Archive for August 14, 2012

« WarSclerotic home page
« Older Entries

Does Israel Face a December Deadline to Attack Iran?

August 14, 2012

Does Israel Face a December Deadline to Attack Iran? – Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East.

Israeli and American flags are seen during a joint news conference by US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak as they visit the Iron Dome defense system launch site in Ashkelon Aug. 1, 2012. (photo by REUTERS/Mark Wilson)
By: Alex Fishman posted on Tuesday, Aug 14, 2012

This December, the Iranians will present us with an impressive chesslike challenge. From that point onward, the route to checkmate will be a matter of just a few moves. Iran will complete its program to protect its nuclear project, with all its scientific, industrial and military components. Israel considers this stage to mark Iran’s entry into an “immunity space” [term used by Defense Minister Barak to designate the point at which the Iranians will become immune to an Israeli strike]. From this point onward, Iran will be able to continue developing its nuclear program without fear of an effective Israeli strike.

This won’t mean that Israel’s ability to act covertly against an Iranian nuclear program will be neutralized. But it will mean a significant – almost total – reduction in its ability to efficiently execute a massive attack, entailing tons of explosives, to destroy the nuclear facilities. In the race between Israel’s development of offensive weapons, and Iran’s establishment of a defense system, the Iranian’s will register a significant achievement: they had a defense plan, it took them a bit more time to complete it, but the Iranian engineers will deliver the goods at the end of the year.

The Iranian defense program includes a few basic components: moving the nuclear facilities deep underground, scattering them around several sites, and reinforcing the facilities’ physical security. Security for Iranian scientists is also increasing. Alongside those measures, the Iranians have progressed faster than expected in the development of launchers and warheads.

Not only Israel has pointed out the December “deadline” – Western intelligence officials around the world have as well. Most importantly, it also appears in an updated intelligence assessment by US espionage figures, which was recently submitted to the president, and will soon be presented to Congress and publicized.

Not for nothing were the Americans angry at the leaks that came out of Israel from this document. While the administration is trying its hardest to delay the Israeli attack at least until after the US elections, a document ends up on the president’s desk that strengthens the Israeli position on the matter of the “immunity space.” Not only does the document reveal the fact that the Iranians are finishing up the nuclear program’s defense system, it also reveals, so it seems, that the Iranians have more nuclear facilities than they did in the past. They scattered the development and production facilities, such that additional protected facilities were “born.”

So in December it seems that from Israel’s perspective, the military window of opportunity for an attack will close. That doesn’t mean that such a window won’t open again in the future, in a year or two, if Israel acquires military capabilities that it doesn’t have today. The probably is that Iran’s nuclear program will also be in a different place then.

The strategic significance is that from December onward, Israel will find itself in a situation in which it is totally dependent on an external, American actor to remove what it terms an “existential threat” hanging above it. Israeli governments have always done everything they could to avoid being pushed into this corner.

The Americans continue to try and calm things down: the Iranian immunity space in comparison with our own capabilities, they say, is different. Trust us, when the time comes, we’ll do the job. The problem is that there is no guarantee that they’ll fulfill that promise. Israel also doesn’t have the moral authority to demand that they act, if it doesn’t suit their national interests.

This and more: Israel believes that US opposition to an attack on Iran will lessen after the presidential elections, starting Nov. 7. Any Israeli attack on Iran at this point would be seen as Israeli interference in domestic U.S. politics. The current government also nicely succeeded in turning Israeli public opinion against the strike. But they forgot to mention that they’ll be less interested on the day after the election. Though that doesn’t mean that they’ll give Israel the green light after the vote.

The picture that emerges from openly known pre-December military and political timetables is as follows: from a military perspective, it would be more comfortable to strike before November. From a political perspective it would be better after November. Under that type of timetable, and the public bedlam surrounding the issue, the state of Israel is meant to take a fateful decision about its future. This is a situation with the power to paralyze any government. The easiest thing to do in this situation is to decide not to decide.

Categories: Uncategorized

Comments: 1 Comment

Obama set to assure Israel that, if all else fails, US will attack Iran by June 2013

August 14, 2012

Obama set to assure Israel that, if all else fails, US will attack Iran by June 2013 — TV report | The Times of Israel.

( “Could” not “will.” – JW )

Channel 10 says explicit US commitment, designed to ensure Israel holds its fire, could be issued at Obama-Netanyahu meet this fall

By and August 14, 2012, 8:49 pm 1
Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu meets with US president Barack Obama in the White House in March (photo credit: Amos Ben Gershom/GPO/FLASH90)

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu meets with US president Barack Obama in the White House in March (photo credit: Amos Ben Gershom/GPO/FLASH90)

American and Israeli officials are working to arrange a meeting between US President Barack Obama and  Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at which the White House will assure Israel that the US will use force to stop Iran’s nuclear weapons drive by next June at the latest if the Islamic Republic has not halted its program by then, Israel’s Channel 10 news reported on Tuesday night.

The meeting will take place in New York or Washington at the end of September or the very beginning of October, the report said. David Axelrod, senior strategist in Obama’s re-election campaign, is coordinating arrangements for the meeting, the report said.

The key formulation being discussed for Obama to assure Netanyahu is that the US “will attack Iran by June 2013″ if the Iranian nuclear weapons drive has not halted by then, the report said.

Despite incessant reports from Israel asserting that Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak are strongly inclined toward ordering an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities in September or October, the US administration tends not to believe that Israel would go ahead and attack Iran alone and in defiance of the US, the report said. Nonetheless, Washington is not certain of what Israel may do.

The White House is thus looking to reassure Israel and reduce the prime minister’s concern that, if Israel does not intervene militarily, nobody else will and the Iranians will get the bomb — a situation Netanyahu has made clear he considers untenable, since it would place the Jewish state under existential threat.

It would be unthinkable for Israel to strike at Iran before any such Obama-Netanyahu meeting, the report said, and similarly unthinkable afterwards — since Obama would provide the necessary reassurance for Israel to hold its fire.

Netanyahu is already tentatively scheduled to fly to the US at the end of September to address the UN General Assembly.

On Monday, Israeli TV reports had quoted unnamed US sources saying the US would not necessarily join in were Israel to launch a military strike against Iran’s nuclear program, but that the US feels a profound commitment to the defense of Israel, and so could be relied upon to protect Israel defensively from the consequences of an Israeli attack on Iran.

Also Monday, White House spokesman Jay Carney said the US was committed to giving talks with Tehran a chance to bear fruit. ”We continue to believe there is time and space for diplomacy, the opportunity remains for Iran to take advantage of this process,” Carney told reporters, AFP reported

Categories: Uncategorized

Comments: 5 Comments

North American Jews move to Israel despite risks

August 14, 2012

North American Jews move to Israel despite risks | ksl.com.

By Blake Sobczak

 

August 14th, 2012 @ 11:39am

 

Associated Press

 

BEN-GURION AIRPORT, Israel (AP) – Despite regional tensions, about 350 Jews from North America landed in Israel on Tuesday, planning to make the Jewish state their new home.

Their arrival coincides with an escalating internal debate over whether Israel should attack Iran’s nuclear facilities. Israel and the West believe Iran may be aiming to produce nuclear weapons. Iran denies that.

Either and Israeli attack that could set off a regional conflagration, or an Iran with a nuclear bomb to back up its frequent calls for the destruction of Israel, would seem to be good enough reason to postpone moving to the Jewish state – but the newcomers dismissed that.

“I’m not nervous about Iran,” said 18-year-old Becca Richman, who left her family in Philadelphia to serve in the Israeli military. “Honestly I’m more nervous about fitting into Israeli society than I am being in the army. This is my dream. This is what I came to do.”

Nearly 130 other army recruits were on Tuesday’s chartered flight. The immigrants were met by throngs of family members, flags, banners, a stage and live music.

Among the dignitaries greeting them was Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He commended them for deciding to “link their personal future with the future of the Jewish state and the Jewish people.”

Netanyahu singled out the prospective soldiers.

“As the Jewish state progresses and rises, so does anti-Semitism,” Netanyahu warned, adding “we need to defend ourselves against that and those who give it intellectual support.”

More than 4,000 immigrants have arrived in Israel from the U.S., Canada and United Kingdom this year.

Sidney and Naomi Schulman left their Massachusetts dental practice to retire in Jerusalem. Their three children and 12 grandchildren, who already live in Israel, all greeted them at the airport, wearing shirts listing their extensive family tree.

“It feels right here,” said Naomi Schulman. “We feel very privileged that we’ve reached this stage in our lives, that we’ve had the opportunity to reunite on a permanent basis with our children and our grandchildren.”

Most North American Jewish immigrants give up their jobs back home when they move, according to Nefesh B’Nefesh, a group that helps potential immigrants make the move and sponsored the flights that arrived Tuesday.

“We wanted to move, and nothing can change our minds,” said 33-year-old Shalom Schwartz, a lawyer from New York who plans to continue his practice remotely from his new home outside Jerusalem.

Categories: Uncategorized

Comments: 2 Comments

Analysis: Another political wake-up call

August 14, 2012

Analysis: Another political wake-… JPost – Diplomacy & Politics.

By GIL HOFFMAN
08/14/2012 16:14
Whenever Netanyahu does make a fateful decision about how to handle Iran, chances are it will happen in the middle of the night.

PM Netanyahu speaks to Jewish immigrants at BGU Photo: REUTERS

At the end of the Passover Seder, when children are often fast asleep and their parents bloated with matza, there is a song called “And it happened in the middle of the night.”

The song describes miracles God performed for the Jewish people at night, from the times of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob through the events that saved the Jews of Shushan in present-day Iran in the Book of Esther. When the book’s sixth chapter says that the king could not sleep, commentaries suggest that the text refers not only to the Persian king but also allegorically to the King of Kings – God himself, who was distressed by the fate of the Jewish people.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has never been compared to God, but Time magazine did call him a king. And Netanyahu seems to do his best work in the middle of the night.

That is when he can work quietly, behind the scenes, without the press he loathes following his every move. Netanyahu has never been a morning person, and his former aides have lamented that their regular work hours often stretched into the wee hours of the night.

Netanyahu advanced the Likud leadership race at midnight in December. He scrapped plans for early elections and formed a national-unity government at 2am between May 7 and 8. Last month, he nearly split Kadima, holding meetings with disgruntled MKs until 3am. And Monday night, he offered Kadima MK Avi Dichter the job of home front defense minister in a meeting that ended at 1:30am.

The decision left Channel 2’s fiercely anti-Netanyahu commentator Amnon Abramowitz with egg on his face after he reported that the job was going to former IDF deputy chief of staff Uzi Dayan. Netanyahu also made newspapers critical of him look bad for reporting that the post was earmarked to former Mossad chief Danny Yatom.

Netanyahu got his revenge against his most critical media outlets that had been reporting that no one wanted the job and that Israel would be left with no one in charge of the home front at a time when they are reporting that a confrontation with Iran is imminent.

The prime minister, whose career was almost killed after then-prime minister Ariel Sharon split Likud, finally succeeded at his goal of bringing about a defection of an MK from Kadima. He did not split the party, but he brought in a much bigger fish than the seven backbenchers he tried to catch last month. If Dichter, who twice ran for Kadima leader, jumped ship, it presents a message to undecided voters that the party’s fate has been sealed.

But Netanyahu’s real foe is neither Kadima, nor Yediot Aharonot. And his deal with Dichter was aimed not at Ariel Sharon or Abramowitz but at Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, Iran’s president.

Despite whatever the media will report over the next few days, adding Dichter to the cabinet does not mean that Israel will be attacking next month or the month after. Dichter will soon see that the job he took on himself of readying the home front will take a lot of work and a lot of time.

But Netanyahu did show Iran that he is getting ready for any possible eventuality. And he continued demonstrating to the world that he means business if they do not take immediate steps to prevent the nuclearization of Iran.

The prime minister will continue to hold his cards close to his chest on that front.

But whenever Netanyahu does make a fateful decision about how to handle Iran, chances are it will happen in the middle of the night.

Categories: Uncategorized

Comments: Be the first to comment

Israel steps up war rhetoric against Iran

August 14, 2012

Israel steps up war rhetoric against Iran – ISRAEL – FRANCE 24.

 

Israel steps up war rhetoric against Iran

 

The Israeli press is giving signs that the country might be preparing for a war with Iran, but analysts remain sceptical.

 

 

By Joseph BAMAT (text)

 

 

Judging by recent articles in the Israeli press, it would appear that the country is on an unavoidable collision course with Iran. On Tuesday, the left-leaning daily Hareetz published an article titled “Lengthy Iran conflict likely to cost Israeli economy billions of shekels.” Such stark headlines, combined with news that Israeli Prime Minister named a former internal security minister Avi Dichter as the new home front defence minister, have many observers wondering if the country is preparing for war.

Indeed, in recent days, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Ehud Barak have used increasingly aggressive language to suggest the Jewish state is seriously considering a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities. “We are determined to prevent Iran from becoming nuclear, and all the options are on the table. When we say it, we mean it,” Barak told Israeli radio on August 9.

Moreover, Israel’s Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon called on the United States and Western allies to declare that negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program had failed, British daily The Telegraph reported on August 12. Ayalon, echoing previous statements by officials, said it was important for powers to give a deadline “within weeks” to Tehran to freeze nuclear activity.

According to Gallagher Fenwick, France 24’s correspondent in Jerusalem, the issue of Iran’s nuclear ambitions and Israel’s response has once more taken centre stage in the media after it was pushed aside for weeks by the political crisis in Syria.

“Obviously there is now a push from the highest levels of the government to put the Iranian question back on the table. Netanyahu and Barak have really taken the rhetoric up a notch,” Fenwick said by telephone.

Tehran, which insists it is not trying to build a nuclear weapon, said on Tuesday it was dismissing threats of an imminent attack.

“We aren’t taking these claims very seriously because we see them as hollow and baseless,” Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast told reporters during a weekly briefing.

An attack on Iran could spark a multi-front war against the Jewish state. It would set off retaliatory attacks by the Islamic republic, but almost certainly also trigger a barrage of rocket attacks from militant groups in the Gaza Strip and southern Lebanon.

Synchronizing clocks with Washington

Further fuelling speculations of an approaching Israeli offensive are the multiple recent visits by top US officials to Israel. While American and Israeli diplomats have told the press they were absolutely on the same wavelength over Iran, it appeared Washington was trying to dissuade its ally from launching a strike.

Speaking on US television on August 13, Israeli Ambassador to the US Michael Oren stressed that Israeli leader’s clocks were “ticking faster” than President Barack Obama’s. “The United States is a big country with very large capabilities located far from the Middle East,” Oren told MSNBC. “Israel is a small country with certain capabilities located in Iran’s backyard. And Israel, not the United States, is threatened almost weekly, if not daily, with annihilation by Iranian leaders.”

According to Robert Blecher, the Arab-Israeli Project director for the International Crisis Group, Oren’s comment should be taken at its most literal sense: Israel feels like it cannot afford to wait as long as the United States, and that a later strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities would not have as much success.

Nevertheless, Blecher added that it was very difficult to predict how Israel would act based on public pronouncements. “Throughout Israel’s history, usually when they are talking, they are not doing. However, you have to wonder if this time they are not playing it the same way,” he noted.

For Majid Rafizadeh, a Washington-based Middle East scholar and analyst, it is clear that involvement in new wars in the Middle East was not popular with the Obama administration, which is head-long into the 2012 presidential campaign, or the unemployment-weary US public. Rafizadeh added that the likely consequences of a unilateral attack by Israel would be international sympathy for the Iranian government and a new lifeline for the Islamic regime.

A lazy summer

For all the rhetoric from officials, ordinary Israeli’s are enjoying summer holidays and have been largely unshaken by declarations, according to France 24’s Fenwick. “I don’t see a country that is ready to launch a major offensive. People are not rushing to stores to buy gas masks or stocking supplies in bunkers,” he said.

Nevertheless, talk of war has been more present in Israeli media, with opposing views on a potential strike being clearly defined and highlighted. The left-wing press has argued that an attack on Iran would be mistimed and a wholly irresponsible move by Prime Minister Netanyahu.

Israeli hawks and conservative dailies have warned of the danger of appearing weak to Arab neighbours or unwilling to follow through on warnings against Tehran.

Despite Israel’s reticence to attack Iran without a UN mandate or the backing of the US, the country, Fenwick noted, largely tends to trust Netenyahu and the military establishment that surrounds him. “This is a country that is used to going to war. That said, I don’t think we are close enough to an actual war for that question to bother Israelis right now.”

Categories: Uncategorized

Comments: Be the first to comment

Silence rules as Israel readies to strike

August 14, 2012

Silence rules as Israel readies to strike | The Australian.

ISRAEL’S Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Ehud Barak are threatening to attack Iran, and the world does not seem concerned.

Israel warns that its face is turned in the direction of a war that will bump up the price of oil and cause many deaths and much damage, and the world does nothing to prevent the tragedy. No emergency meetings of the UN Security Council, no dramatic diplomatic delegations, no live coverage on CNN and Al Jazeera. There aren’t even any sharp fluctuations in the price of oil and gas. Or in Israel’s credit rating. The scene is quiet. Even Iranian counter-threats to hit Israel don’t seem to worry anybody.

What’s happening here? All the signs show that the “international community”, meaning the Western powers and the US in the lead, seem to have reconciled themselves with Israel’s talk of a military strike and now they are pushing Netanyahu to stand by his rhetoric and send his bombers to their targets in Iran. In general terms, the market has already accounted for the Israeli strike in its assessment of the risk of the undertaking, and it is now waiting for the expectation to be realised.

The international community created the ideological grounds for an Israeli operation against Iran.

It has ceased to bother Netanyahu about issues related to the occupation, the settlements and the Palestinian state, which has made it possible for Netanyahu to focus on preparing the Israel Defence Forces and Israeli public opinion for a war with Iran.

The “nuclear talks” between the powers and Iran were the epitome of diplomatic impotence. Economic sanctions on Iran did not stop the nuclear project, and maybe even caused its acceleration, but they are likely to limit Iran in a long-term war against Israel.

US President Barack Obama is considered a sharp opponent to the idea of an Israeli strike against Iran. But his actions say the opposite. Obama once again is leading from behind, as he did in Libya and Syria.

This is his doctrine: instead of complicating the US with a new Middle East war, he is outsourcing the fighting to an external agent. In Libya, it was the French, the British and the anti-Gaddafi rebels. In Syria, it is the Free Syrian Army. In Iran, it is the IDF.

If Israel does strike, the planes and the arms will be made in the US. The Home Front Command will receive early warnings of missile landings from the American radar in the Negev, in southern Israel. The financial aid and state support for the day after the strike will probably also come from Washington.

The public position of the US regime is vague. Officials talk about the “unity of the international community”, “tough sanctions” and say that they will use all available options to stop Iran developing nuclear weapons (as Secretary of Defence Leon Panetta did on his recent visit to Israel). There is no warning here against an Israeli strike. No one is saying, “If you strike, you will put Israel-US relations at risk, and you will remain isolated.”

Obama was much more aggressive when he asked Netanyahu to freeze settlement construction – something that has no effect whatsoever on the wellbeing of Americans. And now, when regional stability and the fate of the world economy are at stake, the Obama administration makes do with a feeble request that Israel waits.

There is logic behind this apparent American weakness: Obama needs the support of the US’s Jews in the upcoming presidential elections, hence his reluctance to enter into a diplomatic confrontation with the Israeli Prime Minister.

According to this explanation, Obama must catch up with Republican rival Mitt Romney, who came to be photographed next to Netanyahu in Jerusalem. Obama despises Netanyahu, but he has put aside his feelings at least until the elections are over.

This is one of the reasons that Netanyahu and Barak want to attack in the coming weeks, when Obama will be forced to support Israel, because of his political needs at home. But even if Obama is held back by the campaign, his restraints do not put his European peers under any kind of obligation. Angela Merkel, David Cameron and Francois Hollande dislike Netanyahu as much as Obama does, but in Germany, Britain and France there is no strong lobby for Israel. And even so, the Europeans are silent.

During Netanyahu’s first term as Prime Minister, European leaders visited Israel often in order to protest the stalemate in the peace process and settlement expansion. And now? The two most important guests that have visited Jerusalem in the past two weeks were the Australian Foreign Minister Bob Carr and the Prime Minister of Tonga. Friendly nations, but ones that lack influence in matters of war and peace.

For Americans and Europeans who are leading a hard line against Iran, it is difficult to present a position that will be interpreted as a defence of the Iranian nuclear program in the face of an Israeli strike.

They can, however, demonstrate diplomatic activity, flood Israel and Iran with visits, brief the press, and maybe even posit creative solutions to calm the crisis. Their reluctance and their silence imply their support for an attack by Netanyahu.

If a war breaks out, they will do everything to minimise any ensuing damage, to reach a ceasefire and to calm the oil market.

And maybe they just think that Netanyahu is bluffing. Maybe, much as they did not believe his pronouncements over a future Palestinian state, they think that his talk of a strike is nothing more than empty words.

Haaretz

Categories: Uncategorized

Comments: 2 Comments

Israeli Opposition to Iran Military Strike Declining, Poll Shows – Bloomberg

August 14, 2012

Israeli Opposition to Iran Military Strike Declining, Poll Shows – Bloomberg.

Israeli opposition to a military strike aimed at halting Iran’s nuclear program is declining as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu steps up warnings that the country faces a potential threat to its existence.

Some 46 percent of Israelis are against a strike on Iran without U.S. support, according to a poll by the Dialog Institute reported on Channel 10 on Aug. 12. That compares with 58 percent opposed to such a move in a survey by Dialog published March 8 in the Haaretz newspaper. Both surveys questioned 500 Israeli adults.

A poll in the daily Ma’ariv on Aug. 10 found that 35 percent believed that Israel should attack Iran alone if necessary, compared with 19 percent in a July 20 poll. All the polls had a margin of error of 4.5 percentage points.

Netanyahu said on Aug. 12 that the Iranian threat to Israel “dwarfs” all others. The same day the Home Front Command announced that it was testing a nationwide text-messaging system to alert the public of incoming missiles. The Haaretz newspaper reported Aug. 10 that Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak are considering a strike on Iran before U.S. elections on Nov. 6. Iranian officials have said that any attack against the country’s nuclear program would prompt retaliation.

Talk of possible conflict “is spreading everywhere,” said Yoram Meital, chairman of Ben Gurion University’s Herzog Center for Middle East Studies in Beersheba. “The discourse over the strike is much larger and deeper than at any other time in the past.”

“Public support is growing for a strike because they are increasingly convinced by Netanyahu that it is either an attack or Auschwitz,” Meital said.

The poll in Ma’ariv found that 37 percent of Israeli Jews believe that if Iran is allowed to gain atomic weapons a second Holocaust is probable.

Categories: Uncategorized

Comments: Be the first to comment

Top Iran official: Israeli threats of imminent strike are mere ‘psychological warfare’

August 14, 2012

Top Iran official: Israeli threats of imminent strike are mere ‘psychological warfare’ – Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper.

Speaking to semi-official Mehr news agency, Iranian Defense Minister Ahmad Vahidi says Israel’s ‘warmongering remarks’ may bring the destruction of its ‘war machine.’

By The Associated Press and Haaretz | Aug.14, 2012 | 5:36 PM
The military complex at Parchin, Iran - AP
ran’s defense minister is dismissing Israeli threats against his country as psychological warfare.

The semi-official Mehr news agency on Tuesday quoted Gen. Ahmad Vahidi as saying Israeli leaders are resorting to “psychological war” against Iran.

Israel has not ruled out a military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities. The West suspects Iran is aiming at producing nuclear weapons. Iran denies that.

Gen. Vahidi warned that Israel is moving toward destruction of its “war machine” through its “warmongering” remarks.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday called Iran his country’s most dangerous threat, as the debate in Israel over whether to attack Iran gains strength.

Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehmhmanparast told reporters Tuesday that Iran would not relate seriously to “baseless” remarks.”

On Monday, Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Michael Oren stressed in an interview to MSNBC that the Israeli clock on military action on Iran’s nuclear program “is ticking faster.”

Ambassador Oren said Israel appreciated Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta’s reiteration that the U.S. is determined to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, but mentioned the “structural differences between the United States and Israel which we can’t ignore.”

“The United States is a big country with very large capabilities located far from the Middle East,” Oren said. “Israel is a small country with certain capabilities located in Iran’s backyard. And Israel, not the United States, is threatened almost weekly, if not daily, with annihilation by Iranian leaders.

“We’ve now had five months of diplomacy,” Oren continued, adding that the attempts to get Iran to negotiate an end to its nuclear program “haven’t worked.”

“We still believe that truly crippling sanctions together with a credible military threat – and that I stress, that’s a threat; not that we just say that it’s credible, the folks in Tehran have to believe us when we say that – may still deter them. But we also have to be prepared, as President Obama has said, to keep all options on the table, including a military option,” Oren said.

Categories: Uncategorized

Comments: Be the first to comment

Lieberman: Israel cannot rely on the international community

August 14, 2012

Israel Hayom | Lieberman: Israel cannot rely on the international community.

Foreign minister accuses international community of standing idly by over the last 17months • “With all the promises and security guarantees can we trust international community?” • White House: There is still “time and space” for Iran sanctions to work.

Shlomo Cesana, Eli Leon, Mati Tuchfeld and Maya Cohen
With all the promises and security guarantees can we trust international community?” Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman.

|

Photo credit: Dudi Vaaknin

Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman on Monday once again hinted that Israel may have to go it alone when it comes to stopping Iran’s nuclear program. Speaking about the ongoing violence in Syria, Lieberman said the international community could not be counted on when it comes to events in the Middle East.

Lieberman also elaborated on Israel’s view of the popular uprising in Syria, saying that what was happening there “should bother all of us, since this represents a failure by the international community to end the killing of civilians.”

“It [the Syrian regime] has not demonstrated its capacity to end the slaughtering of human beings; the carnage in Syria has been taking place for 18 months and not a finger has been lifted; this raises many troubling questions,” the foreign minister said.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney reiterated the administration’s view on Monday that a strike on Iran would be ill-advised at this point, despite Iran’s failure to comply with the demands of the international community.

“We regret that Iran has not yet made a strategic decision to address the international community’s serious concerns regarding its nuclear program and the ongoing P5+1 talks. However, we continue to believe that there is time and space for diplomacy,” Carney said.

“The opportunity remains for Iran to take advantage of this process by taking the necessary steps to come into compliance with its international obligations. In the meantime, even as we continue P5+1 talks, multilateral efforts to increase the pressure on Iran have not ceased at all.

“The United States continues to work with its partners around the world to increase the scale and scope on sanctions on Iran, as you know, making clear that such pressure will only grow until Iran changes course. Continued diplomatic efforts are not inconsistent with expanded pressure,” Carney continued.

“That is the essence of the two-track approach that we’ve taken, which is to step up, week by week, the pressure on Iran, the isolation on Iran, through sanctions and other means, in an effort to convince Iran that they need to make that strategic decision to abide by their international obligations and renounce their nuclear weapons ambitions. And we work with the Israelis as well as all of our partners in that effort.”

Carney’s comments were made just as U.S. officials denied the reports in recent days that should Israel attack Iran, the U.S. would have to join the fighting alongside the Jewish state.

The Russian Foreign Ministry lambasted the U.S. on Monday for the latter’s decision to impose fresh sanctions on Iran.

“Those in Washington should understand that our bilateral relations will seriously suffer if Russian companies working with Iranian partners in strict accordance with Russian law and U.N. Security Council resolutions are affected by the American restrictions,” a Foreign Ministry statement said.

In Israel, several intellectuals, among them prominent writers, wrote a letter to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday demanding that an attack on Iran be approved by the entire cabinet rather than the inner cabinet or other select forum.

The authors of the letter also said they would petition the High Court of Justice if they did not receive a response by Thursday. Reacting to the letter, MK Danny Danon (Likud) said the signatories represented “a minority from the radical left that undermines Israel’s strength; the talk over a possible attack is pointless and dangerous.”

Categories: Uncategorized

Comments: Be the first to comment

Iran’s real center of gravity

August 14, 2012

Iran’s real center of gravity | Conservative News, Views & Books.

Iran's real center of gravity

By: Robert Maginnis
8/14/2012 06:06 AM

Iran is winning the shadow war to acquire nuclear weapons in part because the U.S. and its allies ignore the true center of gravity.

Center of gravity is a military term for the source of power that provides moral or physical strength, freedom of action, or will to act.  Iran’s center of gravity is the supreme leader, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, his core advisers, and their Islamist ideology.

Rather than target the regime for replacement the Obama administration made the Iranian people and Iran’s nuclear program the center of gravity.  That decision plays into the chief mullah’s hands and makes a shooting war more likely.

The ayatollah confirmed as much at a recent meeting with Islamic leaders.  “They [the Americans] clearly say that Iranian officials should be compelled to reconsider their calculations through the intensification of the pressure and the sanctions,” the ayatollah told the Tehran Times.  But the supreme leader said he won’t cave to Western pressure because I am “more confident about the correctness of the path we have followed and the path that the revolution has put before us.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu understands the ayatollah’s revolutionary path.  Netanyahu said Iran is governed by a “fanatical regime” that sees itself on a sacred mission of global Islamic domination which requires nuclear weapons and destroying Israel is just one step on that path.

Consider how Obama’s five-front shadow war focused on the Iranian people and its nuclear program plays into the ayatollah’s hands.

First, America is leading a psychological war to influence Iranian public opinions, emotions, attitudes and behaviors hoping to force the regime to abandon its nuclear program.  It isn’t working.

Over the past two years U.S. and Israel on several occasions dialed-up Iranian anxiety by suggesting a military strike was imminent.  Last week, for example, Israeli defense minister Ehud Barak said the U.S. and Israel are now on the same page about the Iranian nuclear program.  Earlier that day reports surfaced that a new U.S. National Intelligence Estimate indicates Iran has made significant progress toward creating nuclear weapons.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Netanyahu dismissed the idea that a nuclear-armed Iran could be contained.  He said if Iran gets a nuclear bomb, it may actually use it.  And a week ago U.S. secretary of defense Leon Panetta restated America’s intention to attack if Iran develops a nuclear weapon.

Each time these threats surface Iran denies it seeks nuclear weapons and reminds its public the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty grants Iran the right to harness nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.  Then in the same breath Iranian officials remind their public the U.S. has a long history of threatening the Islamic Republic.

America supported Iraq’s Saddam Hussein with weapons to fight the Iranians in the 1980s.  During the eight year Iran-Iraq war America imposed withering economic sanctions on Iran yet the nation survived and by inference it will weather this storm as well.

Second, press reports indicate America and her allies wage a covert war to assassinate Iranian nuclear officials.  The most recent incident took place this January assassinating an Iranian nuclear scientist with a “terrorist bomb blast” in northern Tehran when an unidentified motorcyclist attached a magnetic explosive device to the scientist’s car.

The regime demonizes the West and Israel for waging a covert war on Iranian soil.  Last week Iranian state television broadcast purported confessions by suspects connected with the killings of the Iranian nuclear officials.  The broadcast showed those suspects re-enacting the assassinations and pictures of them at a training camp allegedly outside Tel Aviv, Israel.  Iran blames Israel’s Mossad and the CIA for the assassinations.

Third, the New York Times reports Obama ordered attacks using the Stuxnet cyberweapon on Iran’s computer systems at Natanz, Iran’s largest uranium enrichment facility.  That facility produces low enriched material for generating electricity.

Iran was also targeted by a cyberweapon called Flame that swept up information from computers of high-ranking Iranian officials.   Recently a new virus, Gauss, stole financial information from customers of Lebanese banks.  Iran and its terror proxy Hezbollah use Lebanese banks.

Iran responded to these attacks by announcing the creation of a military cyberunit to defend its networks.  Iranian Brig. Gen. Gholamreza Jalali, the head of Iran’s Passive Defense Organization, said Iran was prepared “to fight our enemies” in “cyberspace and Internet warfare.”  Once again, Iranian officials present themselves as defending their sovereign rights from foreign aggressors.

Fourth, the U.S., United Nations and allies launched an economic war that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called “the most severe and strictest sanctions ever imposed on a country.”

The sanctions’ impact is discernable.  Iran is exporting far less oil every day than a year ago and its currency plunged more than 40 percent against the dollar since 2011.   Banking sanctions are making it difficult to import goods and control inflation.

Tehran responded to the latest sanctions by threatening to disrupt traffic in the Strait of Hormuz and tested missiles capable of targeting the entire region. Subsequently U.S. officials warned that stopping strait traffic was a “red line” that would earn a military response.  The U.S. also increased cooperation with Persian Gulf allies to build a missile defense system.

Iran’s foreign minister, Ali Akbar Salehi, defended his nation’s defensive response and dismissed the sanctions impact. “We have been subject to sanctions for 33 years and these sanctions are … not a problem,” Salehi said and Ayatollah Khamenei called for a “resistance economy,” something reminiscent of the 1980s when Iran struggled against Iraq and suffered under American sanctions.

Understandably some Iranians disagree.  Abdollah Nuri, a former interior minister of Iran, called on the ayatollah to hold a referendum on the fate of the country’s nuclear program.  He warned the “ill-effects, disadvantages, and pressure” due to their nuclear activities earned sanctions that created conditions that have passed the acceptable limit.It is unlikely such dissent will spark widespread unrest.

Finally, the diplomatic war failed to persuade Iran to abandon its nuclear weapons program.  Dennis Ross, Obama’s former adviser on Iran, concluded the latest negotiations with Iran which ended in June had become a trap, allowing Iran to continue enriching nuclear fuel without slowing the Iranian program.

This didn’t surprise the Israeli leader.  “Neither sanctions nor diplomacy has yet had any impact on Iran’s nuclear weapons program.  This is a regime that has broken every rule in the book,” Netanyahu said.

Iran used the latest negotiations to accelerate its nuclear program.  It now has enough enriched uranium for at least six bombs.  Its underground, well-defended Fordow enrichment facility accelerated production of 20% uranium and recently the regime announced its intention to enrich uranium to 60 percent for a future nuclear-powered ship.That is dangerously close to bomb grade material.

Iran is winning the five-front shadow war with the West; the regime is stronger as a result and much closer to being a nuclear-armed state.

The only way to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear-armed regime is to replace the center of gravity – the ayatollah and his cadre.   And short of invasion or assassination the only alternative to remove the regime is to encourage an Arab Spring-like uprising similar to what took place in Egypt which may include arming Iranian rebels.

Categories: Uncategorized

Comments: 3 Comments

« Older Entries