Israel under international pressure not to attack Iran alone
Israel under international pressure not to attack Iran alone – CNBC.
JERUSALEM (Reuters) – Israel is facing growing international pressure not to attack Iran unilaterally, with the United States in particular making clear its firm opposition to any such strike.
Recent rhetoric by Israeli leaders that time is running out to halt Iran’s contested nuclear programme has raised concern that military action might be imminent, despite repeated calls from abroad to give sanctions and diplomacy more time to work.
The U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, has always cautioned against a go-it-alone approach, but he appeared to up the ante this week by saying Washington did not want to be blamed for any Israeli initiative.
“I don’t want to be complicit if they (Israel) choose to do it,” Dempsey was quoted as saying by Britain’s Guardian newspaper on Friday, suggesting that he would view an Israeli attack as reprehensible or illegal.
He went on to repeat that although Israel could delay Iran’s nuclear project, it would not destroy it. He said that unilateral action might unravel a strong international coalition that has applied progressively stiff sanctions on Iran.
“(This) could be undone if (Iran) was attacked prematurely,” he was quoted as saying.
While Tehran says its nuclear programme is peaceful, Western powers believe it is trying to produce an atomic bomb. Israel, believed to have the only nuclear arsenal in the Middle East, views a nuclear-armed Iran as a threat to its existence.
Adding to the sense of urgency, the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency said on Thursday Iran had doubled the number of uranium enrichment centrifuges in an underground bunker, showing its desire to expand its nuclear work.
CRACKS IN THE ALLIANCE
Israel’s vice prime minister Moshe Yaalon said on Friday he feared Iran did not believe it faced a real military threat from the outside world because of mixed messages from foreign powers.
“We have an exchange of views, including with our friends in the United States, who in our opinion, are in part responsible for this feeling in Iran,” he told Israel’s 100FM radio station.
“There are many cracks in the ring closing tighter on Iran. We criticize this,” he said, also singling out U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon for travelling to Tehran this week.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said he will speak out about the dangers of Iran in an address next month to the U.N. General Assembly in New York.
He is also expected to hold talks with U.S. President Barack Obama during his visit. A senior Israeli official told Reuters this month that Netanyahu would be looking for a firm pledge of U.S. military action if Iran does not back down.
However, the meeting might well be icy.
Israel’s top-selling daily Yedioth Ahronoth reported on Friday that there had been an “unprecedented” and “angry” exchange between Netanyahu and the U.S. ambassador in Tel Aviv earlier this month over Iran.
Quoting a source who was present at the meeting, Netanyahu had criticized Obama for not doing enough to tackle Iran. The U.S. ambassador Daniel Shapiro took exception and accused the prime minister of distorting Obama’s position.
The prime minister’s office declined to comment on the report and there was no initial response from the U.S. embassy.
Adding to the growing chorus of concern facing Netanyahu, Haaretz newspaper reported on Friday that German Chancellor Angela Merkel had delivered a “harsh message” to Netanyahu 10 days ago, telling him to hold off on any attack plans.
The German embassy in Tel Aviv declined comment.
Israeli officials have repeatedly said that a growing array of sanctions against Iran are not having any impact on the Tehran leadership and believe they will only back down in the face of a credible threat of military action.
However, Netanyahu faces an uphill task persuading his own military and inner circle of the wisdom of a unilateral strike. Political sources told Reuters on Tuesday an ultra-orthodox party in his coalition was opposed to war.
(Additional reporting by Ari Rabinovitch; Editing by Louise Ireland)
Explore posts in the same categories: Uncategorized
WarSclerotic 
August 31, 2012 at 2:38 PM
There are only ten ( 10 ) weeks until the elections in the States and the big question is still unresolved, regarding the israeli operations in Iran. But something is clear, though : the decision for attacking Iran has been taken and now the debate is only regarding the scale of the conflict. Some high israeli strategists are for a surgical strike only with another deadly strike if things will get tough for Israel.
The second group of strategists believe that a grand scale , multilevel deep strike should be administrated for assuring that any iranian response will be weak enough and the the iranian principal military forces will be destroyed in the process. We wont enter in the operative aspects of this operation but is clear to us the risks and the advantages of each of the two principal choices.
August 31, 2012 at 6:01 PM
I think Israel needs to hit Iran with everything they’ve got all at once. Going just for the nuclear sites and allowing a big retaliation by Iran would be a big mistake.
August 31, 2012 at 6:33 PM
Here is the problem as some people are presenting it : striking Iran ” locally ” has a smaller potential for igniting an all out Middle East war, and Israel still can claim it was only focused on the nuclear installations and trying to contain the conflict. Should Iran answer wildly then Israel can always execute another strike with much more assets. However, I also think that your opinion is the correct one, but that will be decided in other places.
August 31, 2012 at 7:06 PM
What I’m curious about is what Israel plans to do about Bushehr? The Russians have announced today Bushehr is finally operating at full capacity.
Either Israel has to bomb Bushehr, or else they have to use some sort of EMP attack as has been discussed on this blog to disable the electronics.
On the one hand I believe any attack on Bushehr is sure to draw major retaliation. However any strike against Iran that would leave Bushehr still in operation would be pointless.
August 31, 2012 at 8:30 PM
The principal problem, the centrepiece of the iranian nuclear program is not Bushehr, but Fordow near the holy city of Qom.
The very core of the iranian program is buried there.
September 1, 2012 at 2:43 AM
If you are going to hit them, hit them hard.