Archive for March 17, 2013

Syrian rebels seize security compound near Golan Heights

March 17, 2013

Syrian rebels seize security compound near Golan Heights | JPost | Israel News.

By REUTERS
03/17/2013 17:42
Military intelligence compound, 8 km from the Syrian-Israeli border, falls into rebel hands after five-day siege; rebel source says compound was used by Assad to torture rebels.

Syria-Israel border

Syria-Israel border Photo: Nir Elias/Reuters

AMMAN – Syrian rebels on Sunday seized a Syrian military intelligence compound in the southern Hauran Plain near the Golan Heights, rebel commanders said.

The frontier, quiet since Israel and Syria agreed on a US-brokered ceasefire in 1974, has turned volatile in recent weeks, after opposition brigades stepped up attacks against army and intelligence compounds dotting the agricultural plain stretching from the border with Jordan to the Damascus outskirts.

The compound near the Yarmouk River in the town of Shagara, 8 km (5 miles) from a ceasefire line with Israel, fell after a five-day siege, the sources said.

“We have completely taken over this security compound this morning. It’s a command center for the shabbiha (pro-Assad militia). They retreated after strong blows dealt to them during a five day siege,” said Abu Iyas al-Haurani, a member of the Yarmouk Martyrs Brigade.

“Anyone who was arrested in the Yarmouk Valley was sent to this military intelligence headquarters to be tortured and it has a strategic importance. With its fall we have completed our liberation of the town of Shagara,” he added.

Another rebel commander said the aim of the attacks in Western Hauran is to open a new front in the fight against President Bashar Assad that would stretch troops deployed in Hauran, cradle of the two-year revolt, and to secure a supply route to the western approaches of Damascus.

Americans expect a friendlier policy on Israel

March 17, 2013

Israel Hayom | Americans expect a friendlier policy on Israel.

Yoram Ettinger

 

On the eve of President Barack Obama’s visit to Israel, American constituents are concerned about his attitude toward Israel, as reported by the March 4 issue of The Hill, one of the two newspapers on Capitol Hill.

According to The Hill, which features a Pulse Opinion Research poll, “The president’s support for Israel was found wanting by many voters … Three times as many voters believe that the Obama administration is not supportive enough of Israel [39 percent] as believe it is too supportive [13%].”

Once again, American voters reaffirm their sustained and solid support of the Jewish state and Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel, which dates back to the 17th century Pilgrims and 18th century Founding Fathers, who considered themselves “the modern day Israelites.” The Jewish state has never been considered as a classic foreign policy issue, but rather as an integral part of the cultural and moral foundations of the United States: Judeo-Christian values.

The proportion of voters who say that Obama does not give strong enough backing to Israel is higher than it was in each of three similar surveys conducted for The Hill since May 2011. Fewer voters find Obama’s policy excessively supportive of Israel … A slightly larger percentage of likely voters say Obama is generally anti-Israel [30%] than those who say that he is pro-Israel [28%].” In the May and March 2011 polls, 31% and 32% respectively said the president was not supportive enough, while 27% and 25% respectively said Obama was too supportive of Israel.

Elected officials in the U.S. — the legislatures and executives alike — are much more accountable and attentive to constituents’ opinions and worldviews than any other Western democracy. The federalist system highlights voters as the chief axis of the political process, and “we shall remember in November” reverberates powerfully — every two years — through the corridors of power on both sides of Pennsylvania Avenue. Voters’ priorities and worldviews are reflected, most authentically, through both chambers of Congress, which constitute the most potent legislature in the free world, co-determining and co-equal to the U.S. executive.

The March 2013 Gallup poll features Israel, once again, among the top five to seven countries that are most favored by Americans. Israel is favored by 66%, while not favored by 29%. At the same time, the Palestinian Authority — which is not favored by the Arab regimes, but embraced by the “Palestine firsters” in Washington, D.C. — is not favored by 77% and favored by a mere 15%. Once again, Mahmoud Abbas and Salam Fayyad’s Palestinian Authority joins Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya as the least favorable entities.

According to Gallup, Israel is the only top ally of the U.S. that is involved in a high-profile conflict with its neighbors — the Palestinian Authority and the Arab world — which are supported by some Americans who automatically oppose Israel. Therefore, Israel’s 66% favorability is quite significant, since its potential favorability is uniquely constrained.

Israel is perceived by most Americans as a democratic ally, a senior strategic partner in the battle against mutual threats such as Iran’s nuclearization, Islamic terrorism and the raging Arab street — a trustworthy beachhead in an area that is critical to vital U.S. economic and national security interests. At the same time, the Palestinian leadership — which sided with the communist bloc, Ayatollah Khomeini, Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden — is identified with the increasingly hostile Muslim street, totalitarian and corrupt regimes and the U.S.’s arch rivals, China and Russia.

The results of the Gallup and Pulse polls are consistent with the Dec. 27, 2012, Pew Research Center poll (Israel was favored over the Palestinian Authority by a 5:1 ratio), the Nov. 18, 2012, CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll (59% favorable, 13% unfavorable), the Sept. 17, 2012, Foreign Policy Initiative poll (70% favorability for Israel) and the March 2012 Gallup poll (71%, favorable, 19% unfavorable).

At the time when the Arab street is boiling, Israel is increasingly recognized as America’s most reliable, stable, predictable, capable, democratic and unconditional strategic ally in the Middle East, and probably in the world. At a time when political polarization is intensifying in the U.S., support of Israel constitutes a rare common denominator on, and off, Capitol Hill, reflecting shared values, mutual threats and joint interests.

Obama’s March visit to Israel constitutes an opportunity to prove to American constituents that the president shares their support of the Jewish state.

Tehran: Our commanders now authorized to open fire. Go home, Obama!

March 17, 2013

Tehran: Our commanders now authorized to open fire. Go home, Obama!.

DEBKAfile Special Report March 17, 2013, 10:34 AM (GMT+02:00)

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei flanked by Rev Guards chiefs

The words and deeds coming out of Washington in the last three days bring little comfort to the Israeli government as it prepares for Barack Obama’s first visit as president Wednesday, March 20.
According to an authoritative leak, Washington has effectively cancelled the Europe-based missile shield system that was designed to protect that continent and Israel against Iranian ballistic missile attack. The cancellation was part of the plan announced by Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel last week to install 14 additional missile interceptors in California and Alaska to build up United States defenses against a threatened North Korean attack.
Not only has the Obama administration reduced its missile defense commitment to Europe and Israel, debkafile notes that Washington persists in overlooking the tight coordination in tactics and diplomacy on nuclear issues between Pyongyang and Tehran.
The European-based missile shield has been put forward by Moscow repeatedly as a major obstacle to Russian-US cooperation on nuclear arms reduction and “other issues” – meaning the really hot-button ones of a nuclear Iran and the Syrian civil war.
By meeting Moscow’s complaint, Barack Obama was gambling heavily on coming out of the understandings he reached with Russian President Vladimir Putin with an acceptable settlement of the Iranian nuclear controversy and the future of the Assad regime in Syria.

So far, his winnings are slim.
Russian officials are not rushing forward to welcome the reshuffling of missile shields between Europe and America. Kremlin circles were quoted Sunday by The New York Times as commenting stiffly that there would be no reaction until they were fully briefed by American officials next week.
In any case, Tehran wants no part in the diplomatic softball game the Obama administration is playing with Moscow. Indeed, Iranian officials are behaving exactly like their North Korean partners – with threats.

Saturday, March 16, Deputy Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces Brig. Gen. Massoud Jazayeri broadcast two bellicose messages on the Revolutionary Guards website sephanews.com:
1 “Our commanders have been authorized to respond to any kind of hostile move by the enemy.”
debkafile’s military sources note that this message appeared two days after Iranian Air Force fighters tried to shoot down a US Predator drone flying over the Strait of Hormuz. It also comes at a time that Iranian officers are found on field combat duty in Syria and Lebanon as well.

2.  The Iranian general went on to declare: “Mr Obama, do not make a mistake: we too have all our options on the table. Before you get deeper in the region’s quagmire, go back home!”

This was Tehran’s answer to the US President’s comment Thursday in an Israeli TV Channel 2 interview:
“I have been crystal clear about my position on Iran possessing a nuclear weapon – that is a red line for us. If we can resolve it diplomatically that’s a more lasting solution, but if not I continue to keep all options on the table.” Obama added that Tehran is “over a year or so” away from getting a nuclear bomb.

In Tehran’s tightly controlled publicity environment,  General Jazayeri would not have dismissed the prospect of the US activating its military options with such contempt without authorization from the highest level, i.e. supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

He was effectively telling the US president that, after pulling American forces out of the Middle East and relegating the handling of the Syrian issue to Moscow, “Mr.Obama” had burned his military options in the Middle East and should go home.
Our Iranian sources add that that Jazayeri’s remark was addressed equally to Israel. If Obama’s main purpose in his visit is to hear what Israelis have to say – as he himself has stressed – then he is wasting his time. , In Tehran’s view, the Israelis too have no place in the Middle East and should get out – as Iran’s leaders often declare..

Obama and Netanyahu Have Reached Detente in Time for Israel Visit – The Daily Beast

March 17, 2013

Obama and Netanyahu Have Reached Detente in Time for Israel Visit – The Daily Beast.

Mar 17, 2013 4:45 AM EDT

Their relationship may be icy, but the president and prime minister won’t antagonize each other during Obama’s trip to Israel this week. They’ve quietly moved closer on Iran’s nuclear program, Eli Lake reports.

When President Obama arrives in Israel this week, he will be greeted with a lot of unhappy people.

Mideast Israel Obama Outreach
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, right, and President Barack Obama in the Oval Office May 18, 2009 (Charles Dharapak/AP)

Settlers say they will protest Obama’s address to university students because of a U.S. Embassy snub to students from a university in the West Bank settlement of Ariel. The Palestinian Authority’s foreign minister wants the U.S. government to coordinate his Jerusalem visit with the Palestinian side. Average Israelis are complaining the visit will make traffic a nightmare in the days before the Passover holiday. And the labor union that represents Israeli diplomats and foreign ministry workers has threatened a strike the week that he is coming, potentially disrupting the protocol for the meetings, the drivers, and the joint press appearances.

Welcome to Israel, Mr. President. But for all the pre-trip tumult in Israel, one person who is unlikely to cause Obama any problems is Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Despite the icy personal relationship between the two leaders, Israel and the United States have quietly moved much closer on the issue of Iran’s nuclear program.

Six months ago, Netanyahu declined repeatedly to assure Obama that he would not attack Iran before the U.S. election. Obama sent a procession of senior officials from his own administration in the summer of 2012 to persuade Netanyahu to hold off.

Today the tension between the two leaders on Iran has diminished, according to U.S. and Israeli officials. No more does Netanyahu hint Israel will take matters into its own hands over Iran’s nuclear program. When Vice President Biden announced earlier this year the resumption of negotiations with Iran, Netanyahu’s government offered no public criticism. Maj. Gen. Aviv Kochavi, the director of military intelligence for the Israel Defense Forces, told the annual conference here at Herzliya that he assesses “Iran’s nuclear program is advancing slower then they planned.”

That should be good news for Obama. Speaking this week to Israel’s Channel 2, the only Israeli news channel to get an exclusive interview with him, the president reiterated that all options were on the table. But he also seemed to imply he would rather come to Israel as a tourist. He told the news channel he wished he could “sit at a cafe and just hang out, wear a mustache, wander through Tel Aviv, meet with students at a university in an informal setting.”

During his visit, Obama also will attend a state dinner where one of the guests will be the first Miss Israel of African descent. He intends to address the nation’s students in Jerusalem. He will lay a wreath on the grave site of Theodore Herzl, the founder of modern Zionism, and he will tour the Israel Museum. He’ll visit the Church of the Nativity, but he will not visit the remains of the outer wall of the second Jewish temple or, for that matter, al-Aqsa Mosque.

Diplomatically, though, the big news is that Obama and Netanyahu will not antagonize each other. Obama last week told Jewish leaders, according to two sources in the meeting, that he would not be bringing a peace plan to Israel but that he may present a peace proposal later this year if the opportunity arose.

The prime minster at first agreed to freeze some construction of buildings at settlements, but he did not continue the freeze after 2010, when Palestinian Authority president Mahmoud Abbas declined to start formal negotiations with Israel.

Netanyahu, for his part, has backed away from his Iran red line. Speaking at the Herzliya conference last week, U.S. Ambassador Dan Shapiro said, “There has been a very rigorous exchange between the analysts and the experts that have informed the policy and public utterances between the two leaders.”

“The process of the intelligence picture getting closer has been going on for some time,”  said Shmuel Bar, the director of studies for the Institute of Policy and Strategy at the Interdisciplinary Center at Herzliya and a former senior Israeli intelligence official.

Netanyahu’s implicit threat to attack Iran was withdrawn at the end of September. At a speech before the U.N. General Assembly, he presented a graphic of a cartoon-style bomb with a red line right before the fuse marked 90 percent. The U.N. address and the cartoonish graphic signaled the Israeli prime minister would not be attacking Iran before the election, according to U.S. and Israeli officials. A spoof of the cartoon with an actor dressed as the Israeli leader is now a popular billboard hawking a cell-phone plan.

The speech signaled a significant change for the Israeli government on the trigger, or “red line,” for attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities. For much of 2012, Netanyahu and Ehud Barak, the Israeli defense minister at the time, said the red line for attacking Iran would be based on preventing Iran from installing the advanced centrifuges in the underground facility discovered by U.S. intelligence in 2009 known as Fordow.

Netanyahu’s U.N. address made clear that his new red line would be based on how much uranium Iran enriched to 20 percent purity. The highly enriched uranium needed for a weapon is easier to produce from stock material enriched to 20 percent as opposed to the lower enriched uranium at around 3.5 percent.

Israeli experts today say the exact amount of 20 percent enriched uranium to produce a bomb is around 250 kilograms. The latest report from the International Atomic Energy Agency says Iran has enriched more than 250 kilograms of uranium to 20 percent levels, but much of this material has been diverted to metal rods and other kinds of storage that would not be suitable for bomb making. “The Iranians understand our red line, and for now they are respecting it,” said one former senior Israeli diplomat. Kochavi told the Herzliya conference that “Iran is making sure not to cross any international red lines because the survival of the regime is the biggest priority.”

Barak, who stepped down this month as defense minister, acknowledged at the end of October that Iran had begun diverting the uranium enriched to 20 percent levels, a factor he said led Israel to conclude it had more time before a potential attack on the facilities.

The diversion has given Western diplomats a second chance at negotiations with Iran. As Obama prepares for his trip to Israel, Netanyahu for now appears to be giving those negotiations the time they would need.