WarSclerotic

Defense Ministry experts predict 300 Israeli fatalities in war with Iran, Syria – Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper.

Ministry prediction in line with Defense Minister Ehud Barak’s previous statement.

Yes he can – Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper.

The key to preventing disaster is not in the IDF chief of staff’s hands but in the hands of the U.S. president.

Anyone who didn’t understand it last summer understands it this summer. The likelihood of Israel attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities is rising steadily. In the winter we hoped the sanctions would stop Iran. They didn’t. In the spring we hoped the diplomatic talks would stop Iran. They didn’t. At the beginning of the summer we waited for Mitt Romney’s visit. Romney left. Now we’re waiting for the end of the Olympic Games. They will end in 10 days.

So when the children return from their vacation at the end of August, we will all be entering the high-risk zone. It is possible that ultimately nothing will happen. Just as no political tsunami occurred at the end of Summer 2011, no strategic tsunami will occur at the end of Summer 2012. But perhaps something will happen. Foreign observers now say the likelihood of Israel’s striking Iran this year is higher than 25 percent.

Israel could strike Iran for several reasons – its leaders’ resolve to prevent a second Holocaust; the combatants’ capability of giving Israel’s leaders a sense of power; Iran’s technological success, which has almost turned it into a threshold nuclear power; Iran’s success in shielding its nuclear facilities, which will soon make it immune to Israeli attack. But the decisive reason for a possible Israeli attack on Iran is the West.

For 10 years the West has displayed a baffling sluggishness in its regard to the Islamic republic’s nuclear program. Time and again the West has failed to deal with the Iranian apocalypse-seekers who are equipping themselves with apocalyptic weapons. So Israel sees the West as a flimsy, untrustworthy party. Jerusalem’s assessment is that Washington will not stop Natanz this year, or next year, or the year after next. What happened in the 1930s will happen here now. The West will display sympathy toward Czechoslovakia, wave goodbye to it and let it sink into the abyss.

Israelis who fear an Israeli strike in Iran are counting on Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz and the IDF top brass. They expect senior IDF officers and senior civil servants to thwart the high-risk operation that the prime minister and defense minister are planning. This expectation is undemocratic. It solicits the senior command to generate a military coup against an elected government. It is also irresponsible. The Iran problem is real and anyone suggesting not to solve it by an Israeli strike must propose how it can be solved.

From both the democratic and substantive standpoint, IDF headquarters is not the address. The White House is. The key to preventing disaster is not in the chief of staff’s hands but in the hands of the U.S. president.

Barack Obama is a brilliant orator. Obama has made quite a few exemplary speeches both as presidential candidate and as president. But the American president’s most important speech is the one he has not made so far – the Iran speech. A speech in which the leader of the free world pledges in pubilc that the free world will prevent Iran from obtaining military nuclear ability – at any price. A speech in which the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff says that if the sanctions don’t stop Iran, America’s military power will.

A speech in which the U.S. president stands before the citizens of the United States and its allies and says – it’s on me. I will not ignore your existential needs nor abandon our strategic interests, nor let Iran become a nuclear power. In my name and in the name of Mitt Romney and the bipartisan leadership, I hereby pledge that in the course of 2013 America will paralyze the Iranian centrifuges that could bring an historic catastrophe on us all.

If Obama delivers an Iran speech in this spirit in the coming weeks, he will vindicate himself. He will prevent an Israeli strike, send a powerful message to the Iranians and establish his status as a world leader. His election for a second term will be almost certain.

But if Obama buries his head in the sand even now, he will be taking on a chilling risk. One morning he may wake up to discover the Middle East is going up in flames and the United States is submerged in serious trouble.

Can sanctions stop Iran’s nuke program? – Israel Opinion, Ynetnews.

Analysis: For the time being, Khamenei appears unfazed by soaring inflation, currency depreciation, price hikes and record-low oil production rate

The sanctions are exacting a heavy price from Iran and its citizens. The harshest of these is the US and EU ban on Iranian oil imports, on insuring ships that carry Iranian crude and on financial transactions with Tehran, which resulted in a significant drop in the country’s revenues from the black gold. At the same time, the price of food and housing is seeing a sharp increase. The local currency is collapsing, leading to a rise in the price of imported goods. In the thriving black market for these goods, the dollar is being traded at double its official value. The citizens’ expectations for additional sanctions are further exacerbating the situation.

Iran’s lower classes and the urban middle class, whose members can’t make ends meet and see their savings being depleted on a daily basis, are suffering most from the economic turmoil. As reported by Ynet’s Dudi Cohen, citizens in northeast Iran recently protested against the sharp rise in poultry prices. In another incident, a woman was killed while waiting in line for chicken at a government distribution center.

But this does not seem to faze Ali Khamenei. According to reliable information obtained by Israeli and western diplomats, Iran’s supreme leader has ordered authorities to move forward with the uranium enrichment program. Khamenei believes that for the time being the sanctions are not causing significant financial distress among Iran’s citizens and therefore do not endanger the regime. However, data obtained by the Foreign Ministry indicate that Iran’s economy has been hit hard by the sanctions:

Currency depreciation: Since the beginning of 2011, the rial has lost 60-70% of its value against the dollar. The expectation that Iran’s currency will continue to depreciate as a result of the sanctions is causing major price hikes – though there does not appear to be a shortage of key commodities.

Soaring inflation: According to official data, Iran’s inflation rate has fluctuated between 23% to 25% this year. Western economists who are familiar with the situation in Iran estimate that the real inflation rate has exceeded 40% and continues to rise. The prices of basic goods, such as milk and poultry, have increased by over 100%. A kilogram of beef, for example, costs $23 dollars.

Oil production at all-time low: Over the past six months Iran’s crude oil production rate has dropped from 3.5 million barrels a day to 2.7 million. The UN has determined that in April alone Iran’s oil production rate fell 20-40%. Experts estimate that this downward trend is continuing and that Iran will eventually produce 2 million barrels a day.

Apart from stifling the Iranian economy, the sanctions are also affecting the citizens’ frame of mind. For example, the Tehran Stock Exchange reacted positively to the launch of nuclear negotiations with the West in Istanbul last June, but when the negotiations collapsed, the market fell. A recent poll found that 60% of Iranians support halting the uranium enrichment program in exchange for a gradual removal of international sanctions.

Iran’s economy has also suffered from a flawed subsidy policy, bad management and corruption. Iranians, including Khamanei and members of the conservative parliament, are holding President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad accountable for the country’s economic woes. Ahmadinejad, for his part, was able to cover up some of the economic failures through subsidies that were financed by Iran’s oil export revenues.

Today the government is trying to contain the sanctions’ psychological and economic effects by granting subsidies for the middle class, offering direct welfare stipends to the poor and physically repressing any attempts to protest against the regime’s policy. The question is what will happen when Iran’s foreign exchange reserves, which finance the subsidies and imports, shrink even more.

Moreover, country’s that continue to purchase Iranian oil are doing so at a discount and are paying with their local currency. India, for example, pays in rupees instead of dollars, so Iran can use this money to purchase goods mostly in India itself. The ban on insuring tankers carrying Iranian oil has led to the closure of a shipping company jointly owned by India and Iran. Iran has similar trade relations with South Korea and even China.

Iran has resorted to creative measures in an effort to bypass the sanctions. The regime in Tehran and the Revolutionary Guards are smuggling crude oil to the West with the help of Turkey and other countries.

Crude oil that is smuggled from Iran through the Kurdish region in Iraq is sold to Europe as Turkish or Iraqi oil. The Obama administration is working to put an end to this phenomenon, or at least reduce it – in part due to pressure from Israel.

The Gulf States, headed by Saudi Arabia, have contributed greatly to the success of the sanctions policy by increasing their oil production to fill the void left by the shrinking Iranian oil industry – thus preventing a rise in global oil prices.

‘Sanctions not working fast enough’

Iran has also suffered from the continued drop in global oil prices, which is attributed to the recession that has hit the US, Europe and China. According to the CIA’s calculations, Iran has to charge a minimum of $80 a barrel in order to pay for its imports and amass considerable foreign exchange reserves.

Iran has also a hard time storing the oil it has not been able to sell. The New York Times reported recently that Iran has been forced to store some 40 million barrels of oil that “that no one is willing to buy” because of the crippling embargo on a fleet of about 65 tankers “floating aimlessly” in the Persian Gulf.

The newspaper quoted international oil experts as saying that Iranian exports have already been reduced by at least 25% since the beginning of the year, costing Iran roughly $10 billion so far in forgone revenues.

Experts estimate that in addition to the millions of oil barrels stored on the “floating storage facilities,” another 10 million oil barrels are being stored on land. This predicament has forced the regime in Tehran to reduce the production rate at its oil fields– a move that will cause long term damage to the ability of these fields to produce oil.

The Americans are using these statistics to try and convince Israel to give the sanctions a chance and put the military option on the back burner. Senior Israeli officials, for their part, claim that at least a year will pass before the sanctions begin to significantly decrease Iran’s foreign exchange reserves and endanger its oil industry. By then, they warn, Iran will be capable of producing enough uranium to build 5-10 nuclear warheads. This means that Iran will become a nation “on the brink” of nuclear capabilities – and in this situation an Israeli or American strike on its nuclear facilities would be futile.

U.S. and Israel Intensify Talks on Iran Options – NYTimes.com.

By ELISABETH BUMILLER and JODI RUDOREN

ASHKELON, Israel — A series of public statements and private communications from the Israeli leadership in recent weeks set off renewed concerns in the Obama administration that Israel might be preparing a unilateral military strike on Iran, perhaps as early as this fall.

But after a flurry of high-level visits, including one by Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta to Israel on Wednesday, a number of administration officials say they remain hopeful that Israel has no imminent plans to attack and may be willing to let the United States take the lead in any future military strike, which they say would not occur until next year at the earliest.

The conversations are part of delicate negotiations between the United States and Israel that have intensified over the past month. On Wednesday they continued with Mr. Panetta, who appeared with the Israeli defense minister, Ehud Barak, and declared that the United States would stand by Israel if Iran developed a nuclear weapon.

“We have options that we are prepared to implement to ensure that that does not happen,” Mr. Panetta said. Standing with Mr. Barak in front of an Israeli antirocket missile battery in the southern town of Ashkelon, about five miles from the Gaza border, Mr. Panetta made clear what he meant. “My responsibility is to provide the president with a full range of options, including military options, should diplomacy fail,” he said.

In the last three weeks, a steady stream of administration officials have flown to Israel to meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, among them Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Thomas E. Donilon, the national security adviser. The trips were in part planned for other reasons — Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Panetta were going to Egypt to meet with the new president and so diplomatically could not ignore Israel — but administration officials say that there has been an intense effort to stay in close contact with Israel and abreast of its intentions.

The visits, deliberately or not, also sandwiched in Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, who was in Jerusalem two days before Mr. Panetta. Mr. Romney, who received a short briefing from the American ambassador in Israel but had no other substantive communication with the administration, appeared to take a harder line against Iran than President Obama has.

In Jerusalem, Mr. Netanyahu continued on Wednesday with his tough rhetoric of recent days, arguing that sanctions against Iran were largely useless. “Right now the Iranian regime believes that the international community does not have the will to stop its nuclear program,” Mr. Netanyahu said. “This must change and it must change quickly because time to resolve this issue peacefully is running out.”

Administration officials say that Israeli officials are less confrontational in private and that Mr. Netanyahu understands the consequences of military action for Israel, the United States and the region. They say they know he has to maintain the credibility of his threat to keep up pressure on the United States to continue with sanctions and the development of military plans.

“The more the Israelis threaten, the more we respond by showing them that we will take care of the problem if it comes to that,” said Martin Indyk, a former American ambassador to Israel and director of foreign policy at the Brookings Institution.

Mr. Panetta met separately on Wednesday with Mr. Netanyahu, Mr. Barak and Shimon Peres, the Israeli president. Administration officials say the Americans and Israelis shared the latest intelligence on Iran, coordinated implementation of the most recent sanctions and discussed military options. Mr. Panetta said on Tuesday in Cairo that he was not taking any American attack plans to show to the Israelis.

He also said that any American strike would be a last resort. “We have to exhaust every option, every effort, before we resort to military action,” Mr. Panetta said at the Ashkelon missile battery, which is part of the Iron Dome defense system in part paid for by the United States.

On Wednesday, Mr. Panetta used some of his sharpest language on Iran, as if to assure the Israelis that the Obama administration could be equally tough.

“This is not about containment,” Mr. Panetta told reporters at the start of his meeting with Mr. Peres. “This is about making very clear that they are never going to be able to get an atomic weapon.”

In Israel, there remains feverish speculation that Mr. Netanyahu will act in September or early October. Besides the prime minister’s fear that Israel’s window of opportunity will close soon, analysts cite several reasons for the potential timing: Israel does not like to fight wars in winter. Mr. Netanyahu feels that he will have less leverage if President Obama is re-elected, and that if Mr. Romney were to win, the new president would be unlikely to want to take on a big military action early in his term.

“If I were an Iranian, I would be very fearful of the next 12 weeks,” said Efraim Halevy, a former chief of Israel’s intelligence agency and national security adviser.

Others made light of the constant visits from the United States. “The visitors are actually baby sitters to make sure the unpredictable kids do not misbehave,” said Efraim Inbar, the director of the Begin-Sadat Institute for Strategic Studies.

American defense officials and experts in Israel say that because Israel does not have a bomb powerful enough to penetrate Iran’s underground uranium-enrichment facilities, an independent strike would be likely to set the nuclear program back only one or two years, at most. That has led to major dissent among Israel’s security professionals over the wisdom of such an attack. The Pentagon, in contrast, has the munitions, bombers, missiles, stealth aircraft and drones that would cause far more extensive damage.

David Makovsky of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, who recently spent time in Israel talking to government officials, said that Israel’s longstanding doctrine of self-reliance makes American promises to act later if all else fails less effective. Instead, he said, Israel needs to be convinced that if it waits, it can still retain the option to act independently.

“Make Israel not believe that it’s two minutes to midnight,” Mr. Makovsky said. “If Israel is so convinced that its window of action is shutting, then maybe you try to enlarge Israel’s window. You say, ‘Here, we know there are some things you need. But we don’t want you to use them until several months ahead.’ ”

The Obama administration is eager to prevent an Israeli attack partly to avoid a major foreign policy crisis during the American presidential campaign and partly because officials say an Israeli strike could set off a new conflagration in the region. If Iran retaliated by launching missiles at Tel Aviv that killed thousands of Israelis, administration officials say the United States would be under enormous pressure to defend Israel and respond, and would then be pulled into another war in the Middle East.

Mr. Netanyahu and other Israeli officials have argued that Iran makes progress in enriching nuclear fuel every day, enhancing its capability to withstand a strike and keep any nuclear weapons program on track. Iran denies the intent to develop nuclear weapons and says its program is for peaceful purposes.

The Israeli news media have been filled in recent days with speculation about a strike. One article said that the Obama administration had vowed to strike within 18 months, another reported continuing concerns in the security establishment here about the effectiveness of an Israeli strike, and a third said that Mr. Donilon, Mr. Obama’s national security adviser, had revealed details of the American attack plans during his visit. The articles did not make clear where those accounts came from, but they contributed to a growing atmosphere of expectation.

“Everybody’s leaking like crazy right now — that doesn’t mean there will be a strike, but it means we’re closer to a decision,” said Amos Harel, defense correspondent for the left-leaning Israeli newspaper Haaretz, who estimated the chance of an attack before November at 50 percent. “It’s probably a more crucial junction than it was ever before.”

Analysis: Not a question of attacking, but of … JPost – Defense.

Netanyahu: Iran unfazed by threats | News24.

2012-08-01 17:44

Benjamin Netanyahu. (AP)

Jerusalem – US and Israeli threats of a military strike have done nothing to stop Iran’s pursuit of a nuclear capability, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Wednesday in talks with US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta.

Speaking at a press conference in Jerusalem with the visiting Pentagon chief, Netanyahu warned that time was running out “to resolve this issue peacefully”.

And Panetta used the visit to issue his own warning to Iran over its efforts to develop what Israel and much of the West believe is a bid for military nuclear capability.

“They have a choice to make,” he told reporters on a visit to an Iron Dome battery in the southern port town of Ashkelon with Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak.

“They can either negotiate in a way that tries to resolve these issues and has them abiding by international rules and requirements and giving up their effort to develop their nuclear capability.

“But if they don’t, and if they continue to make the decision to proceed with a nuclear weapon …we have options that we are prepared to implement to ensure that does not happen.”

Warning

Israel, the sole if undeclared nuclear power in the Middle East, has repeatedly warned that a nuclear Iran would pose an existential threat to it, and both Israeli and US officials have repeatedly warned that all options – including a military strike – were on the table for preventing such a scenario.

“You recently said that sanctions on Iran are having a big impact on the Iranian economy, and that is correct,” Netanyahu told Panetta. “But unfortunately it is also true that neither sanctions nor diplomacy have yet had any impact on Iran’s nuclear weapons programme.

“You yourself said a few months ago that when all else fails, America will act. But these declarations have also not yet convinced the Iranians to stop their programme,” he warned.

“However forceful our statements, they have not convinced Iran that we are serious about stopping them,” Netanyahu said.

On Tuesday night, the Israeli leader said he had not yet decided whether to mount a military strike on Iran’s enrichment facilities.

Time

But he also said Israel would not rely on anyone else to guarantee its security – not even Washington.

Panetta also made clear it was not time for such a move, reiterating US pleas for more time to let diplomacy and sanctions work before considering a strike.

“We have to exhaust every option, every effort before we resort to military action,” he said in Ashkelon.

“It is my responsibility as secretary of defence to provide the president with a full range of options, including military options should diplomacy fail,” he added.

Asked how the Obama administration would react in the event of a unilateral Israeli strike, Panetta said that questions about what was in Israel’s national security interest “is something that must be left up to the Israelis”.

Unified stance

Panetta said he believed the diplomatic and economic sanctions were “having an effect” but stressed that a unified global stance would be the most crucial element in forcing Iran to rethink.

“The most effective way to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon is for the international community to be united, proving to Iran that it will only make itself less secure if it continues to try to pursue a nuclear weapon.”

Barak said it was extremely unlikely that sanctions and diplomacy would convince Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions, which Tehran insists are purely peaceful in nature.

“The probability of this happening is extremely low,” he remarked, noting that Iran was pushing ahead with daily enrichment of “uranium needed for their weapon.”

“We have clearly have something to lose by this stretched time,” he remarked.

Attack plans

Speaking ahead of his arrival in Israel, Panetta ruled out talks on “potential attack plans” with the Israelis.

“I think it’s the wrong characterisation to say that we’re going to be discussing potential attack plans,” he said in Cairo. “What we are discussing are various contingencies on how we would respond.”

Washington, he said, was continuing to “work on a number of options in that area”. He did not give further details.
Panetta was to meet Israeli President Shimon Peres in Jerusalem later on Wednesday.

His visit comes just weeks after a secret visit by US National Security adviser Tom Donilon, who reportedly briefed Netanyahu on US contingency plans for a pre-emptive strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, Haaretz newspaper reported earlier this week.

In Tuesday’s interview on private Channel 2 television, Netanyahu was asked if he had decided whether to strike Iran.

“I have not taken a decision,” he said. “Israel’s fate depends solely on us and no other country, however friendly,” he said, in reference to the United States.

Israel Defense | Leon Panetta: “Iran will never have nuclear weapons”.

IsraelDefense

1/8/2012

“Iran will never have nuclear weapons,” US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta told Israeli President Shimon Peres Wednesday.

Panetta arrived in Israel earlier in the morning, for a series of meetings with senior Israeli officials, which focused on the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

“We want to make it clear that Iran will never have nuclear weapons.” Panetta stressed. “We will work in cooperation with Israel and together with the global community to do everything in order to ensure this never happens. I want you to have my personal assurance that we will do everything so that this threat does not become a reality.”

Earlier Wednesday, Panetta met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who warned that Iran remains unfazed and defiant vis-à-vis the United States and Israel’s threats of a military strike against its nuclear facilities.

Speaking at a press conference held in Jerusalem, Netanyahu warned that time was running out “to resolve this issue peacefully.”

The increasing financial sanctions imposed on Tehran are having a significant impact on the Iranian economy, Netanyahu told the Pentagon chief, “But unfortunately it is also true that neither sanctions nor diplomacy have yet had any impact on Iran’s nuclear weapons program. “You yourself said a few months ago that when all else fails, America will act. But these declarations have also not yet convinced the Iranians to stop their program,” he warned. “However forceful our statements, they have not convinced Iran that we are serious about stopping them.”

Upon arriving in Israel, Panetta met with Defense Minister Ehud Barak and the two toured an Iron Dome battery stationed near Ashkelon.

Panetta used the visit to issue his own warning to Iran over its continued efforts to develop military nuclear capability: “Iran has a choice to make. They can either negotiate in a way that tries to resolve these issues and has them abiding by international rules and requirements and giving up their effort to develop their nuclear capability. But if they don’t,” he warned, “And if they continue to make the decision to proceed with a nuclear weapon… we have options that we are prepared to implement to ensure that does not happen.”

Still, the Pentagon chief insisted that the West must exhaust all diplomatic avenues prior to any decision on a military campaign.

“It is my responsibility as secretary of defense to provide the president with a full range of options, including military options should diplomacy fail,” Panetta was quoted as saying by AFP.

“The most effective way to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon is for the international community to be united, proving to Iran that it will only make itself less secure if it continues to try to pursue a nuclear weapon,” he stressed.

‘Sanctions are taking too long’

During the Iron Dome tour, Barak commented that while it was clear that the West’s financial sanctions were effective to a degree, it is “extremely unlikely” that they will prompt Tehran to abandon its nuclear ambitions.

“Sanctions and diplomacy have an impact. However, the truth is that there is a low chance that the Ayatollah’s will sit at the table and say ‘that’s it, the game is over – we need to give up the nuclear program.’ It’s important to note that sanctions and diplomacy take time and in the meantime, Iran is continuing to enrich uranium and approach the amounts it needs to prepare a weapon.” Barak said.

The defense minister stressed that Israel has made it clear to the US that, “Only the Israeli government will make the decision regarding its core defense issues.”

Asked how the Obama Administration would react in the event of a unilateral Israeli strike, Panetta said that “questions about… Israel’s national security interests are something that must be left up to the Israelis.”

Barak and Panetta also discussed the defense relations between both countries: “The relations between the US administration and the Israeli government have grown stronger in recent years, and the relations between the US Department of Defense and Israel’s Defense Ministry, and the entire defense establishment, are at what might be a record,” Barak said.

“I believe that a great amount of the credit belongs to my friend, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, and of course to President Obama.”

On his part, Panetta said that the US and Israel enjoy a “very close friendship” and even closer defense ties.

Barak echoed the Pentagon chief, saying that “Our relations deepened in a variety of fields, including intelligence, high-tech, and also in ensuring Israel’s qualitative military advantage.

“There is a very comprehensive cooperation, and we recently received another $70 million to advance the readiness of the Iron Dome system. The system represents a remarkable technological accomplishment on the part of the Israeli defense industries, and an exceptional operational achievement for the IAF and the air defense fighters.

“This is a very effective measure,” he stressed, “which provides flexibility to the political echelon, as well as providing defense of a different sort to residents.

“We live in a difficult area, with many dangers, and changes that we have not known in the past that have transpired in the area during the past two years. Israel and the US are closely following the developments. As with any friendship and partnership, there are occasional disagreements, but this does not detract from the quality and depth of the relations. We are determined to keep the relations close, deep and open, even if we don’t always agree on everything, and we will continue maintaining these relations,” Barak concluded.

Israel unconvinced as U.S. urges patience on Iran – CBS News.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, left, listens as U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta speaks during a meeting at the prime minister’s office in Jerusalem Aug. 1, 2012. (AP Photo)

Updated at 11:16 a.m. ET

(AP) JERUSALEM – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Wednesday that U.S. statements of solidarity with Israel and its assurances that military strikes are still an option aren’t working to convince Iran that the West is “serious about stopping them” from developing nuclear weapons.

Standing with a visiting Leon Panetta, Netanyahu dismissed the U.S. defense chief’s counsel to give diplomacy more time to halt Iran’s nuclear program.

“Right now the Iranian regime believes that the international community does not have the will to stop its nuclear program,” Netanyahu said at the prime minister’s residence in Jerusalem. “This must change, and it must change quickly because time to resolve this issue peacefully is running out.”

Earlier Wednesday, at an Israeli defense site south of Tel Aviv, Panetta stood beside Defense Minister Ehud Barak to declare that the Obama administration is serious about the possibility of eventually resorting to military force against Iran. But he said all non-military measures must be exhausted first.

Barak sounded as unconvinced as the prime minister, saying he appreciated U.S. support but added that the probability of international sanctions ever compelling Iran to give up its nuclear program is “extremely low.”

Netanyahu’s and Barack’s statements, taken together, dramatized the growing strains in U.S.-Israeli relations over what strategy to pursue with Iran.

Tehran has said repeatedly that its nuclear work is for civilian energy uses only, but suspicions that the Islamic republic will use enriched uranium for nuclear weapons have resulted in international sanctions and saber-rattling from Israel, which perceives a nuclear Iran as an existential threat. The United States has discouraged Israel from a unilateral, pre-emptive military strike on Iran.

Panetta on Wednesday said repeatedly that “all options,” including military force, are on the table to stop Iran, should sanctions and diplomacy — the preferred means of persuasion — ultimately fail.

He said he still hopes Iran will see that negotiations are the best way out of this crisis.

However, Panetta said, “If they continue and if they proceed with a nuclear weapon … we have options that we are prepared to implement to ensure that that does not happen.”

Netanyahu for his part, has said repeatedly that if necessary he will order military action against Iran even if Washington objects. Panetta said in his appearance with Barak that he understands that Israel must make such important decisions on its own terms.

“Their effort to decide what is in their national security interest is something that must be left up to the Israelis,” Panetta said.

The Panetta visit to Israel comes just days after U.S. Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney met with top Israeli officials about Iran and other issues and said that if he becomes president, he will “honor” whatever Israel decides to do about Iran’s nuclear capabilities. Romney has accused the Obama administration of being too soft on Iran and of not providing sufficient support to Israel.

In greeting Panetta Wednesday at Israeli defense headquarters, Barak said, “The defense ties between Israel and the United States are stronger and tighter than they have ever been and the credit now has to go, most of it, to you, Leon.”

Panetta responded: “We are a friend, we are a partner, we have, as the defense minister has pointed out, probably the strongest U.S.-Israel defense relationship that we have had in history. What we are doing, working together, is an indication not only of our friendship but of our alliance to work together to try to preserve peace in the future.”

Netanyahu told Israeli Channel 2 TV on Tuesday that despite reservations about an Iranian attack among former Israeli security officials and Israel’s current army chief, the country’s political leadership would make the final decision on any attack.

“I see an ayatollah regime that declares what it has championed: to destroy us,” Netanyahu said. “It’s working to destroy us, it’s preparing nuclear weapons to destroy us. … If it is up to me, I won’t let that happen.”

With “matters that have to do with our destiny, with our very existence, we do not put our faith in the hands of others, even our best of friends,” Netanyahu said, hinting that Israel might act alone despite American misgivings.

Netanyahu said both Romney and President Obama have said “Israel has the right to defend itself.”

Barak took Panetta on a trip Wednesday to inspect and get briefed on an Israeli air defense system known as Iron Dome. It is designed to shoot down short-range rockets and artillery shells such as those that have been fired into the Jewish state in recent years from Islamic militants linked to Iran and based in southern Lebanon and the Gaza Strip.

Mr. Obama last week announced he was releasing an additional $70 million in military aid for Israel, a previously announced aid commitment that appeared timed to upstage Romney’s trip to Israel. The stepped-up U.S. aid, first announced in May, will go to help Israel expand production of the Iron Dome system.

Iranians disregard Israeli threat – Israel Opinion, Ynetnews.

Ron Ben-Yishai

Analysis: Khamenei certain Israeli military strike can’t stop Iran from achieving nuclear capabilities, believes West won’t attack due to oil crisis threat

Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and his close advisors have reached the conclusion that that the “military option” placed on the table by Israel and the West is a mere empty gun, at least until the end of the year because of the elections in the US. The Iranian deterrence is based mostly on money, and more specifically the assumption that an attack on its nuclear facilities would result in a sharp rise in oil prices. Even if the Gulf States increase their oil production, Iran’s retaliatory measures (such as mining the Strait of Hormuz) would lead to a shortage of crude oil and expectations of a shortage. The result would be a price hike that would deal a devastating blow to the chance that the economies of Europe, the US, China and India would recover from the deepening global economic crisis anytime soon.

As for an Israeli strike, as frustrating and insulting as it may be, the Iranians are not in the least bit concerned. They believe that Israel’s military capabilities alone are not enough to cause any significant or long-term damage to their missile arsenal and nuclear plants. But that’s not all. There are other reasons why Tehran estimates Israel won’t attack:

1. The ayatollahs are convinced that the Israeli government and people are extremely fearful of the response such an attack would trigger from Iran, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Hamas (from Gaza) and perhaps even Syria.
2. Khamenei and his aides believe the relations between the US and Israel are a mirror image of the ties between Iran and Hezbollah – classic patron-client relations in which there is concern for the client’s military and economic needs, but the client provides services to the patron and follows orders. According to this premise, just as Hezbollah must shower Israel with rockets in the event of an attack on Iran, Israel must refrain from striking at this stage if Washington believes it would hurt Obama’s interests.
3. The Iranians believe Israel is already isolated in the international community and would not dare isolate itself even more by launching an attack and risk being blamed for deepening the economic crisis.

The regime in Tehran is dealing with a host of internal economic and social problems stemming from the harsh sanctions imposed by the West, but at the same time it is advancing its nuclear and strategic missile programs. Therefore, Israeli officials estimate, only a real physical threat or an actual strike can stop or at least delay Iran’s nuclear and missile programs. Officials in Jerusalem, Washington and London believe the sanctions will eventually cause Iran to stop enriching uranium, particularly if Tehran’s efforts to bypass these sanctions are also curtailed. But until this happens, in at least two years’ time, the nuclear threat will have reached the US as well.

Jeremy Issacharoff, deputy director-general for strategic affairs at the Foreign Ministry, believes the sanctions offer a window of opportunity to resolve the nuclear crisis without military intervention. “As long as the Iranians are under the impression that they are paying a small price for the uranium enrichment – they will continue. But if they realize that the West is determined with regards to the sanctions and that they will suffer even more in the future, then they will stop enriching uranium,” he said.

“This is proven by the fact that their key demand in the negotiations with the West is to lift the sanctions. If they realize that the sanctions will not be removed, they may stop enriching uranium or at least make some concessions (that will slow down the pace of enrichment). This is happening now because they are confidant. The real test is not the threats but what is happening on the ground.”

In order to achieve nuclear capabilities Iran must create not one but three “immunity zones” (the term was coined by Defense Minister Barak):

Military-technological immunity zone:Protection of its missile stockpiles and nuclear plants from a strike. The nuclear facility in Fordo, for example, was built inside a mountain, covered by layers of rock.

Nuclear-technological immunity zone:A situation in which Iran’s ability to produce a number of nuclear bombs will become irreversible – to the point where sanctions, diplomatic pressure and even a strike cannot affect it. In practical terms, such a situation calls for Iran possessing enough uranium enriched to a fissile concentration of 20% and more to produce 2-4 nuclear warheads, as well as the knowledge to mount a nuclear warhead on a ballistic missile. Such a development would alter the strategic balance in the Middle East and Iran would be able to leverage its position as a nuclear power to soften the sanctions and deter other countries from attacking.

Political immunity zone:Meant to provide Iran’s nuclear and missile scientists, as well as its Revolutionary Guards, with enough time to create the other immunity zones. A key factor here is the talks with the West, in which Iran is stalling for time by hinting that it would possibly make concessions with regards to uranium enrichment to 20% if sanctions are eased. But EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton found that the Iranian representatives to the talks have no authority to even discuss such matters.

As part of their efforts to create an immunity zone, Iran is also threatening to mine the Hormuz shipping lane and attack oil fields in the Gulf States – an act that would surely lead to a spike in oil prices. However, this appears to be a false threat, because by mining Hormuz Iran would be mining its own exporting route, while Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Kuwait have other shipping lanes. But this threat – real or not – is causing Europe and the US to all but rule out a military strike.

Israel believes Iran will be crossing the “red line,” after which only a military strike can stop it from achieving nuclear capabilities, when it possesses the technological know-how and enough uranium to produce one or more nuclear bombs – even if it has yet to make a “breakthrough” towards building a nuclear bomb. But the Obama administration contends that a military strike should only be carried out if and when the Islamic Republic makes this “breakthrough.” But by then, Netanyahu, Barak and Strategic Affairs Minister Ya’alon claim, it will be too late – and perhaps too little. Why? First of all, because it is not clear whether western intelligence agencies will learn of such a breakthrough in time, and secondly, after Iran will be “on the brink” of achieving nuclear capability, even the American bombers won’t be able to destroy Iran’s enriched uranium and stop its plans for a nuclear warhead.

American officials visiting Jerusalem and the Kirya army base in Tel Aviv these days are trying to allay Israel’s concerns, saying they have operational plans in place. Our bombers are capable of flying back and forth to Iran until the nuclear weapon components are destroyed, they say; we have large forces deployed in the Persian Gulf and the Mediterranean that are prepared to carry out these operational plans, and our Air Force has recently announced that the 30,000-pound behemoth bunker buster is ready to be used if needed. Even the Fordo plant cannot be protected from these bombs, they argue, so even if word of a “nuclear breakthrough” arrives a little late – it won’t really matter.

It’s safe to assume that Israel is currently focusing its efforts on creating a viable and available military option, but Jerusalem has not reached the point where it has to decide whether or not to strike. Israel may reach this point by the end of the year or the middle of 2013 – depending on Khamenei’s actions. In the meantime, the “forum of eight,” which consists of ministers with vast security-related experience, has yet to discuss this possibility (any decision to attack Iran will likely be reached by the Cabinet).

In summation, it is safe to say that Iran is close to creating the “immunity zones” that will allow it to cross the nuclear threshold. But there remains a period of six months to a year in which even Israel alone would be able to set Iran’s nuclear program several years back. In any case, the Americans can halt Iran’s race towards a bomb by either attacking its nuclear plants or imposing even harsher sanctions that would be backed by a credible threat of a strike. But in order for this to happen, Israel must convince the US to act with resolve. Therefore, this week’s talks with visiting Defense Secretary Leon Panetta are incredibly important.

Netanyahu to Panetta: Iran is not convinced West is serious about stopping its nuclear program – Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper.

Prime Minister Netanyahu says sanctions, diplomacy have had no impact on nuclear weapons program; Panetta: We will not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon, period.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Wednesday that U.S. statements of solidarity with Israel and its assurances that military strikes are still an option aren’t working to convince Iran that the West is “serious about stopping” the Islamic republic from developing nuclear weapons.

Standing with the U.S. defense secretary, who is on an official visit to Israel, Netanyahu said, “Neither sanctions nor diplomacy have yet had any impact on Iran’s nuclear weapons program,” Netanyahu said.

“America and Israel have also made clear that all options are on the table. You yourself said a few months ago that when all else fails, America will act. But these declarations have also not yet convinced the Iranians to stop their program,” he added.

“However forceful our statements, they have not convinced Iran that we are serious about stopping them. Right now the Iranian regime believes that the international community does not have the will to stop its nuclear program. This must change and it must change quickly, because time to resolve this issue peacefully is running out,” the prime minster said.

Panetta responded that, “We will not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon, period. We will not allow them to develop a nuclear weapon, and we will exert all options in the effort to ensure that that does not happen.”

“Make no mistake, we will remain determined to prevent Iran from ever acquiring a nuclear weapon,” he added.

Panetta warned earlier on Wednesday on a visit to Iron Dome anti-missile defense system in Ashkelon, that the United States is prepared to implement ‘other options’ if Iran continues to work toward attaining nuclear weapons.