WarSclerotic

UWI’s ‘Stop Iran’ Initiative Hit by Cyber-Attack – Inside Israel – News – Israel National News.

( PLEASE take a few minutes to sign the petition.  It goes automatically to your reps on the hill.  The site is back up and functioning. – JW )

Successful ‘Stop Iran’ petition site targeted in internationally coordinated cyber-attack, 1 year after UWI Pillar of Defense site attacked.

United With Israel (UWI)’s “Stop Iran” initiative was hit by a cyber-attack on Wednesday that shut down the site stopiran.org for several hours. UWI’s success in reaching millions worldwide appears to have motivated the pro-Iran attack.

The site, which features a petition urging US President Barack Obama and congressional leaders to oppose any deal on Iran that doesn’t completely dismantle the Islamic regime’s nuclear program, has already garnered more than 130,000 signatures that have been submitted to the White House and Congress.

Michael Gerbitz, founder of UWI, spoke to Arutz Sheva about the cyber-attack. Regarding the attackers’ identity, Gerbitz noted the attack appeared to be a coordinated effort conducted by cells operating in a number of different countries.

Exactly one year ago UWI was the target of a similar cyber-attack against its campaign defending the IDF’s counter-terror Operation Pillar of Defense in Gaza, reports Gerbitz. The methods employed this time were similar, although the targeted site was not part of UWI’s main page.

An official UWI statement declared the organization “will continue to lead the way in defending Israel’s position to the world. We will continue to influence world opinion.”

UWI’s efforts to defend Israel can be supported by donations to the organization.

The Israel Project has also been campaigning to raise awareness about Iran’s nuclear program, recently releasing an infographic highlighting the dangers of a bad deal versus the requirements of a good deal.

The cyber-attack comes as the US is expected to relinquish its governance of the internet following numerous scandals concerning the American National Security Agency’s (NSA) widespread internet surveillance.

Rod Beckstrom, former chief of Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), an organization overseeing the internet’s architecture, told Al Arabiya that he expects the US to relinquish governance of the internet by 2018.

Ya’alon rails against Iran deal as 3rd day of nuclear talks begins | The Times of Israel.

Tehran looking to operate under nuclear umbrella,’ warns defense minister on official state visit to Canada

By Times of Israel staff and AP November 22, 2013, 10:03 am

Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon in Ottawa, Canada on November 21, 2013. (Photo credit: Ariel Harmoni/Ministry of Defense)

On the table | JPost | Israel News.

By JPOST EDITORIAL

11/21/2013 20:50

Convincing the Iranians that they face military action if they continue to march toward nuclear weapons capability actually increases the chances that diplomacy will work.

A number of key Israeli military experts, commenting on Iran’s nuclear weapons program, have in recent days emphasized that from Israel’s point of view, the military option is still “on the table.”

Former IDF intelligence chief Maj.-Gen. (res.) Amos Yadlin, director of the Institute for National Security Studies, argued in a recently published paper that the horror scenario commonly depicted by some in the West of a regional war sparked by an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities is “highly unlikely.”

Yadlin and research assistant Avner Golov described five possible Iranian responses to a strike, ranging from total military restraint to a full-blown regional war, and argued that the most likely scenarios were two gradations of a limited response consisting of conventional missile volleys launched at Israel. An apocalyptic regional war scenario was, in Yadlin’s and Golov’s assessment, both “highly questionable” and “not grounded in rational evaluation.”

Meanwhile, outgoing national security adviser Yaakov Amidror, told the Financial Times that Israel has the military capabilities to stop Iran’s nuclear program.

Amidror noted that the Israel Air Force has been conducting “very long-range flights… all around the world” in preparation for a potential strike on Iran, which could set back its nuclear program “for a very long time.”

The timing of the two men’s comments, as P5+1 representatives sit down with their Iranian counterparts in Geneva, is not coincidental. For some time now all parties interested in seeing Iran stop its nuclear program have recognized that the success of a diplomatic solution depends, at least in part, on Iranians’ belief that they risk a military strike if they fail to negotiate.

That’s why US President Barack Obama and other world leaders opposed to Iran getting the bomb have reiterated, on numerous occasions over the years that the military option remains “on the table.” And they have combined sanctions with the ever-present threat of a military strike.

They understood that any discrediting of the military option actually encourages a situation in which diplomatic efforts will have less of a chance of succeeding and, ironically, a situation in which the military option becomes the only available option for preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

In recent weeks a US military option has looked increasingly unlikely.

First, there was the Syrian chemical weapons crisis.

Not only did Obama refrain from acting alone after Syrian President Bashar Assad crossed his red line and used chemical weapons against his people, the US president also failed to convince the American public and Congress to launch even a limited military strike. In the aftermath, the US administration seemed more determined than ever to resolve the Iranian nuclear crisis without resorting to force.

Just last week, White House press secretary Jay Carney said, “The American people do not want a march to war.”

Carney added in clear reference to Israel, Saudi Arabia, France and other critics of a deal nearly signed between the P5+1 and Iran, “And it is important to understand that if pursuing a resolution diplomatically is disallowed or ruled out, what options then do we and our allies have to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon?”

But accusing those opposed to a bad deal of war-mongering and sending out the message that the US and other nations are desperate to do anything to avoid a military conflict with the Islamic Republic – including signing off on a bad deal – actually increases the chances of a military confrontation.

If the goal of stopping Iran’s nuclear weapons program is not achieved via diplomacy – because the sides fail to reach a final agreement, or because a bad deal is signed, or because the Iranians are lying – this will be in large part because Tehran is convinced that no real military option exists.

In contrast, convincing the Iranians that they face military action if they continue to march toward nuclear weapons capability actually increases the chances that diplomacy will work. That’s why a credible military option must remain “on the table.”

Uncertainty in Geneva on Iran leads to tough talk in Washington | JPost | Israel News.

By MICHAEL WILNER

11/21/2013 22:30

WASHINGTON — French and American diplomats expressed skepticism on Thursday that negotiations in Geneva between world powers and Iran would achieve an interim deal this week over the Islamic Republic’s controversial nuclear program.

Just a day into the third Swiss summit on the nuclear crisis since October, France called on the international community to maintain “firmness” over the language of a proposed deal that would effectively halt Iran’s uranium enrichment and plutonium programs.

Germany and the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council – the US, the United Kingdom, France, China and Russia – would then agree to relieve some financial sanctions against Iran for a period of six months, during which time the parties would attempt to forge a permanent agreement.

Failure to reach a final deal in that time would lead to a resumption of the full sanctions regime.

“The P5+1 remains entirely united in our proposal,” State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said on Thursday. “Our negotiators are making progress, but as we all know these issues are complicated and take time to hash out.”

Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Wendy Sherman, leading the US delegation in Geneva, met bilaterally with her Iranian counterparts on Wednesday evening. No bilateral meeting took place on Thursday, but representatives from P5+1 powers met separately, Psaki said.

“This [interim] agreement can only be possible based on firmness,” Laurent Fabius, foreign minister of France, told France 2 television. “For now the Iranians have not been able to accept the position of the six. I hope they will accept it.”

But in comments targeting France’s corps diplomatique, the deputy of Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said Thursday that an element of professional trust had been compromised in the public row.

“We have lost our trust,” Abbas Araqchi, the Iranian deputy, said. “We cannot enter serious talks until the trust is restored. But that doesn’t mean that we will stop negotiations.”

And yet without a deal, Washington is now primed to act on its own. After weeks of heated debate on the timing of a new sanctions bill in the Senate between congressmen, the White House and the Israeli government, one key senator has thrown support behind the bill should negotiations fail in Geneva this week.

We all strongly support those negotiations and hope they will succeed, and want them to produce the strongest possible agreement,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who controls whether or not the bill will get a vote in the upper chamber. “However, Mr. President, we’re also aware of the possibility that the Iranians could keep the negotiations from succeeding.

“I hope that won’t happen,” Reid continued. “But the Senate must be prepared to move forward with a new bipartisan Iran sanctions bill when the Senate returns after the Thanksgiving recess. I’m committed to do just that.”

Several senators have proposed legislation that would further tighten the noose around Iran’s oil sector and the country’s access to foreign exchange. But, at the urging of the Obama administration, Reid has held off in order to allow negotiations to play out.

Responding to Reid, Psaki thanked the Senate majority leader for waiting until after talks conclude in Geneva this week to move forward with any new legislation. But the administration hopes Reid will continue to “give the space” requested by the president for negotiations to succeed, she added.

“Broadly speaking, if the negotiations fail writ large over the coming months or however long… we would lead the charge for more sanctions,” Psaki said. “That’s one of the reasons why we’ve been so clear in Congress why we should give diplomacy the chance to breathe, to see if it works out.”

Iranian parliamentarians have warned that progress in Congress on new sanctions would force them to exit the talks. But it now appears that a failure to achieve an interim deal in Geneva will lead to progress in Congress on new penalties.

Introducing a bill Thursday that would require Iran first comply with the tenets of an interim deal– and to accept the terms of a final agreement– before any sanctions are lifted, Senator Bob Corker, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said that Congress should proceed regardless of what happens in Switzerland this week.
“Whatever the outcome in Geneva may be this week, I’m hopeful the Senate will work in a bipartisan fashion to strengthen the position of the US in these negotiations so we can reach a final status agreement that will prevent the Iranians from ever developing a nuclear weapon,” Corker said.

Reuters contributed to this report.