Archive for January 14, 2013

US judge: PA can cover up link to 2002 terror attack

January 14, 2013

US judge: PA can cover up link to 2002 ter… JPost – Middle East.

By JPOST.COM STAFF
01/14/2013 16:59
Citing “privileged and protected” information, judge orders memo connecting PA to suicide bombing returned or destroyed.

Abbas talks against backdrop of Arafat image

Abbas talks against backdrop of Arafat image Photo: Courtesy

A US judge ruled that the Palestinian Authority has the right to cover up evidence of its connection to a 2002 suicide bombing in Karnei Shomron which killed three teenagers, The New York Post reported Monday.

According to the report, a two-page memo directly linking the PA to the terror attack was inadvertently handed over to lawyers suing the Palestinian government for $300 million on behalf of the parents of two American teens killed in the bombing. An Israeli teen also was killed in the attack.

The New York Post claimed that the document reveals a “close relationship” between the bomber, Sadeq Hafez, an operative for the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) terror group, and Raed Nazal, a captain in the Palestinian Authority security forces who allegedly planned the attack.

At the time, Nazal allegedly “was both a salaried officer in the PA’s security services and a leader of the PFLP cell” which carried out the bombing.

The NY Post further reported that the memo, written in April 2012 by Maj. Ziad Abu Hamid of the PA’s General Intelligence Service, details “at least six other critical facts” about the attack and “clearly establishes the [PA]’s material support and liability.”

Nevertheless, Washington, DC, federal Judge Richard Leon ordered the memo destroyed or returned to the PA, citing “privileged and protected” information.

The plaintiffs’ lawyers, David Schoen and Robert Tolchin, denounced the ruling, asserting that the PA’s “illegitimate cover-up efforts must not be permitted with impunity.” Otherwise, they claimed, “this critically important evidence of murder will likely be lost forever.

“It would also deprive Congress of the kind of evidence it must have to evaluate whether to continue funding [the PA] only to see the money go to support and reward terrorism against Americans.”

Lawyers for the Palestinian Authority did not return a request for comment.

In court papers, however, they said the memo was mistakenly handed over in a Sept. 12 deposition. They said the memo “retains the protection of the privilege despite the inadvertent disclosure.”

‘Iran could reach key point for nuclear bomb by mid-2014’

January 14, 2013

‘Iran could reach key point for … JPost – Iranian Threat – News.

By REUTERS
01/14/2013 16:54
Group of US nonproliferation experts say America, allies should intensify sanctions, recommend Obama should clearly threaten military action, express concern Iran could enrich uranium without detection.

Interior of Bushehr nuclear plant

Interior of Bushehr nuclear plant Photo: REUTERS/Stringer Iran

WASHINGTON – Iran could produce enough weapon-grade uranium for one or more nuclear bombs by mid-2014, and the United States and its allies should intensify sanctions on Tehran before that point is reached, a report by a group of US nonproliferation experts said.

President Barack Obama should also clearly state that the United States will take military action to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, the report said.

The UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, has expressed concern that Iran’s nuclear program has a military dimension. Tehran, which says its nuclear program is for peaceful energy purposes, calls those allegations baseless.

The 154-page report, “US Nonproliferation Strategy for the Changing Middle East,” produced by five nonproliferation experts, was expected to be released on Monday.

“Based on the current trajectory of Iran’s nuclear program, we estimate that Iran could reach critical capability in mid-2014,” the report said.

It defined “critical capability” as the point when Iran would be able to produce enough weapon-grade uranium for one or more bombs without detection by the West.

By mid-2014, Iran would have enough time to build a secret uranium-enrichment site or significantly increase the number of centrifuges for its nuclear program, said David Albright, one of the project’s co-chairs and president of the Institute for Science and International Security.

“We don’t think there is any secret enrichment plant making significant secret uranium enrichment right now,” he told Reuters. But there is “real worry” that Iran would build such a plant, he said.

The report recommends that the United States and its allies intensify sanctions pressure on Iran prior to that point because once Tehran acquires enough weapon-grade enriched uranium it would be “far more difficult to stop the program militarily.”

International embargo

The report recommends that the US government should announce its intention to use sanctions to impose a “de facto international embargo on all investments in, and trade with, Iran” if Tehran does not comply with UN Security Council resolutions.

It also recommends sending a “crystal clear” message to Iran’s leaders that US military action would prevent them from succeeding in the pursuit of a nuclear weapon.

“The president should explicitly declare that he will use military force to destroy Iran’s nuclear program if Iran takes additional decisive steps toward producing a bomb,” the report said.

On the civil war in Syria, the report said that the US government should emphasize to the opposition trying to oust President Bashar Assad that once it comes into power, it will have to work with the international community to destroy Assad’s chemical weapons stockpile.

Failure to do so would lead to sanctions and other measures at a time when a new government would need external assistance to consolidate control and develop the economy, the report said.

It also recommended stressing to the Assad government that it should destroy the chemical weapons rather than use them and face prosecution or have them fall into the hands of its opposition.

In addition to Albright, the other project co-chairs were Mark Dubowitz, executive director of The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies; Orde Kittrie, law professor at the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law; Leonard Spector, deputy director of the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies; and Michael Yaffe of the Near East, South Asia Center for Strategic Studies at the National Defense University. They were not representing their institutions in this project.

Reports: Syria ordered to attack Israel if Assad falls

January 14, 2013

israel today | Israel News | Reports: Syria ordered to attack Israel if Assad falls – israel today | Israel News.

( Thanks to Blessmaster…. JW )

Monday, January 14, 2013 |  Israel Today Staff

Embattled Syrian dictator Bashar Assad has ordered his military chiefs to launch ballistic missiles at Israel if he is killed by rebel forces, according to sources in Damascus cited by Israeli media this week.

The online newspaper Inyan Merkazi reported that Assad met with his top generals recently to express concerns that he could be taken out by advanced American missiles recently provided to rebel forces, or by a violent mob similar to the one that violently murdered former Libyan dictator Muamar Gaddafi.

Should either of those scenarios become reality, Assad reportedly told the generals to unleash Syria’s considerable missile arsenal on Israel and Egypt.

The reason for attacking Israel is obvious. Syria is officially in a state of war with Israel and hosts numerous terror groups dedicated to the Jewish state’s demise. Even with all the regional hostility toward him, Assad would secure a positive legacy by making his final act the destruction of Israeli cities.

Assad is angry at Egypt because of the new Muslim Brotherhood-controlled government’s support for Syrian rebel groups, many of which are fellow Islamists.

Last year, when the Syrian rebellion was first heating up, Assad warned that if his rule were truly threatened, he would ignite the powder keg that is the Middle East. That threat remains a very real concern.

Russia says removing Assad from power is ‘impossible’

January 14, 2013

Russia says removing Assad from power is ‘impossible’.

Sergei Lavrov conceded that a rare speech Assad delivered on Jan. 6 laying out his own vision for a peace settlement probably did not go far enough and would not appease the armed opposition. (AFP)

Sergei Lavrov conceded that a rare speech Assad delivered on Jan. 6 laying out his own vision for a peace settlement probably did not go far enough and would not appease the armed opposition. (AFP)

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s removal from power was not a part of past international agreements on the crisis and impossible to implement.

“This is a precondition that is not contained in the Geneva communiqué (agreed by world powers in June) and which is impossible to implement because it does not depend on anyone,” news agencies quoted Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov as saying.

Lavrov conceded that a rare speech Assad delivered on Jan. 6 laying out his own vision for a peace settlement probably did not go far enough and would not appease the armed opposition.

But he also urged Assad’s enemies to come out with a counterproposal that could get serious peace talks started between the two sides for the first time.

“President Assad came out with initiatives aimed at inviting all opposition members to dialogue. Yes, these initiatives probably do not go far enough. Probably they will not seem serious to some, but they are proposals,” the Interfax news agency quoted Lavrov as saying.

“If I were in the opposition’s shoes, I would come up with my ideas in response on how to establish a dialogue.”

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon voiced disappointment over Assad’s speech a week ago that was also dismissed by the United States. Syrian rebels described it as a renewed declaration of war.

Russia which has shielded Damascus from more international pressure to end the bloodshed – setting Moscow at odds with the West and most Arab states – said Assad’s ideas should be taken into account.

Lavrov also reiterated Moscow’s long-standing position that the Syrian opposition’s demand for Assad to quit could not be a precondition for peace talks to end the 21-month conflict that killed at least 60,000 people.

Hagel Could Change the Strategic Calculus for Israel and Iran « Commentary Magazine

January 14, 2013

Hagel Could Change the Strategic Calculus for Israel and Iran « Commentary Magazine.

In Chuck Hagel, President Obama is appointing a vociferous and public opponent of any military strike to stop the Iranian nuclear program–whether by the U.S. or Israel. For instance in 2006 he said, “I would say that a military strike against Iran, a military option, is not a viable, feasible, responsible option. I believe a political settlement will be the answer. Not a military settlement.” Just last year he said: “There will be a lot of killing. These things start and you can’t control. They escalate. They always do and they always will.”

Contrary to what he said, a strike on Iran is indeed a “feasible” option (it could be carried out successfully either by the U.S. Air Force and Navy or by the Israeli Air Force), but in one sense he is right–both the U.S. and Israel need to think carefully about all the ramifications of a military strike on Iran are and act only if there is no chance of stopping the Iranian nuclear program by peaceful means. But here’s the problem: The only way to stop the Iranian program by peaceful means is to act as if you’re ready to go to war. Only then is there any chance of the mullahs giving up their nuclear-bomb project. This is in many ways similar to the paradoxical logic of deterrence during the Cold War–only by showing an absolute willingness and ability to wage nuclear wage could the U.S. prevent a nuclear war from breaking out.

But if Hagel is confirmed as secretary of defense, this will be a signal to the entire region that the U.S. is not serious about doing whatever it takes to stop an Iranian nuke, thereby making war more likely by forcing Israel into a unilateral strike.

That signal is already being sent. Witness, for example, this Al Arabiya article: “Hagel to rein in Israel on Iran strike: commentators.” That very perception will not only embolden the mullahs to avoid serious negotiations; it could also force Israel to act on its own.

Both Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak are known to view Iran as an existential threat to the Jewish state and they have made clear many times their willingness to attack the Iranian program to prevent its completion. This is not a bluff on their part. They have not acted, however, in part because they could not convince the rest of the security cabinet and Israel’s security chiefs–the heads of the armed forces and the intelligence agencies–that there was no option but to launch a unilateral strike. Skeptics of an attack on Iran within the Israeli security establishment have argued that Israel should exhaust every remedy and act only in concert with the U.S. They have buttressed their position by pointing to all of the tough sanctions the U.S. and its allies were imposing on Iran and by citing the tough statements President Obama has made. For instance, in the third presidential debate last fall, Obama said: “As long as I’m president of the United States Iran will not get a nuclear weapon.”

But, whatever Obama’s publicly stated views, Hagel has made clear that he views bombing Iran as a bigger threat than Iran getting the bomb. If he takes office, that will send a very dangerous signal that the U.S. is not serious about doing whatever it takes to stop the Iranian nuclear program. At that point the balance of opinion within the Israeli security establishment could very well shift in favor of a unilateral strike. And if a strike were to occur, Iran could very well retaliate not only against Israel but also against U.S. forces in the region and our Arab allies. In other words, if the Senate confirms Hagel, absent a convincing transformation in his views, it would be making more likely precisely the war that he (and everyone else) would like to avoid.

Iran spying on Israel from Syria, says Pentagon

January 14, 2013

Iran spying on Israel from Syria, says Pentagon | The Times of Israel.

Signals intelligence stations, including one in the Golan, are meant to supply information to Hezbollah

January 14, 2013, 4:07 am 2
UN peacekeepers monitor the Syrian side of the Israeli-Syrian border from an army post at Mount Bental in the Golan Heights last July (photo credit: Tsafrir Abayov/Flash90)

UN peacekeepers monitor the Syrian side of the Israeli-Syrian border from an army post at Mount Bental in the Golan Heights last July (photo credit: Tsafrir Abayov/Flash90)

Iran has been spying on Israel for years, with the help of its allies in Syria, according to a report published by the Pentagon and reported on Sunday by the World Tribune.

Signals intelligence stations are reportedly being set up by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) throughout the Middle East, and the US believes they are meant to supply information on Israel to the Lebanese-based terrorist group Hezbollah.

One of the SIGINT stations is located in the Syrian part of the Golan Heights, according to the Pentagon.

The report, entitled “Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence and Security: A Profile,” was authored by the US Department of Defense with the help of Congress. It stated that “two Iranian-Syrian [signals intelligence] stations funded by the IRGC reportedly have been active since 2006, one in the Al Jazirah region in northern Syria and the other on the Golan Heights.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government has been publicly contemplating a strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities for months, often appearing critical of the US administration for not setting a definitive “red line” for Tehran.

Iran, for its part, has consistently maintained that its nuclear program has no military component.

In recent weeks, news of US President Barack Obama’s nomination of former senator Chuck Hagel to the post of Defense Secretary garnered opposition from those who view Hagel as dovish on the issue of Iran.

The former senator has previously criticized the discussion of a military strike by either Israel or the US on the Islamic Republic, but appeared to moderate his views ahead of confirmation hearings in the US Senate.

Republicans, particularly, are expected to have some tough questions for Hagel at those hearings, with South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham declaring earlier this month that Hagel would be ”the most antagonistic secretary of defense towards the state of Israel in our nation’s history.”

Former secretary of state Colin Powell defended Obama’s nomination of the former senator, pushing back on Sunday against those who have criticized Hagel on Iran and Israel.

“There are people who are very supportive of the state of Israel,” Powell said on NBC’s Meet the Press. “I’m very supportive of the state of Israel. So is Senator Hagel, and you’ll see that in the confirmation hearings, but it doesn’t mean you have to agree with every single position that the Israeli government takes.”