink, Israel certainly will attack in the fall with no ifs and or buts.

Furthermore, the mathematical probability of Iran winning the war is naught, since as Israel knows best, when it comes to Israel’s security, there can be no substitute for victory.

Speculation aside, war becomes inevitable for reasons beyond logic and difficult to explain – and the consequences are actually unpredictable and messy. Typically, in these most challenging and uncertain times, it is very difficult indeed. This is yet another reason why Israel’s risks and dilemmas, difficult as they are, will never be brought to a peaceful conclusion.

As former Mossad chief and national security adviser Ephraim Halevy, quoted by the New York Times, said, if he were Iranian he “would be very fearful of the next 12 weeks”.

Sources:
http://www.empactamerica.org/index.php
http://youtu.be/PPzIWsdnj0w

The Call — Hey, Israel Might Actually Strike Iran! :: Gatestone Institute.

With this week’s episode of The Call, we welcome our fifth and last regular participant, Amos Harel, the distinguished military reporter and defense analyst for the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz. Amos led off our discussion by summarizing some of his recent reporting about a possible Israeli military strike on Iran.

The panelists concluded that the combination of increasingly aggressive and uniform rhetoric issuing from Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak combined with the public alarms being sounded by high-ranking members of the Israeli security establishment indicate that something has changed quite recently in Israel’s evaluation of the plausibility and potential benefits and drawbacks of a strike. Among the possible reasons for this change cited by the panelists are:

1. The American Presidential campaign, which some of the panelists and some Israelis see as offering an ideal moment to pressure Obama without fear of retaliation.

2. The degrading of Syrian military capabilities and the increasingly embattled position of Hezbollah in Lebanon.

3. An important — but as yet unnamed — shift in the Israeli attack plan that has altered the calculus of the country’s leaders.

The five regular participants on The Call are:

Pepe Escobar — author of the “Roving Eye” feature for the Asia Times.

David Goldman — aka “Spengler” of the Asia Times.

Amos Harel — Military correspondent and defense analyst for Ha’aretz.

David Samuels – Contributing Editor of Harper’s Magazine

Rotem Sella — foreign affairs editor of Ma’ariv

“THE CALL”

Amos Harel: Even by the Israeli media’s standards, the recent coverage of the possible attack on Iran probably sets some kind of record. Since Thursday we’ve heard one ex-chief of Mossad and two ex-chiefs of the Military Intelligence warning that an Israeli strike might occur in the next 12 weeks – and coming out publicly against it.

How much of this represents actual knowledge of Netanyahu’s not-so-secret intentions and how much is sophisticated psychological warfare against the Iranians? (Or maybe the Americans?). I’ve met with two of the three recently, and talked to them by phone yesterday. I assume they’re not part of any intentional spin. They are genuinely worried about the possibility of a decision being made soon – and the outcome of such a strike. Barak is a more difficult case to decipher.

This guy does not say what he means and I doubt if he ever means what he says — a real case of a riddle wrapped in an enigma. I think his (and Netanyahu’s) main concern at the moment is maintaining a credible military threat. As long as Israel seems serious about this, the international community will have a hard time avoiding the growing pressure on Iran.

But will Netanyahu risk an Israeli strike before the presidential elections? I think David Samuels [http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3243/netanyahu-plays-the-romney-card] did a good job of describing the Israeli visit on Romney’s assault-the-world tour last week. But I suspect David is also slightly underestimating the importance of the Panetta visit. Netanyahu and Barak will have to work against two major factors: the Obama Administration’s objection – and the doubts raised by both current chiefs of the IDF and Mossad who apparently fear a direct conflict with the Americans. Benny Gantz is crucial here. It will be extremely complicated to persuade the ministers to vote for a strike, when the IDF’s chief of staff tells them he thinks this is not the right time.

Caveat Emptor: One far-fetched scenario that should nevertheless be considered. Is it possible that Obama actually decided, for his reasons, that an Israeli strike is inevitable at this time and is only
concerned of surprising the Iranians and avoiding accusations of being an accomplice to Israel’s plans?

David Goldman: Welcome, all. I think the floor goes to David S. to respond to Amos.

David Samuels: What we can all see right now is that Netanyahu and Barak have ratcheted up the rhetoric over the past few months and have stopped their prior bad cop-good cop routine at least in public. Also, this shift in rhetoric has been greeted with alarm by members of the Israeli security establishment who are not known for crying wolf. So the possibilities that occur to me are:

1. The Israelis are precisely taking advantage of the American election year to exert maximum pressure to create the appearance of a credible threat.

2. Something has changed in Israeli strategic thinking.

3. This is all part of a clever plan to create distance between Israel and America for a strike that Obama has already ok-ed.

Amos Harel: I think both 1 and 2 are correct. There is a change in favor of a strike. It still doesn’t mean they’ll actually go for it. I’d put #3 as a 10% chance, max. One more advantage for Bibi: nobody speaks about the Palestinians (what Palestinians?) any more.

Rotem Sella: I agree with Amos on number 3. I would suspect the Israel and the United States aren’t coordinated, and that we aren’t ok-ed. Also back to what Amos wrote in the opening remarks – The voices we are hearing against the strike are NOT part of a psychological warfare. They create a lot of pressure on Netanyahu and try to tilt the public opinion against a strike.

David Samuels: The technical shift has to be something about the way an attack is configured since the targeting stuff was settled a while ago. I think Netanyahu and Barak are former commandos and there is a new plan that captured both their imaginations — which has to be something that uses technology in an unexpected way to produce less risk, a higher chance of success and some element of surprise.

David Goldman: There is the issue of the degree of success of the attack and the issue of retaliation.

The success part can be measured in time. How many months or years can the Israelis hold off an Iranian program, given that a large number of centrifuges are in “isolation” (this assumes that no-one has found a way to toss dirty bomb down a tunnel).

The retaliation part depends on Iran itself, Syria and Hezbollah. How does the present situation in Syria affect Iran’s capacity to respond via proxies? Hezbollah has a lot of missiles but can they be resupplied? With the Syrian army busy elsewhere do the Israelis have a free hand to mop up in a way that was not true in 2006?

Technical issues might include 1) non-aerial attacks by commando teams on the ground, 2) additional capacity to interdict missiles from Iran and Lebanon, 3) others?

Pepe: My question to Amos: So we have Benny Gantz, Ya’akov Ayash. Tamir Pardo, Aviv Kochavi, Mossad department heads, the head of the Israeli Air Force Amir Eshel and at least four of Bibi’s 8-man “kitchen cabinet” currently against an attack. How could Bibi possibly order an attack when the best informed minds in Israel know that would inflict a 6-month delay max on Iran’s nuclear program (the Americans have already calculated it); and that a strike would definitely lead Tehran to abandon its current “latency period” and go for weaponization in no time?

Moreover, only Alice in Wonderland characters believe Israel would attack without a full Obama administration OK.

David Goldman: Pepe, Israel never got a full administration OK for any major attack. That goes for 1956, 1967, Osirak, and so on.

Amos Harel: According to Barak, an attack will achieve a one to two year delay. Hezbollah would join Iran. That’s what they’re paid for. Assad would be otherwise occupied, if he’s still there.

Pepe, remember Diskin blaming the duo (Bibi-Barak) for being “messianic”? Here is your answer.

David Samuels: So Amos, you think the technical shift is the disintegration of Assad’s army?

David Goldman: How degraded are Syria’s capacities now? In general, what would IDF operations in southern Lebanon look like today vs. 2006, in a scenario where Israel attacks Iran and Hezbollah retaliates with missiles?

David Samuels: Hezbollah has lost a lot of public support in Lebanon, and Suleiman, the Lebanese President, is now making noises about staying out of war and sectarian militias not being acceptable. The Syrian Army appears to be otherwise occupied these days.

Amos Harel: Assad’s problems might benefit Israel regarding Iran. But at least Farkash is worried that Assad might be tempted to join the Iranians, seeing this by mistake as a possible way out. Syria’s capacities are terrible, conventionally speaking, but their missile and chemical capabilities are troubling. Lebanon next time: we won’t hesitate for 30 days about sending in the ground forces and the air force would be much more aggressive.

Rotem Sella: What I’m hearing is that, with Syria in its present state, Hezbollah and Hamas are not the big-questions. The big question is can we lunch a successful operation in Iran and are the media and the veterans over-stating the danger to the home front.

The question considering the strike is also what will be seen by the Israeli public as a success – it’s very political. Israeli Mk’s and ministers from the right sees a strike before the US elections as something that can help Obama win the elections by making him a War President.

David Samuels: Assuming Lebanon and Syria unleash missiles immediately, where do Israeli planes land after an attack? You don’t have to hit planes with missiles. You only have to hit their landing strips.

David Goldman: It would frighten and surprise me if Lebanon and Syria together had enough missiles to knock out every F-15 capable landing strip in Israel.

Amos Harel: David, the air force maintains that they would still be able to land and then fly more sorties. I think that some of our capabilities would be damaged.

David Samuels: What base is physically out of range of the missiles or protected?

Amos Harel: None are absolutely out of range. Those in the south are better protected

David Samuels: There is a trade-off then in protecting the bases and protecting the cities that becomes political, yes?

Amos Harel: Sure. There’s an ongoing debate about where to place Iron Dome batteries during a war. The generals will probably win this. The air bases will be better defended.

David Samuels: I was also interested in what Rotem Sella said earlier about right-wing MKs in Israel believing that a pre-election strike will re-elect Obama.

Rotem Sella: They think that Obama will have to support a strike that is very popular in the US. And will become by default a war president. So if the strike is successful he wins – and if it fails he also wins.

David Samuels: Except when shopping centers start blowing up in America. And the price of gas doubles.

David Goldman: Precisely. The administration is more worried about the economy than anything else, and the economy is probably 10 times as important as foreign policy right now. The only constituencies who care about foreign policy are Jews and evangelical Christians, and if this happens, the Jews will have given their money to Romney, and the evangelicals won’t vote for Obama anyway.

Romney would support a strike because he is ideologically and religiously joined at the hip to Israel. Mormons are the ultimate Judeophiles, Christian Zionists and American exceptionalists — they make the evangelicals look like pansies.

Amos Harel: Too much of a gamble from his point of view. My guess: he will remain against it. And this is probably why Romney would support an Israeli strike now, won’t he?

Rotem Sella: Obama for another four years in the White House also might be considered by Bibi as a threat to Israel.

David Samuels: Obama makes a big point of announcing that he isn’t a member of the Likud party in his speeches and conversations with American Jews. So maybe Netanyahu will repay the favor by announcing that he isn’t a member of the Democratic Party in America – an announcement accompanied by a big boom in Iran.

David Goldman: There is an issue of timing. We are talking about an Iranian bomb a year from now, not three months from now. If Netanyahu attacks Iran before the election, Obama can’t punish Israel too badly (although he would wait until after the elections and then really screw Israel). Netanyahu doesn’t gain a lot in terms of the US relationship by hitting before November. But if Romney is elected, the US will be in full support of Israeli action starting in late January. That makes a good case for waiting.

Read Marty Peretz’ interview in the WSJ on Saturday — Peretz was the Zionist who gave Obama the hechsher in 2008, and now he hates Obama with a passion. That’s true of a lot of big Democratic Jewish donors.

Amos Harel: Guys. I’ll have to sign off now. I can hear the planes overhead here… Just kidding. Previous obligations. Regarding president Romney: Barak assumes he won’t be able to discuss anything before next May.

Rotem Sella: David, If Israel strikes Iran before the elections can Obama take the credit for a successful operation, and claim in the case of blow-up’s in the US/surging oil price, “I’m not a Likudnik.”

David Samuels: No, he can’t. The very fact that Israel mounted a successful operation will make him look weak. No one thinks he is a secret supporter of Bibi Netanyahu or of Israeli military action against Iran, even if logic dictates that he could be, or even should be. And if Israel flops then he looks weak and not in control and the global economy probably goes haywire right before the election – none of which seems like a big plus for him.

David Goldman: Any last thoughts?

David Samuels: Pepe, I would love to read one of your far-out imaginings of Mitt and Bibi going out for drinks together one night in Boston in the 1970s, back when they were both young bankers at the Boston Consulting Group.

Pepe: I WILL think about a screenplay soon!

Was Iran behind coordinated Islamist attacks on Egypt and Israel from Sinai?.

DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis August 6, 2012, 9:22 AM (GMT+02:00)

Egyptian soldier opposite IDF Sinai border position

The initial Egyptian and Israeli accounts of the attacks in which 16 Egyptian soldiers were killed and the Israeli border crashed Sunday night, Aug. 5, don’t match up:  Egypt points the finger at the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip; Israel at Sinai Salafits. 

debkafile postulates a third option:  Tehran put Gaza Strip Islamists and/or Palestinian proxies together with a Sinai al Qaeda cell for a coordinated attack on Egyptian and Israeli military targets to avenge the presence of al Qaeda in the anti-Assad revolt in Syria under the Western-Arab aegis. That would signal the spillover of the Syrian crisis into two more Middle East countries.

The gunmen first stormed an Egyptian commando post in Sinai with bombs, grenades and sidearms, killing at least 16 Egyptian soldiers, wounding many more and taking several hostages. A quantity of weapons and two armored vehicles were seized.
According to Egyptian sources, all ten gunmen infiltrated Sinai from the Gaza Strip through the smuggling tunnels. They were disguised as Sinai Bedouin.
In contrast, the Israeli military spokesman tagged the gunmen as Sinai Salafist Bedouin tied to al Qaeda. He denied there was any connection with the IDF’s targeting of two Popular Resistance Committees earlier Sunday after they were identified as the perpetrators of the June 18 shooting of an Israeli border fence workman.
The IDF also claimed it had been forewarned of the plot to attack the Kerem Shalom terminal opposite the Egyptian post and were therefore prepared for the gunmen’s incursion aboard two captured Egyptian vehicles for the purpose of snatching Israeli soldiers. Israel bombed the vehicle that got through from the air and by artillery. Seven terrorists were gunned down as they fled. There were no Israeli casualties.
The army spokesman did not indicate whether the Egyptians had also been forewarned.
The IDF version, if it is correct, exposes the most ambitious operation al Qaeda has ever mounted from Sinai. The jihadists, even in their biggest outrages in Iraq and Afghanistan – or Syria today – rarely carried through an operation this complex against one military base after another in two different countries.
Its features do, however, recall Palestinian terrorist strikes on Israeli military positions in the Gaza Strip at the height of their 2000-2003 war on Israel.  In that sense, the Egyptian version pointing to Gaza as the source rings true. And indeed, the enclave’s Hamas rulers hastened to condemn the attack and block the Gaza-Sinai smuggling tunnels first thing Monday, Aug. 6, and a Hamas leader, Mahmoud A-Zahar, admitted Palestinians may have been complicit.
Neither Israel nor Egypt has mentioned  a third option, which in the view of debkafile’s counter-terror analysts is the most sinister of them all, namely that Iran’s proxy in the enclave, the Palestinian Jihad Islami, which operates under the command of the Al Qods Brigades operations center in Beirut, was told to muster al Qaeda jihadists in Sinai for the coordinated attacks. Iranian officers posted in Beirut would then have orchestrated the combined operation, bringing to bear their long experience of setting up terrorist campaigns against Western and Arab targets – Saudi Arabia in 2003 and 2004; Iraq up to the present day and Afghanistan, against US and NATO forces.
If that is what happened, it would be the first time Tehran has harnessed al Qaeda to lash out out against Egyptian and Israeli military targets as a riposte for the presence of al Qaeda fighters in the revolt against Bashar Assad.
Just a few hours earlier, Iran’s Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani declared: “The fire that has been ignited in Syria will take the fearful (Israelis) with it.”

That was also the first time Tehran had explicitly threatened that the Syrian conflict would spill over into Israel.

Iranian state goes offline to dodge cyber-attacks – Telegraph.

Iran is to move key ministries and state bodies off the worldwide internet next month in an effort to shield them behind a secure computer wall from disruptive cyber attacks like the Stuxnet and Flame viruses.

A student surfing the internet in Tehran Photo: GETTY

The debate on Iran – JPost – Opinion – Editorials.

Photo: REUTERS

IAF thwarts terror attack at Egypt border – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Arab media outlets say armed gunmen from global jihadist movement kill 15 Egyptian soldiers in north Sinai; hijack armored vehicle and infiltrate into Israel. IAF kills terrorists; no Israeli casualties reported

Yoav Zitun

Arab news outlets reported Sunday that 15 Egyptian policemen were killed in an armed attack on a police station in north Sinai Peninsula at a security checkpoint in Rafah.

The gunmen reportedly took control of two Egyptian armored vehicles using RPG missiles and explosives. One of the vehicles blew up near the Kerem Shalom border crossing, while the other one managed to infiltrate into Israel. The gunmen fired tank shells toward Israeli forces stationed at the border, but IAF aircraft managed to hit the armored vehicle.The IDF Spokesperson’s Unit stated that there were no casualties among IDF forces or Israeli civilians.

The IDF reported that around 8pm, the terrorist cell managed to take over an Egyptian base in north Sinai and killed at least 10 Egyptian soldiers. At 8:15pm, one of the armored vehicles hijacked by gunmen blew up at Kerem Shalom border crossing and the second one managed to cross into Israel, but was bombarded by the IAF shortly afterwards.

Several of the terrorists tried to escape from armored vehicle, but were hit by IAF fire. The bodies of four terrorists were found on the Israeli side and three others were found on the Egyptian side.

Security forces at Kerem Shalom crossing (Photo: Roi Idan)

Heavy IDF forces were called up to the sector and started scouring the area. “We are maintaing contact with the Egyptians and continuing to cooperate with them,” said IDF Spokesperson Brig. Gen. Yoav Mordechai.

Mordechai noted that the attack was unrelated to the IAF strike in Gaza earlier on Sunday, which killed a global jihadist movement terrorist who was planning attacks against Israel.

Reacting to the incident, senior security officials said that the terrorists who tried to infiltrate Israel were planning a major terror attack. “Should they have succeeded, it could have been a very serious terror attack. A major disaster has been prevented.”

Hijacked armored vehicle on fire (Photo: IDF Spokesperson’s Unit)

Defense Minister Ehud Barak said the attack shows the need for “determined Egyptian action” to impose security and “prevent terror in Sinai. Barak congratulated the security forces for thwarting a terror attack at the Kerem Shalom border crossing.

Barak said “The IDF forces under Brigadier General Tal Russo and the direction of the Chief of Staff Lieutenant General Benny Gantz showed alertness, vigilance and decisiveness and thwarted an attack that could have led to a mass casualty event.”

Following the incident, Gantz held a situation assessment with senior IDF officers.

Morsi calls meeting

Meanwhile, Egyptian media outlets reported that security forces raised the alert level at the border and issued a curfew in the northern Sinai district. Egyptian state TV reported that Egyptian security sources announced the Rafah border crossing with Gaza would be closed “indefinitely” after the Sinai attack.

Also, Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi called for an urgent meeting with the military council, an official from Morsi’s party said on Facebook.

Egypt’s new Tourism Minister Hisham Zaazou condemned the attack, telling al Youm al Masri newspaper that the incident took place at a time when Egypt is trying to restore tourism in the area.

The Hamas leadership in Gaza issued a statement denouncing the attack on Egyptian troops, saying: “Hamas condemns this ugly crime that killed a number of Egyptian soldiers and extends its deep condolences to the families of the victims and to the leadership and the people of Egypt.”

Some Egyptian sources blamed Israel for the attack. Spokesperson of Al Jamia Al Islamiya said that the Israeli intelligence is behind the incident: “Israeli sources are staging violent attacks in Sinai in order to modify the security arrangements and Israeli presence at the Egyptian border.”

Earlier, al-Arabiya network reported that the gunmen, who are affiliated with the global jihadist movement which has become increasingly active in Sinai, drove a four-wheel-drive vehicle when they attacked the troops.

“It seems the attack was sudden and well-coordinated, using heavy arms, ” an al-Arabiya reporter said.

The website of Egyptian newspaper al-Ahram reported that the soldiers were killed after a terrorist cell blew up a car bomb inside an Egyptian base near Rafah.

The attack occurred during the Iftar evening meal, when Muslims break their Ramadan fast.

Attila Somfalvi, Elior Levy, Roi Kais Ilana Curiel and Neri Brener contributed to this report

Egypt’s president holds urgent talks with army after deadly Sinai ambush.

Sunday, 05 August 2012

The Egyptian soldiers were reportedly attacked as they were breaking their Ramadan fast. (Reuters)

  nShare

Egypt’s newly elected Islamist president on Sunday held an urgent meeting with his country’s military council after more than a dozen soldiers were killed in an attack by suspected extremist “jihadists” in the Sinai desert region.

President Mohamed Mursi had called for the meeting after at least 15 Egyptian soldiers were killed and 10 were wounded in the ambush by gunmen at a security checkpoint in Rafah, a city in North Sinai near the border to the Gaza Strip.

The gunmen were driving four-wheeled all-terrain vehicles when they attacked the troops, witnesses said. Egyptian state television reported the attackers were “jihadists.”

The gunmen took control of two Egyptian armored vehicles and exploded one of them, reported Ahmad Bagato, Al Arabiya correspondent.

A spokeswoman for the Israeli army said a “group of terrorists” had attacked the border post, Reuters reported. The Israeli air force had targeted one vehicle that tried to infiltrate Israel, while a second vehicle had exploded at the border crossing, she said.

A television journalist based in North Sinai said the area was sealed off by security forces, blocking the road from the main town of al-Arish in the direction of the Gaza border crossing at Rafah.

Egypt has ordered the closure of the Rafah Gaza border crossing after the attack. Gaza Strip’s Hamas condemned the killing of the Egyptian troops.

Earlier on Sunday, an Israeli air strike killed a Palestinian gunman from a radical Islamist group and wounded another as they rode a motorbike in southern Gaza near the Egyptian border.

It was not immediately possible to confirm whether the two incidents were linked.

The gunmen carried out their attack at Iftar time, when soldiers were busy breaking their Ramadan fast.

“It seems the attack was sudden and well-coordinated, using heavy arms,” Al Arabiya’s Bagato said.

Israeli army spokesman Afihai Adra’ei told Al Arbiya that attack was likely bigger than it appears.

He said Karam Abu Salem border crossing, located southeast of Gaza Strip, appeared to be the target.

He said the Israeli air force targeted one vehicle that tried to infiltrate Israel and that a second vehicle exploded at the border crossing.

Experts say that militant groups in Sinai aren’t directly affiliated to al-Qaeda but are seeking to be so.

Since the overthrow of U.S.-aligned Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak in February last year, security has loosened over Sinai and groups of militant Islamists have spread across its northern part, attacking police stations and a pipeline exporting gas to Israel and Jordan.

The desert border between Israel and Egypt was relatively quiet for decades after the two countries signed a peace treaty in 1979. But Israel says that since the fall of Mubarak, Cairo has lost its grip on the Sinai.

In April, Israel said a rocket fired from the Sinai hit the resort of Eilat, causing no injuries, while last August cross-border infiltrators shot dead eight Israelis. Israeli soldiers repelling the attack accidentally killed five Egyptian guards.