Archive for September 2, 2012

Saddam Hussein’s Nuclear Strategy Says a Lot about the Likelihood of Deterring a Nuclear Iran

September 2, 2012

defence.professionals | defpro.com.

18:10 GMT, September 2, 2012 The doomsday clock is tick-tocking ever closer to midnight in the Persian Gulf and talk of an Israeli strike on Iran is reaching a fevered pitch. Western leaders are becoming agitated. German Chancellor Merkel felt it necessary to personally call Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu to caution him against a unilateral strike. In a comment that can only be described as bizarre, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, complained that “I don’t want to be complicit if they [Israel] choose to do it.” What a great way of hanging America’s long-time ally out to dry.

Most analysts agree that it is probably already past the point at which a military operation short of regime change could prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Many of these same analysts do not believe that sanctions will compel the Iranian regime to not take the final steps to entering the “nuclear club.” The only strategy that remains is nuclear deterrence. Some observers argue that the same deterrence strategy which was able to maintain the peace with the Soviet Union, a far more aggressive and powerful foe, could effectively put a cork in the bottle that would be the Iranian nuclear threat.

Those who argue for a deterrence strategy would be wise to consider the evidence of Saddam Hussein’s thinking on the subject of nuclear weapons. A study published last year that used all-source data including captured documents and interviews with former Iraqi leaders presents an alternative to the mirror-imaging approach applied by most Western analysts and decision makers, one which assumes that once having acquired nuclear weapons, the Iranian leadership will be satisfied with using them to ensure the regime’s survival (Norman Cigar, Saddam Hussein’s Nuclear Vision: An atomic Shield and Sword for Conquest, The Marine Corps University, Middle East Occasional Papers, June 2011). This study concluded that “rather than viewing nuclear weapons as a stabilizing factor through strategic deterrence, Iraqi thinking suggested a potentially destabilizing approach, given the intent to change the status quo and the balance of power in the region.” Gee, of what other nation located at the head of the Persian Gulf does this remind us? This analysis goes on to conclude that:

Iraqi thinking on deterrence entailed a far from benign ‘aggressive deterrence’ by providing a shield for a more assertive – and potentially very disruptive policy beyond Iraq’s borders. Iraq also perceived that nuclear weapons had a warfighting role, in addition to a deterrence role, with nuclear military doctrine developed even at the operational level. . . Moreover, the Iraqi regime’s threshold for use of such weapons seems to have been considerably lower than conventional wisdom posited (at least in regional conflicts).”

There are reasons to be concerned that Iran’s nuclear thinking has followed a similar intellectual and doctrinal course. If so, the U.S. will not be able to place much reliance on classic deterrence. For Israel, there can be no possibility of stable deterrence with a nuclear-armed adversary that not only publicly calls for Israel’s destruction but is also seeking to provoke asymmetric aggression against that country. Imagine Israel’s dilemma if it is required to act against Hezbollah when that terrorist organization is abler to operate under the protection of an Iranian nuclear umbrella.

Consideration of possible Iranian views on the role of nuclear weapons in its political and military strategies puts an entirely different spin on discussions of the utility of a preemptive strike. Simply put, there may well be no alternative to such a course of action, particularly for Israel. It does not matter that such an attack will probably not decisively disable the Iranian program. At a minimum, a preemptive attack would make clear to Iran that it will never be able to employ its nuclear arsenal – whenever it acquires one – as a tool of an aggressive foreign policy or military strategy.

—-
Daniel Goure, Ph.D.
Early Warning Blog, Lexington Institute

 

Iran’s Nuke Strides Strain Israel-U.S. Ties | Defense News | defensenews.com

September 2, 2012

Iran’s Nuke Strides Strain Israel-U.S. Ties | Defense News | defensenews.com.

 

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief inspector Herman Nackaerts, center, looks on as Iran's envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Ali Asghar Soltanieh, right, delivers a speech following talks at the Iranian permanent mission to the United Nations and other International Organizations in Vienna on Aug. 24.

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief inspector Herman Nackaerts, center, looks on as Iran’s envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Ali Asghar Soltanieh, right, delivers a speech following talks at the Iranian permanent mission to the United Nations and other International Organizations in Vienna on Aug. 24. (Alexander Klein / AFP)

TEL AVIV — Iran’s unabated uranium enrichment drive, confirmed publicly last week by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), is fueling frenzy in Israel among leaders urging a pre-emptive strike and others warning against precipitous action that could damage ties with Washington.

The IAEA’s Aug. 30 report on Iran’s implementation of Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty safeguards and U.N. Security Council resolutions appears to validate Israeli claims that sanctions, inspections and diplomacy have not slowed the Islamic republic’s drive for nuclear weapons.

According to the report, Iran has grown its stockpiles of enriched uranium, introduced more efficient centrifuges, and has plans for up to 10 new enrichment and reactor programs, which may include new laser-enrichment technology.

The report concluded that information “indicating that Iran has carried out activities that are relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device” has been assessed “to be, overall, credible.”

The latest IAEA estimates put Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium at 8.7 tons, including nearly 190 kilograms of uranium enriched to 20 percent, the level considered usable in a weapon. Compared with IAEA estimates from November, Iran managed to boost its stockpile by 723 kilograms, including 44 kilograms of uranium enriched to 20 percent.

Given the stockpile, Israel estimates that Iran will have enough 20 percent enriched uranium to manufacture its first bomb by spring, after which even a sustained U.S.-led air campaign would prove limited.

While the IAEA report did not include a calculated time frame for weapon-grade capability, Anthony Cordesman, of the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, warned it was now only a matter of time.

“This stockpile is large enough at the 20 percent level to indicate that Iran can produce significant amounts of weapons grade material over time,” Cordesman wrote Aug. 30.

Cordesman’s analysis of the IAEA report concluded that Iranian actions “raise growing questions about whether Iran will ever agree to meaningful disclosure, inspection and other verification measures covering its overall nuclear efforts.”

Rising U.S.-Israeli Tension

In the weeks before the IAEA’s findings, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak intensified pressure within the Israeli Cabinet and with senior U.S. officials to engage in pre-emptive, preferably U.S.-led action in Iran.

During a visit here last month by U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, both Israeli leaders highlighted the urgency for pre-emption and sought to ease U.S. objections to prospective unilateral Israeli action. But the White House remains adamant against uncoordinated and precipitous action by Israel, warning that an Israeli attack would prove dangerous and counterproductive in undermining international support for sanctions.

Speaking in London on Aug. 30, Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, reiterated U.S. objections to an Israeli attack, which would not only fail to destroy Iran’s nuclear program, but could also prompt Iran to reconstitute its weapons program.

“I don’t want to be complicit” in a premature Israeli strike, Dempsey was quoted as telling reporters in London when asked about the prospects of Israel dragging the United States into war with Iran in the near term.

In Aug. 31 editions, the Hebrew daily Yediot Ahronot reported on an unprecedented argument that took place during an Aug. 24 meeting in Jerusalem among Netanyahu; U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., chairman of the House Intelligence Committee; and U.S. Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro.

According to the report, as Netanyahu harshly criticized President Barack Obama’s Iran policy and expounded on the dangers of dead-end diplomacy, Shapiro interrupted with: “Enough already.” According to the report, “The argument between the prime minister and the U.S. ambassador was an unprecedented deviation, and very undiplomatic.”

Neither Netanyahu’s office nor the U.S. Embassy commented on the report.

Ephraim Sneh, a former Israeli defense minister, said the disagreement about attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities “has turned into ugly bickering, much of it disguised.”

In an Aug. 27 paper for the Israel Policy Forum, a nonpartisan, nongovernmental organization here, Sneh underscored Israel’s legitimate fear of a nuclear-armed Iran and noted that “no responsible Israeli leader would allow such a nightmare to become reality.”

Nevertheless, he warned about threatened Israeli airstrikes in the run-up to U.S. presidential elections that expressly contravene White House demands.

“The damage of defying the president would be greater than the damage sustained by allowing the Iranian regime an additional few months of advancing toward acquiring the bomb,” Sneh wrote.

The futility of relying on the international community

September 2, 2012

The futility of relying on the in… JPost – Opinion – Columnists.

09/02/2012 13:28
Candidly Speaking: We have learned from bitter experience, that when the chips are down we must rely on ourselves.

Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei at NAM Summit.

Photo: REUTERS
Over 120 countries – equating to two thirds of total United Nations membership – convened in Tehran to partake in the 16th Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) hosted by the Iranian Islamic Republic.

The Iranians boasted that 3 kings, 27 presidents, 8 prime ministers and 50 foreign ministers attended. Egypt’s President Mohamed Morsy was present, breaching Egypt’s long standing estrangement from Iran which he now describes as “a strategic ally”, even though he condemned Assad’s regime in Syria. India, the world’s most populous democracy, participated with a delegation of 250 headed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, stating shamelessly that its objective was to increase trade and commerce with Iran.

Despite appeals from the United States and others, UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, also attended. He did so only days after his condemnation of Iran for defying repeated Security Council resolutions demanding that it end its uranium enrichment program and repeatedly contravening the UN Charter by calling for the destruction of Israel.

In his address to participants, Ban, without explicitly naming Iran, did condemn “threats by any member state to destroy one another, or outrageous attempts to deny historical facts such as the Holocaust”. He also called on Iran to stop supplying arms to Assad in Syria and expressed regret at Iran’s refusal to halt its nuclear enrichment program.

Ban’s media spokesman, Martin Nesirky stated that in private meetings with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the UN leader also referred to the vicious verbal attacks on Israel as offensive, inflammatory and unacceptable.

But this did not detract from the fact that combined with representatives from 120 nations, the UN secretary-general’s presence effectively provided legitimacy to Iran and sabotaged efforts to isolate it as a pariah state, the regime which serves as a launching pad for global terrorism. In fact, only last week, Iran proudly proclaimed that it had dispatched members of its Revolutionary Guard Corps and other fighting personnel to support Assad’s criminal rule in Syria.

At the opening of the conference, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khameini made yet another feral anti-Semitic speech, shamelessly exhorting the world to annihilate Israel the cancerous growth, referring to the “blood-thirsty Zionist wolves” who kill and torture Palestinians and control the global media. Yet the UN secretary-general, together with the other 120 participants remained passively glued to their seats. In many respects, the atmosphere was reminiscent of the late 1930s when the European nations, bent on appeasing Hitler, abandoned Czechoslovakia.

Had the Iranians, instead of targeting Israel, been describing a country like the UK as the cancer of Europe and calling for its elimination, it would have been inconceivable for Ban and the participating countries to attend a meeting hosted by such rogues. But apparently, for Israel, anything goes, provoking Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to appropriately describe the Tehran NAM summit as “a disgrace and stain on humanity”.

To exacerbate matters, in their closing statement, the 120 participants mockingly denounced the UN Security Council “unilateral sanctions” and unanimously endorsed Iran’s right to pursue “a peaceful nuclear program” including “nuclear enrichment”.

Nor was there a single dissenting voice when Egyptian President Morsy handed over the rotating presidency to Holocaust denier, President Ahmadinejad who will now preside over NAM during the next three years.

Any criticism or deviation from Iranian policy such as Ban’s censure of Iranian behavior or Morsy’s condemnation of Syria’s Assad was predictably censored by the local media who presented the summit to the Iranian public as a vindication of their policies and a global rejection of efforts to isolate and impose sanctions against their government.

Not surprisingly, the Iranian leaders jubilantly proclaimed that the broad global participation vindicated them and represented a repudiation of US and Western efforts to deter them from becoming a nuclear power. All in all, it was a major PR victory for this evil regime and an indictment of the dismal state of the international community.

The willingness of so many countries to attend such a conference in Teheran at this time and unanimously endorse the Ayatollah’s nuclear policies, clearly demonstrates the abysmal failure of Obama’s initial policy of “engaging” with Iran and his subsequent decision to impose sanctions and isolate the rogue state.

This episode underlines the futility of Israel relying on the international community to resolve potential conflicts.

It also reaffirms the dysfunction of the United Nations, which the Obama Administration continues to appease.

Nothing epitomizes this more demonstratively than the prominent role Syria, Iran, Libya, Cuba, Saudi-Arabia and similar dictatorships have contributed towards formulating the policy of the so-called United Nations Human Rights Council. Ironically, both Syria and Sudan, whose leaders are recognized war criminals, notorious for brutally butchering their own people, are candidates for seats on this bogus organization’s council scheduled for election next month.

Ironically, the US is the principal financial donor to the UN – to the tune of a staggering $6 billion annually. It is highly unlikely that UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon would have dignified the Iranians with his presence, had the US threatened to review its funding to the UN budget if he proceeded to undermine efforts to isolate Iran for defying Security Council demands and repeatedly calling for the annihilation of a member state.

The United States and Western democracies must recognize that they will become utterly impotent if their global policies continue to be effectively subject to veto by international bodies dominated by an alliance of Islamic nations, dictatorships and tyrannies.

Democracies should unite and seek to create a world order which will strengthen freedom, encourage oppressed people to achieve self-determination and if required, be willing to employ military power to deter the barbarians at our gates. Failure to confront these problems now, threatens the long-term survival prospects for Western civilization.

In Europe, the motivation to resist antidemocratic forces has been substantially weakened by the immigration of large numbers of Muslims who have undermined the foundations of genuine multiculturalism by seeking to impose their way of life on indigenous communities. This has been aided and abetted by the postmodernists –– whose anarchical leftism and confused anti-colonialism have led them to allying themselves with terrorist organizations and apologists for the most rabid racist.

The message emerging for us in Israel is that we must retain our relationship with democratic countries, in particular the US, which despite the Obama administration’s appeasement of Muslim extremism, has not capitulated to Islamic pressures like the Europeans.

Ultimately, the bottom line is that we must not succumb to pressures from those seeking to deter us from taking steps to thwart threats to our survival. Nor should we be tempted to rely on undertakings from other, “friendly” nations. We have learned from bitter experience, that when the chips are down we must rely on ourselves. As Vice Prime Minister Moshe Ya’alon recently stated “the righteous work may be done by others, but we have to prepare as if no one else will do it for us”.

The writer’s website can be viewed at www.wordfromjerusalem.com.

He may be contacted at ileibler@netvision.net.il 

Gantz cautions Iran: IDF can hit any place, anytime

September 2, 2012

via Gantz cautions Iran: IDF can hit any place, an… JPost – Defense.

09/02/2012 20:18
IDF chief of staff says responds to threats to “wipe Israel off the map,” says IDF ready for any scenario; Barak: Map of Middle East changing before our eyes, Israel must be prepared.

Gantz and Barak

Photo: Reuters

The IDF is ready to reach any enemy target at any time, Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Benny Gantz said Sunday, during an awards ceremony for reserve army units.

“Recently, we’ve heard threats from near and far enemies to ‘wipe out’ the State of Israel from the map of the Middle East. In all these, I can say that the IDF is ready for any scenario. We will reach any place, anytime, and defend this nation,” Gantz said, speaking at the residence of President Shimon Peres.

In recent weeks, Iranian leaders, from Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khameni to military officials, have stepped up threats to annihilate Israel. Khameni described Israel as a “cancerous tumor” and “the biggest problem confronting Muslim countries today.” The threats coincided with a message from Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah, who threatened to kill tens of thousands of Israeli civilians in a future confrontation by striking strategic sites with rockets.

The threats came as tensions rose over Iran’s ongoing nuclear program.

Defense Minister Ehud Barak also spoke at Sunday’s award, saying, “In the past two years, the map of the region is changing before eyes. Nations went out into the streets and toppled totalitarian states. Reality has given birth to unexpected results, more than once.”

Barak added that Israel resides in an unstable Middle East, and is surrounded by a “stormy sea, big parts of which refuse to accept it as a member of the nations with equal rights.” He said that the “reality in which we live has presented us with heavy challenges, the need to fully use utilize resources, [and] to prepare for all developments that may come from near or from afar.”

US CIA chief Petraeus arrives Monday to cool Israeli ire

September 2, 2012

US CIA chief Petraeus arrives Monday to cool Israeli ire.

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report September 2, 2012, 7:27 PM (GMT+02:00)

 

CIA Chief David Petraeus to Turkey and Israel
CIA Chief David Petraeus to Turkey and Israel

President Barack Obama is sending CIA Director David Petraeus to Israel in a hurry Monday, Sept. 3, in an attempt to quench the flames of discord between Israel and his administration on the Iran issue. He will fly in from a visit to Ankara Sunday, where too he faces recriminations for US handling of the Syrian crisis.

Israel has a double grievance over Obama’s Iran policy: Not only does his administration spare Iran’s leaders any sense of military threat that might give them pause in their dash for a nuclear weapon, but US officials are actively preventing any Israel striking out in its own defense to dispel the dark shadow of a nuclear Iran.
Behind closed doors in Ankara Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan and President Abdullah Gul are preparing to vent their anger against the US administration for tying their hands against establishing safe havens in Syria for rebel operations against the Assad regime. The Turkish Air Force has been on standby for the last two months for this mission, along with the Saudi and UAE air forces. However, none are prepared to go forward without logistical backing from the US Air Force.

They blame Obama’s refusal to engage directly in the Syrian conflict for the escalating terrorist threats confronting Turkey from Assad’s open door to PKK (Kurdish Workers Party) bases in northern Syria and the Iraqi-Syrian-Turkish border triangle.  Turkey is also stuck with a swelling influx of Syrian refugees piling an unmanageable burden on its economy.
Israel does not expect anything useful to come out of the Petraeus visit – or even any alleviation of the bad feeling between Binyamin Netanyahu and Barack Obama. High-placed officials in Jerusalem were of the view that the CIA chief fits the US president’s bill at this time. His visit is a non-binding gesture of goodwill for Israel which does not require the White House or the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey to backtrack or apologize for his derogatory remarks about the IDF’s capacity for taking Iran on. Another advantage is that any words passing between the CIA chief and Israeli leaders may be classified.
His visit to Jerusalem will therefore not stem the ill will prevailing between Jerusalem and Washington.
All the same, Prime Minister Netanyahu chose his words carefully Sunday to avoid fingering the US directly when he urged the international community to get tougher against Iran, saying that without a “clear red line,” Tehran will not halt its nuclear program. He was addressing the weekly cabinet meeting in Jerusalem.

“I believe that the truth must be said, the international community [not the US] is not drawing a clear red line for Iran, and Iran does not see international determination to stop its nuclear program,” Netanyahu said.

“Until Iran sees this clear red line and this determination, it will not stop its advancement of the Iranian nuclear program. Iran must not have a nuclear weapon,” he declared.
Earlier Sunday, debkafile reported:  Slashed US military input shortens Israel’s notice of Iranian missile launch.

Netanyahu: Time for world to set ‘clear red lines’ for Iran

September 2, 2012

Netanyahu: Time for world to set … JPost – Diplomacy & Politics.

09/02/2012 11:48
PM says at cabinet meeting that sanctions hurting Iranian economy but not deterring Tehran’s nuclear advance; decries lack of protest at “anti-Semitic rants” of Iranian leadership during NAM conference.

Netanyahu at cabinet meeting

Photo: Pool/Eli Selman

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu called on the international community Sunday to set down a clear “red line” for the Iranians so Tehran feels the world’s determination to stop its nuclear march.

Netanyahu, speaking at the beginning of the weekly cabinet meeting, articulated publicly what he has been saying for weeks behind closed doors: that it is not enough for there to be open-ended diplomacy, but clear red lines need to set so the Iranians see that there will be direct consequences for their actions.

Referring to last week’s Non-Aligned Movement conference in Tehran, Netanyahu said that the representatives of 120 countries listened to the anti-Semitic rants of the Iranian leadership and “no one stood up, no one left the hall.”

This lack of protest was even worse in light of the recent International Atomic Energy Agency report that “confirms what I have been saying for a long time – the international sanctions are making things difficult for the Iranian economy, but are not delaying at all the Iranian nuclear program.”

“I think that the truth must be told,” Netanyahu continued. “The international community is not putting down a clear red line to Iran, and Iran is not seeing international determination to stop its nuclear program.”

Until the Iranians see a clear red line and this determination, he said, they will not stop moving their nuclear program forward.  “Iran cannot get a nuclear weapon,” he declared.

Turning to the economy and the steep rise in prices, Netanyahu pointed out the world was still in the midst of the worst economic crisis it has faced in the last 80 years.

“These difficulties are making things difficult for the citizens of all countries, especially developed countries, and also for Israelis,” he said. “We need to tighten our belt in order to preserve Israel’s economy, and that is not easy, and it presents difficulties for the citizens, and I know that”

Netanyahu said that alongside the difficulties, the government is taking action to ease the situation. He ticked off a number of steps, including free education for children from age three and free dental care until age 12.

“The most important thing,” he said, “is that we are protecting the places of employment for Israeli citizens.” To prove this point he referred to statistics released last week by the Central Bureau of Statistics placing the country’s unemployment rate at 6.5%, lower than the unemployment level in the US, Europe and most developed nations  in the world.

Slashed US military input shortens Israel’s notice of Iranian missile launch

September 2, 2012

Slashed US military input shortens Israel’s notice of Iranian missile launch.

DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis September 2, 2012, 9:28 AM (GMT+02:00)

 

US and Israeli defense chiefs far apart.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak are silent in the face of the avalanche of bad news coming in from official Washington.
The Patriot anti-missile systems scheduled for what was to have been the biggest joint US-Israel anti-missile drill in October will remain packed in tarpaulin because they come without crews; even one – much less two – Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense warships may not be dispatched to Israeli waters; and the number of US servicemen sent over for the annual exercise is to be cut by more than two-thirds to 1,500.
This downgrade of US participation in an annual war exercise with Israel is more than striking. It adds up to the dismemberment by the Obama administration of the entire intricate strategy US and Israel have built over years for the deterrence – and interception if need be – of any Iranian/Hizballah/Syrian missile assault on Israel.
The inferences are cruel: The US defense or second-strike elements – which had been slotted into place by the military strategists of the two armies – will not be there. Their absence slashes the time available for Israel’s alarm-and-interception systems to spring into action – the moment the engines of Iranian ballistic missiles heading its way are fired – right down from the originally estimated 14 minutes’ notice.
It also means that Barak’s estimate of 500 dead in the worst case of a war with Iran must go by the board.
Netanyahu and Barak have clearly been rendered speechless by the high-powered US military, diplomatic and personal onslaught on Israel and its government. Even the smooth-tongued Tzahi Hanegbi, just returned to the Likud fold, found no easy way of whitewashing the debacle. “Defense relations with the US are deeper than ever before,” he said unconvincingly in a radio interview Sunday morning, Sept. 2.
Hanegbi is in Netanyahu’s confidence. His words may signify the prime minister’s decision to bow under the onrush of Hurricane Obama. There is of course another way: He could demand a retraction from the White House of the damaging comments by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey denigrating Israel’s military ability to seriously damage Iran’s nuclear program and his statement: “I don’t want to be complicit if they (Israel) choose to do it.”

This was a devastating detraction by America’s top soldier, who a week ago boasted he spoke regularly to Israel’s Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz, not only of Israel’s military deterrent ability but of the morality of its acting to preempt or delay a nuclear Iran.
(Collins dictionary: complicit: The fact of being an accomplice especially in a criminal act.”)
Yet US commander-in-chief, President Barack Obama and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta have chosen to let Dempsey’s words stand. The unavoidable inference is that they are complicit with Dempsey’s sentiments.
For a similarly brutal assault, the late prime minister, Mehahem Begin, reproved US Ambassador Samuel Lewis by retorting, “We are not a banana republic!” He sent his cabinet secretary Arieh Naor to recite his words in Hebrew and English to make sure they were fully understood in Washington.
By failing to follow his example, Netanyahu and Barak are bowing their heads before the Obama administration, a grave strategic error at the very moment when Israel needs to put its foot down, and one which augurs ill for the efficacy of their handling of the Iranian peril rising up just around the corner.

Official: Obama will make Bibi pay after elections .

September 2, 2012

Official: Obama will make Bibi pay after elections – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Israeli security officials say Pentagon’s decision to reduce number of US troops it will send to joint drill with Israel not related to growing tensions with Israel; others claim Washington saying ‘you will not drag us into Iran war’

Attila Somfalvi

Published: 09.02.12, 00:39 / Israel News
Israeli security officials on Saturday tried to downplay the Pentagon’s decision to significantly scale back its participation in a joint military exercise with Israel next month, but some government officials said the decision came as a response to the growing tensions between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu‘s office and the Obama administration.

“This is the Obama administration’s response to the dinner party Netanyahu held in (Mitt) Romney‘s honor,” a senior member of the political-security cabinet told Ynet, while another official said the Pentagon’s decision “isn’t boosting deterrence and is not making the Iranians sweat.
סוללות פטריוט בתרגיל הקודם ב-2009 (צילום: EPA)

Patriot battery during previous drill in 2009 (Photo: EPA)

“Regardless of the exercise, the relations between Israel and the US have soured,” another minister said, while another added cynically that “our relationship has never been better.

“The US elections are in two months, and there is no doubt that President Barack Obama, if he is reelected, will make Netanyahu pay for his behavior,” said the security cabinet member. “It will not pass quietly.”.

Other officials in Jerusalem said Washington is trying to send a message that Israel will not drag it into war, certainly not before the elections. The Americans were enraged by Israel’s repeated threats to launch a solo military attack on Iran’s nuclear sites, and top US General Martin Dempsey’s recent statement that he does not “want to be complicit” if Israel chooses to attack was carefully worded.

Officials said that while Jerusalem has received the message, the Americans’ conduct is leading Iran to believe that it is safe at least until the US elections.

“This is why the Iranians are issuing threatening statements against the US,” one official argued. “Washington’s hesitant policy is making the Iranians feel freer to move ahead with the nuclear program. This is not how you create deterrence to avoid a military operation.”

The joint military drill is scheduled to begin in September and conclude in mid-November. “Israel has no idea why the Americans decided to reduce the number of troops it will send to the drill,” a security official said. “The ties between the US and Israeli armies are strong, and we would have known if the reduction had something to do with any tensions between Jerusalemand Washington.”

Another security official also rejected the notion that the Pentagon’s decision to scale back its participation in the military exercise was meant as a message to Israel: “There are various reasons for decision, but they have nothing to do with the mounting tensions between Jerusalem and Washington. The drill will still be the largest these armies have ever conducted.”

According to Time Magazine, the US slashed the number of American troops who were slated to take part in the drill by more than 60%. Instead of the approximately 5,000 troops originally assigned to “Austere Challenge 12,” as the exercise is dubbed, the Pentagon will send only 1,500 servicemen and perhaps as few as 1,200.

The number and the potency of missile interception systems that were to be used in the maneuvers were also reduced. Patriot anti-missile systems will arrive in Israel as planned, the crews that can operate them will not. Instead of two Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense warships, only one will be deployed – and even that is uncertain, Time said, citing officials in both the US and Israeli militaries.