Archive for September 2012

German FM: Nuclear Iran would pose threat to entire region

September 9, 2012

German FM: Nuclear Iran would pos… JPost – Diplomacy & Politics.

 

By JPOST.COM STAFF

 

09/09/2012 15:31
Following meeting with Barak, Westerwelle emphasizes shared concerns over Iranian threat, says “a nuclear-armed Iran is not an option”; defense minister lauds security cooperation between the two countries.

Defense Minister Ehud Barak, German FM Guido Weste

German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle emphasized the concerns his country shared with Israel over Iran’s nuclear program, following a meeting with Defense Minister Ehud Barak on Sunday.

“A nuclear-armed Iran would not only pose a threat to Israel but to the stability of the entire region. A nuclear-armed Iran is not an option,” he said.

He said that Germany would maintain sanctions and diplomatic pressure on Iran, adding that there was still room for diplomacy. “We urgently call on Iran to enter into substantial negotiations,” he said.

“We greatly appreciate the German government’s views on Iran,” Barak said during the meeting, calling Germany a “leading partner” in the international effort to use diplomacy and sanctions to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

Barak also lauded the close security cooperation between the two countries, specifically mentioning the signed contract for a sixth submarine.

He further thanked Germany for for its contribution in strengthening the Palestinian Authority, the West Bank and Gaza and in promoting peace and normalization.

“Israel’s relationship with Germany is long-standing and based on a basic belief in democracy, value and memory, and we greatly appreciate your friendship,” Barak told Westerwelle.

Britain joins campaign to label Hezbollah a terrorist organization

September 9, 2012

Israel Hayom | Britain joins campaign to label Hezbollah a terrorist organization.

British Foreign Secretary William Hague says the EU should add Hezbollah to its list of terrorist groups in light of the July 18 terrorist attack in Burgas, Bulgaria • The Netherlands also joins the campaign.

Eli Leon
British Foreign Secretary William Hague (right), with his EU counterparts. [Archive]

|

Photo credit: AP

Did the bluff succeed?

September 9, 2012

Israel Hayom | Did the bluff succeed?.

Dan Margalit

Finally, the seeds that Israel has sewn in the Iranian groves are bearing fruit. In a surprising article in the highly regarded newspaper The Washington Post on Saturday, the editorial staff called on U.S. President Barack Obama to back up his promise to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons by complying with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s request and drawing a red line. Basically, the U.S. president was urged to announce, in advance, what nuclear threshold Iran would have to cross before the U.S. would launch a military offensive, the same way Washington responded when Iran threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz.

The New York Times said the same thing a few days earlier, and if Obama does make such a declaration — as close as possible to the November election, to maximize the benefit — then Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak’s game of diplomatic poker will have achieved one of its main objectives.

But before we jump for joy, we should take a closer look at the facts: Obama has not yet made any declaration, and the harbingers of spring are just American newspaper editorials and a toning down of Netanyahu’s and Barak’s remarks. Netanyahu is aiming for a diplomatic achievement in the form of a stated U.S. commitment, and Barak is alluding to impressive American preparation, involving top-secret operational details. These two things are not contradictory, but there is a very clear difference in emphasis between the two.

There is still no guarantee that the U.S. will draw clear diplomatic or military red lines, but if Israel can live with this level of commitment, it will become clear that Netanyahu and Barak did in fact intend to do no more than play a hand of diplomatic poker. If so, that is why they were so publicly opposed to Israeli officials making declarations about Israel attacking Iran — these declarations were needlessly encumbering, and potentially undermining, Israel’s ability to achieve its poker objective. Those who directly or indirectly leaked information or exposed Israeli secrets to the world will feel embarrassed for having caused harm without meaning to.

This weekend was characterized by several turns of events. The enlightened world tried to step up sanctions against Iran. Netanyahu was right to exclaim that though the sanctions were significantly impacting Iran’s economy they were failing to derail the ayatollah regime’s nuclear aspirations. But still, the prime minister cannot be certain that the sanctions won’t soon begin to have the desired effect. In maneuvers such as this, the breaking point is never foreseeable. It is impossible for anyone to know when, if at all, the breaking point will come, before it happens.

If Obama commits to a clear red line he will become very active in the sanctions front, so as to avoid having to follow through on his military threat. Only Russia was, and still remains, an obstacle. Europe is also hesitant to adopt Israel’s stance, and things are moving forward slowly. European governments are suspicious of Israel’s innocence on the Palestinian issue and project this suspicion onto the Iranian issue.

Canada’s decision to close its embassy in Tehran last week was extremely important, but also raises sad thoughts. It was the right decision, worthy of encouragement and praise, and one should hope that President Shimon Peres and Netanyahu were not the only world leaders to congratulate Canada for the move. The sad part is that such a natural move has taken so long to happen, and that Canada is the solo pioneer marching ahead of the group, in perfect solitude for now. The entire world should have already done exactly what Canada has done. And still, thank you, Canada.

Canada’s moral leadership

September 9, 2012

Israel Hayom | Canada’s moral leadership.

President Shimon Peres was right to laud Canada as a “moral role model” for the nations of the world. Commenting on Ottawa’s Friday decision to cut diplomatic relations with Iran, Peres said, “Canada has proven once again that morals come before pragmatism, (and that) policy must reflect principles and values … I thank Canada for taking a stance based on the highest morals and hope that other nations will see Canada as a moral role model. The diplomatic isolation of Iran is an important step for the security and stability of the entire world.”

The Canadian decision was not surprising for those who have followed the brave new path in global affairs carved out by Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Foreign Minister John Baird. Under their leadership, Canada has become arguably the most pro-Israel country in the world. They have led a conceptual revolution in how Canadians think about the world, and that includes a deep understanding of and appreciation for Israel’s security dilemmas.

From being the first world leader to cut off funds to the Palestinian Authority in 2006 when it was taken over by Hamas, to speaking out against growing global anti-Semitism, Harper has embraced Israel as no Canadian leader did before him. He blamed Hezbollah for the war and civilian deaths in Lebanon during the summer war of 2006, and rejected widespread calls for an immediate ceasefire. He led the boycott of the Durban II conference. He blocked a G-8 statement that would have called for a return to Israel’s 1967 borders, despite pressure from U.S. President BarackObama and the Europeans.

Harper, Baird and colleagues also have consistently stood up for Israel, often as a lone voice, in the G-20, the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the U.N. General Assembly. Over the three years that it sat on the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva, Canada stood alone in defense of Israel — eight times casting the only “no” vote against unfair condemnations of Israel. Last fall, Canada changed its votes in favor of Israel on seven resolutions at the U.N., and signed new agreements for military, defense and intelligence cooperation with Israel.

Defence Minister Peter MacKay told then Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi, during a 2011 visit to the Middle East, that “a threat to Israel is a threat to Canada.” McKay’s cabinet colleague Peter Kent stated that “an attack on Israel would be considered an attack on Canada.”

Speaking to the Herzliya Conference earlier this year, John Baird said plainly that “Israel has no greater friend in the world than Canada. You have no better friend in the world than Canada, no stronger ally who will stand up for you. We won’t stand behind you; we will stand shoulder to shoulder with Israel. Canada will not remain silent while the Jewish state is attacked for defending its territory or people.”

Ottawa stands with Israel, he said, because it was a Canadian tradition “to stand for what is principled and just, regardless of whether it is popular, convenient or expedient,” and because Israel embodies values that Canada holds dear and respects. “Israel is a beacon of light in a region that craves freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law.”

Baird told the Israeli press in February that “My grandfather went to war in 1942 — the big struggle of his generation was fascism and then communism. The great struggle of my generation, of our generation, is terrorism. Too often Israel is on the front line of that struggle, and it is tremendously important that we take a principled stand and support our friend and ally.”

Harper and Baird also have explicitly adopted Natan Sharansky’s 3-D rubric for definition of the “new anti-Semitism.” They have slammed the “constant barrage of rhetorical demonization, double standards and delegitimization” of Israel. Baird: “Harnessing disparate anti-Semitic, anti-American and anti-Western ideologies, it targets the Jewish people by targeting the Jewish homeland, Israel, as the source of injustice and conflict in the world, and uses, perversely, the language of human rights to do so. We must be relentless in exposing this new anti-Semitism for what it is.”

After Canada lost its bid for a seat on the U.N. Security Council, Harper suggested that the country’s stalwart defense of Israel was a contributing factor. For the prime minister, however, it was a small price to pay. Admitting that there is a diplomatic price to be paid for such moral probity, Harper said that he remains undeterred.

“The easy thing to do,” he told the Inter-Parliamentary Coalition for Combating Anti-Semitism in Ottawa in 2010, “is simply to just get along and go along with this anti-Israeli rhetoric, to pretend it is just being even-handed, and to excuse oneself with the label of ‘honest broker’. [But] Canada will take a stand [in support of Israel], whatever the cost. Not just because it is the right thing to do, but because history shows us, and the ideology of the anti-Israeli mob tells us all too well, that those who threaten the existence of the Jewish people are, in the longer term, a threat to all of us.”

“As long as I am prime minister, whether it is at the U.N. or the Francophonie or anywhere else, Canada will take a stand, whatever the cost.”

Harper speaks often about the lessons of the Holocaust and refers to Israel in almost prophetic terms. “Remembering the Holocaust is not merely an act of historical recognition, but an undertaking,” Harper has said. “The same threats exist today … Memory requires a solemn responsibility to fight those threats.” He adds,“The persistence of the Jewish homeland is a sign of hope and a symbol of our faith in humanity’s future, in the power of good over evil.”

Israelis feel very much isolated in today’s world community, which often appears to be increasingly hypocritical, cynical and indifferent to Israel’s existential dilemmas. This is a world in which the president of Iran vows to erase Israel, tells the world that the Holocaust never happened, and is building a nuclear weapon. Yet Mahmoud Ahmadinejad receives applause when he speaks from the U.N. rostrum, gets unashamedly invited to speak at Columbia University, and basks in the glow of 120 world leaders including the U.N. Secretary General at a Non-Aligned conference in Tehran.

Canada’s bold words and actions give us Israelis hope that there are indeed many decent people, some of them in positions of power, who will not bow to demonization or to the Orwellian twisting of history and language that often pertains to Israel these days. And they will stand in defense of Israel.

The writer is director of the Israel office of the Center for Israel and Jewish Affairs, the central advocacy agency of the Canadian Jewish community.

Report: Possible EMP Strike on Iran?

September 9, 2012

Report: Possible EMP Strike on Iran?.

U.S. intelligence agencies recently reported growing concerns that Israel will conduct a strike on Iran using a high-altitude nuclear burst aimed at disrupting all electronics in the country.

The intelligence worries were triggered by recent publication of an article in the Israeli press suggesting the Jewish state should carry out an electromagnetic pulse, or EMP, attack.

U.S. officials said the article likely reflects official Israeli government thinking about a possible preemptive response to Iran’s expected emergence as a nuclear weapons state in the near future.

Asked about the EMP report, an Israeli government spokesman declined to comment. A U.S. intelligence community spokesman also declined comment.

A U.S. official said the article in question appeared Aug. 6 in the news outlet Israel National News. The article stated that an Israeli nuclear burst over Iran could “send Iran back to the Stone Age.”

It was the first time the issue of a nuclear EMP attack by Israel had appeared in a mainstream Israeli press outlet.

U.S. officials also suspect the article was written by someone in the Israeli government who favors such a strike. Another theory among analysts is that the Israeli government, at a minimum, encouraged publication of the article.

The American author of the Israeli article, Joe Tuzara, wrote that growing signs Iran is speeding up development of nuclear weapons should lead Tel Aviv to launch the preemptive EMP attack.

“For the most part, Israel’s dilemma is focused singly on the use of electromagnetic pulse (EMP) without informing the U.S.,” Tuzara stated.

The attack could be carried out using a nuclear warhead detonated after launch by one of Israel’s Jericho III missiles at high-altitude over north central Iran.

EMP affects computers and other electronics and would disrupt critical infrastructure that relies on electronics and electricity, such as communications, transportation, and other networks.

The burst would create “no blast or radiation effects on the ground,” the article stated.

“Coupled with cyber-attacks, Iranians would not know it happened except for a massive shutdown of the electric power grid, oil refineries, and a transportation gridlock,” the article said.

“Food supply would be exhausted and communication would be largely impossible, leading to economic collapse. Similarly, the uranium enrichment centrifuges in Fordo, Natanz, and widely scattered elsewhere, would freeze for decades.”

Around the same time the article was published, state-run media in Iran announced that Iran plans to take all key government ministries off the Internet in September to protect against cyber attacks.

The announcement followed several cyber attacks that disabled Iranian computer networks, including those controlling the nuclear program.

The Israeli EMP article mirrors the doomsday scenario contained in the 2009 novel “One Second After” by American writer William R. Forstchen. The book has been widely read in U.S. military and intelligence circles, and examines the aftermath of an EMP attack on an American town.

Peter Pry, a former CIA analyst and a leading U.S. specialist on EMP, said he doubts the allegations that Israel is planning an EMP strike.

“It is not based on any Israeli source, but is the result of the U.S. media recycling its own speculation,” Pry told the Free Beacon in an email.

Pry said he was present at a meeting with a U.S. journalist who first advocated the idea. The notion was later picked up and reported by other U.S. reporters.

Pry said the speculation “is creating a misimpression that there is some credible Israeli source behind it.”

“In fact, I have been to Israel, at the invitation of their government, to help convince officials that Israel should protect its electric grid from EMP,” said Pry, who now heads a group called EMPact America.

“I have been invited to return to continue this mission in October,” he said. “If Israel has such high confidence in the efficacy of an EMP attack, why do they need to be educated on the consequences to their own grid by me?”

Pry also said it is not clear an EMP attack would shut down the Iranian nuclear program since Iran’s centrifuges, which are being used to spin uranium gas into nuclear weapons fuel, are underground in bunkers protected from earth-penetrating weapons.

He also said the electromagnetic shockwave produced by an EMP blast could affect centrifuges, but the wave cannot penetrate too deeply into the earth.

“The EMP would certainly take down Iran’s national electric grid, and nuclear weapons programs do require vast amounts of electricity (less so when based on centrifuges),” Pry said. “But the underground facilities probably have emergency generators.”

“An EMP attack could conceivably stop Iran’s nuclear weapons program, not by destroying nuclear facilities, but by paralyzing the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and allowing the people to successfully revolt and achieve regime change,” Pry said.

Tuzara said his analysis of the prospect of a preemptive strike is based on five signs that Iran has reached what Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak has called a “zone of immunity.”

They include Iran’s plans to speed up uranium enrichment to 80 to 90 percent or weapons grade; along with indications that Iran has tested its ballistic missiles in an EMP mode with help from North Korea.

Other indicators include reports that Iran can further enrich its stocks of low-enriched uranium for weapons; and satellite photos that show recent fortification of underground nuclear facilities in Iran.

Last, the Iranians have begun loading fuel rods into the core of the Bushehr nuclear power plant reactor.

“In light of the latest developments, there is no question that Iran is now a de facto nuclear state—a ‘casus belli’ for Israeli military action,” Tuzara said.

U.S. intelligence analysts and military intelligence officials are on high alert for any indications Israel will conduct a strike on Iran that could lead to a large-scale regional conflict.

Some U.S. officials believe Israel could conduct some type of action against Iran in October, prior to the U.S. presidential election.

America’s closest ally in the Middle East might act without warning.

U.S. concerns over an Israeli attack were heightened by Ehud Barak, the Israeli defense minister, who said July 25 that any military strikes to set back Iran’s nuclear program would be costly, but that the loss of human life in a future Iranian nuclear attack on Israel would be far greater.

Iran has threatened counterattacks against Israel if it conducts a strike.

Iranian legislator Avaz Heidarpour was quoted in state-run Fars News Agency that if Israel attacks Iran, Iran could not guarantee that even one single Zionist living in the occupied Palestinian territories will survive.

“We have no doubt that the Zionists’ claims about attacking Iran are nothing but psychological warfare,” he said.

‘Israel could send Iran back to Stone Age’

September 9, 2012

‘Israel could send Iran back to Stone Age’ – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Sunday Times quotes defense experts as saying that Jewish state could cripple Islamic Republic’s power grid with electromagnetic pulses

Ynet

Published: 09.09.12, 08:27 / Israel News

British newspaper Sunday Times has exposed one of the “surprises” the Israel Defense Forces has in store in case of a military strike in Iran.

According to the Sunday morning report, the Jewish state could cripple the Islamic Republic’s power grid with electromagnetic pulses as part of a concerted attack to halt Iran’s military nuclear program, which could “send Iran back to the Stone Age.”

Related stories:

The report, by Uzi Mahnaimi, claims that the possible use of such a weapon has been raised in several quarters as a debate rages among Israel’s politicians about whether a swift strike should be launched against Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Bill Gertz, a veteran American defense specialist, is quoted as saying that US intelligence agencies have reported “growing concerns that Israel will conduct a strike on Iran using a high-altitude nuclear burst aimed at disrupting all electronics in the country.”

The technology behind EMP, which is regarded as non-lethal, has been known for decades, the Sunday Times reports.

An electromagnetic pulse is an intense burst of gamma energy that reacts with the Earth’s magnetic field to produce a powerful current. This sets off a shockwave with the potential to “fry” electronic devices and circuits.

Although the potential of EMP was first noted as a side effect of high-altitude nuclear tests in the 1950s and 1960s, the report says, a pulse can also be produced by non-nuclear means such as a microwave generator.

Such a pulse could knock out the power grid and communications for transport, financial and emergency services.

The newspaper quotes Uzi Rubin, who helped develop Israel’s anti-missile defense shield, as saying that “the use of a nuclear device even for non-lethal use such as EMP is out of the question. There are methods to operate EMP from the ground.”

Iran: Hezbollah will retaliate in case of Israeli strike

September 8, 2012

Iran: Hezbollah will retaliate in case of Israeli strike – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Ayatollah Khamenei’s top military advisor warns that Israeli strike on Tehran’s nuclear facilities will trigger massive reaction by its Lebanon-based proxy

Dudi Cohen, Roi Kais

Published: 09.08.12, 17:41 / Israel News

Major-General Yahya Rahim Safavi, who serves as the top military advisor for Iran’s supreme leader the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, warned Saturday that if Israel were to attack his country’s nuclear facilities, Hezbollah will retaliate.

Iran’s Maher news agency quoted Safavi as saying that, “If the Zionist regime acts against us one of these days, resistance groups, and mainly Hezbollah, will respond and act against it with great ease.”

“Defending the Palestinian people is within the scope of our strategic defense interests and both Lebanon and Syria fall under our strategic maneuvering zone,” he added.

Also on Saturday, Iranian Chief of Staff General Hassan Firouzabadi commented  on the West’s attempts to intervene in the Syrian crisis, saying that the West was “sure to fail in that arena.”

According to Firouzabadi, “Syria will surely become a source of defeat and scandal for the United States and the West, as they race to save the Zionist regime.”

The Iranian general further claimed that the recent series of al-Qaeda terror attacks in Syria were part of the West’s conspiracy against Muslims.

“The international community should know that al-Qaeda and the rest of the (Islamic) radicals have nothing to do with Shiites and Sunnis and that the result of this campaign of terror… will only make things more complicated for the Europeans and the Americans,” he told Iran’s Press TV.

Middle East experts believe that the Iranians are exacerbating their tone vis-à-vis the West in regards to Syria, for fear that their ally’s days are numbered.

Should the Assad regime collapse, the radical axis of Iran-Syria-Hezbollah is likely to suffer a serious blow.

Official says Hezbollah will retaliate if Israel attacks Iran: report

September 8, 2012

THE DAILY STAR :: News :: Politics :: Official says Hezbollah will retaliate if Israel attacks Iran: report.

BEIRUT: Hezbollah will retaliate against Israel if the Jewish state launches any steps against the Islamic Republic, Iran’s Mehr agency quoted Saturday a senior military aide to Iran’s supreme leader as saying.

“If the Zionist entity carried out any steps against us, resistance groups, particularly Hezbollah in Lebanon, given their central role in our defensive strategy, will respond against this entity,” the semi-official news agency quoted Maj. Gen. Yahia Safawi as saying.

“The defense of the Palestinian people comes within the framework of our defensive strategy and Lebanon and Syria also constitute the core of our defensive strategy,” Safavi, an aide to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, added, the agency said.

In June Safavi was quoted by AFP as saying: “Hezbollah has thousands of missiles … Hassan Nasrallah is a soldier of the supreme leader … All places in the Zionist entity are within missile range.”

Safavi was until 2007 the commander in chief of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, the force that protects Iran’s Islamic system of governance.

In a face-to-face interview with Almayadeen television last week, Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah said a possible Israeli strike on Iran would invite a strong retaliation from the Islamic Republic, but he played down the possibility such strike would take place, adding that Israeli officials were divided on the issue.

Chemical threat is back. Hizballah, Israel close to clash

September 8, 2012

Chemical threat is back. Hizballah, Israel close to clash.

DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis September 8, 2012, 12:16 PM (GMT+02:00)

 

Syrian CB weapons

The first US-Turkish backed steps for creating safe havens in Syria and possible strategic bombardment of the Syrian army have brought the Middle East close to two dangerous junctures: The Syrian army’s use of chemical weapons, and an outbreak of hostilities between Hizballah and Israel, debkafile’s military sources report.  The creeping Western involvement in the Syrian conflict was not previously acknowledged and the Lebanese Shiite Hizballah rarely figured publicly as a fighting prop of the Assad regime.
That is until the dam burst Friday and Saturday, Sept 7-8.
The United States then admitted that US officials and intelligence agents were training and aiding Syrian rebels from positions on the Turkish border – and therefore directly intervening in their operations.
This admission came on the heels of the debkafile disclosure of Sept. 6 that Turkish officers backed by US agents had taken command of two Syrian rebel brigades.
Britain and France came next to report they were sending aid directly to the Syrian opposition, a more cautious admission than the American reference to officials and agents, but clearly on the same track, which adds up to their direct intervention in Syria for the creation of safe havens.
French and British foreign ministers attending a European Union meeting in Cyprus called Friday night for sanctions against Hizballah, meaning that mounting Western pressure on Assad has been extended to his Lebanese ally.
But the big event thus portended is still to come.
It will now be up to the Syrian rebels, backed and steered by a US-led Arab-Western-European-Turkish coalition, to fight for the safe haven, purge it of forces and militias loyal to Assad and expand it for control of large tracts of territory in eastern and western Syria.
Despite fairly large-scale defections, the bulk of the Syrian army still maintains its allegiance to the Syrian ruler and doesn’t appear ready to turn against him. The rebels therefore face a long, arduous and hazardous haul before they can secure a substantial safe haven – unless it can be shortened by a step now under consideration in Washington, London, Paris, Ankara and at least two Arab capitals: aerial bombardment of the Syrian army’s toughest backbone, the 9th Division commanded by the Syrian ruler’s brother, Gen. Maher Assad. .
The same treatment could be meted out to smash Hizballah bases and strategic centers.
The thinking in some circles in Washington is that Russia’s disengagement from its support of the Assad regime and cutoff of essential weapons, have opened the way to severing the military bonds tying Assad, Hizballah and Tehran together. As long as those bonds are viable, it will be that much harder to bring Assad to heel and subjugate his armed forces.
The revelation by British military sources Friday, Sept. 7 that 150 elite officers and troops of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards had flown into Syria was intended as a warning to Tehran that the time had come to pull its hand  out of the Syrian fire.
This rush of events may bring closer to reality the action feared most by Western powers, Israel, Turkey and Jordan that, as his enemies close in, Assad will bring out his chemical weapons.
Consciousness of this approaching threat led Washington sources to disclose Friday that Syria’s nuclear arsenal was bigger and more widely scattered than suspected hitherto. It was also an admission that Washington was no longer fully apprised of the scale of this arsenal or its locations.
Last week, Israeli media were too preoccupied with the likelihood of war with Iran to notice that Israel and Hizxballah had moved up to the brink of a major clash. The war alert declared by Israel’s armed forces in mid-week had only partly eased by Saturday..

Canada’s Latest Iranian Caper – NYTimes.com

September 8, 2012

Canada’s Latest Iranian Caper – NYTimes.com.

John Baird, Canadian foreign minister, in Vladivostok on Friday.Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press, via Associated PressJohn Baird, Canadian foreign minister, in Vladivostok on Friday.

LONDON — Do the Canadians know something that we don’t?

The Ottowa government abruptly announced on Friday that it was closing its embassy in Iran after removing its remaining diplomats from the country for their own safety.

Now, don’t leap to conclusions.

The move is apparently unrelated to growing speculation that Israel might be about to bomb Iran’s nuclear installations, despite the instant reaction of one quoted Iranian community leader in Canada that it represented an “immediate sign of attack on Iran.”

When John Baird, the Canadian foreign minister, announced the embassy closure, in the margins of an Asia-Pacific conference in Russia, a spokesman quoted him as saying: “Unequivocally, we have no information about a military strike on Iran.”

So, why now?

Mr. Baird said the decision, coupled with an announcement expelling Iranian diplomats from Canada, reflected Ottowa’s view that Iran represented a significant threat to world peace.

As he explained, Tehran supported Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president; it refused to comply with United Nations resolutions on its nuclear program, and it regularly threatened Israel.

So — to repeat — why now?

Mr. Baird linked his fears for the safety of Canadian diplomats to an attack on the British embassy in Tehran — but that was 10 months ago. The Iranian authorities apologized at the time but the British pulled out anyway.

Canadian diplomats used to be more intrepid. In 1979, they risked life and limb to help six U.S. diplomats evade capture by hostage-taking militants in Tehran in what became known as the “Canadian caper.”

Kenneth Taylor, the former Canadian ambassador who masterminded the “caper”, said on Friday that he was surprised by the decision to withdraw diplomats from Iran and said there were ample reasons to maintain a Canadian presence. “I don’t see the rationale at this moment,” he said.

So, what is Ottowa up to?

1. Canada, in line with the strategy of its U.S. and European allies, is stepping up the diplomatic pressure on Tehran to bow to international demands on its nuclear program.

2. The Canadian government wants to send a signal to Russia, host of the Asia-Pacific summit in Vladivostok, that it opposes Moscow’s supportive stance towards Syria and Iran.

3. The Canadians know something that we don’t.

Permit me a moment of déjà vu.

In April 1980, British security services discovered by chance that the U.S. administration of President Jimmy Carter was planning a military operation in Iran to rescue American hostages held there.

The U.S. administration was furious about the leak and swore the British to secrecy. The British quietly removed their diplomats before the fatal day. The U.S. rescue mission went ahead. It was a disaster. But that’s another story…