WarSclerotic

Security and Defense: First come sanctions. And then…?.

By YAAKOV KATZ

30/04/2010 16:05

What would Israel do should sanctions fail to stop Iran’s nuclear program?

Washington went out of its way this week for Defense Minister Ehud Barak. In the US for routine high-level talks, Barak was met with open arms wherever he went.

At the White House on Monday, during a meeting with National Security Adviser James Jones, President Barack Obama popped his head in to say hello, stayed a few minutes and declared his administration’s commitment to Israeli security. At the State Department the next day, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called Barak her friend, saying: “I have known the defense minister for more years than I care to remember. We were both very young, Ehud.” In response, Barak said: “[Since] immediately after your bat mitzva,” to the laughter from the crowd.

Later Tuesday, Barak made his way to the Pentagon for a meeting with Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, an old friend whom he has known since Gates was director of the CIA in the early 1990s, and he himself was chief of General Staff.

In an unusual and rare move for the Pentagon, Gates and Barak held a joint press conference following their meeting, which focused on a wide range of issues, including Iran, Syria, Hizbullah, the peace process and IDF procurement plans.

The increase in pleasantries had a twofold purpose. Firstly, Barak is perceived in Washington as the member of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s coalition who is most in line with the Obama administration’s current thinking, both on the Palestinian and Iranian issues.

In addition, the administration seemed to feel that it had to make up for the way the media portrayed Obama’s treatment of Netanyahu during his visit in March. This time around, the top Israeli official in town was showered with love.

AT THE same time, however, there are vast differences between Jerusalem and Washington on Iran and the Palestinian issue. While there seems to be some progress in getting the Palestinian Authority to return to the negotiating table, on Iran Israel is growing increasingly frustrated with the continuous delay in getting the next round of sanctions imposed.

Behind the scenes is a fundamental disagreement between the two governments not only regarding the nature of the sanctions that need to be imposed – Israel wants sanctions on the energy sector, while the US is concerned that will hurt the average Iranian – but also about what the next step will be if the sanctions fail. The new target date for sanctions appears to be in June, after Lebanon finishes as the rotating president of the UN Security Council.

The status of Iran’s nuclear program, once a source of disagreement, is similarly understood today by both countries’ intelligence services, as demonstrated by the CIA report released in late March which stated that Iran could, if it wants, begin developing nuclear weapons.

This is very similar to Military Intelligence’s assessment of Iran’s current nuclear standing. When Maj.-Gen. Amos Yadlin took command of Military Intelligence in 2005, the assessment was that the moment Iran obtained enough low-enriched uranium to extract the required amount of high-enriched uranium to make a bomb it would do so.

About two years ago the assessment changed and, like the US, Israel now believes that what is delaying an Iranian nuclear weapon is a political decision that needs to be made by the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Iran already has two tons, which is more than enough for one nuclear bomb.

The current assessment is that the Iranians are waiting to increase their stockpile by several more tons so they will have enough for several bombs. Once that happens, they will likely then wait for a window of opportunity when the international community is too weak to do anything to stop them.

The difference between Israel and the US mainly comes down to what needs to be done after the next round of sanctions. While Israeli military and government officials are skeptical about the effectiveness of the planned sanctions, the government is backing them for the moment.

Barak emphasized this during his joint press conference with Gates, when he said: “The time is clearly, at this stage, time for sanctions and diplomacy.”

His next statement, however, illustrated the difference between Israel and the US: “We expect the sanctions to be effective and to be limited in time, so we will be able to judge to whether – what kind of results stem from the sanctions regime.”

So what will happen next? According to a recent article in The New York Times, Gates wrote a secret three-page memorandum to Jones in which he lamented the lack of a detailed US long-range strategy for dealing with Iran’s nuclear program.

Following the disturbing report were a number of comments by top American officials which seemed to indicate that a military strike was not in the cards.

First there was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen, who said: “I worry, on the other hand, about striking Iran… I’ve been very public about that because of the unintended consequences of that.”

Next was Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Michele Flournoy, the number two official at the Pentagon, who said in Singapore that a military strike against Iran is currently not on the table. “Military force is an option of last resort,” Flournoy said. “It’s off the table in the near term.”

The main US opponent of a military strike is perceived by some insiders here to be Gates himself, who has succeeded in getting Obama on board. The problem, from an Israeli perspective, is that if the Iranians believe a military strike is not a realistic option, there is really not much of a chance that sanctions will work.

On the other hand, even if Israel decides to attack, there are still many considerations beyond just the feasibility and effectiveness of a potential strike. There are questions of how Israel would fly to Iran and whether it will have approval from the US to fly over Iraq. There are also questions of how far back the IDF is capable of pushing the Iranian nuclear program.

But what about the day after the strike? Will Israel have American support or find itself isolated as it was following the bombing of the Osirak reactor in 1981?

The main difference is that today, there is no doubt that following a strike on Iran, Israel will be attacked by Hizbullah, Hamas, Iran and possibly even Syria. Israel will likely then need assistance, such as arms shipments, like it received from the US during the Second Lebanon War. The question is whether there will be someone in Washington willing to send them.

Israel: We need more Iron Dome systems.

US: Progress on Iran sanctions.

NEW YORK – Ahead of a major conference on nuclear non-proliferation at the UN this week, top US officials say they are making progress on sanctions against Iran and will work “as long as it takes” to pass a strong resolution.

Briefing reporters in Washington and New York on Friday, US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice said talks among Security Council members were taking place with “significant pace and intensity,” but declined to elaborate on a timeline.

“We’re going to continue our efforts in New York and in capitals, as long as it takes to get a strong and sound resolution passed,” she said.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is expected to appear on Monday at the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference, a gathering held every five years to assess compliance and chart new actions to strengthen the 1970 arms control treaty.

The conference this year will take place from May 3 to 28, with 189 signatories to the NPT participating.

US officials, who have pursued a dual-track strategy of engagement and pressure with Iran, said they do not plan to meet with Ahmadinejad while he is in New York.

“If Iran has something new to say, it knows where to find us,” Rice said on Friday.

Israel, which has not confirmed or denied the existence of a nuclear arsenal, has not signed the NPT and will not be participating in the conference.

Cairo has said a key to stopping Iranian nuclear ambitions is to establish a nuclear-free Middle East. With the backing of non-aligned members, Egypt plans to present a working paper at the NPT conference, calling for the implementation of a 1995 resolution establishing the Middle East as a nuclear-free zone, “including the accession by Israel to the treaty as soon as possible.”

Egypt has also called for an international conference – which Israel would participate in – to jump-start the process toward a treaty to establish a nuclear-free Middle East.

“Success in dealing with Iran will depend to a large extent on how successfully we deal with the establishment of a nuclear-free zone” in the region, Egyptian Ambassador to the UN Maged Abdel Aziz told reporters last week. “We refuse the existence of any nuclear weapons, whether it is in Iran or whether it is in Israel.”

The proposed conference does not appear to have the full backing of US officials, who said they are working with their partners in Cairo on implementing the 1995 resolution.

US Under Secretary for Arms Control Ellen Tauscher said the state of the peace process did not lend itself to the sort of conference envisioned by Egypt. “We are concerned that the conditions are not right,” she said. “This is something the region has to embrace, and they have to embrace it at the right time, when all parties can participate.”

Asked if the US would call on Israel to sign the treaty, Tauscher said: “The United States has always stood for universality of the NPT.”

During a briefing with reporters ahead of the conference, Rice and Ambassador Susan Burk, special representative of the president for nuclear nonproliferation, said the US seeks to strengthen the treaty across three “pillars” of disarmament, nonproliferation and peaceful uses of nuclear energy.

“We will focus on ways to improve compliance with the nonproliferation requirements of the treaty and to strengthen support for the IAEA,” Rice said. “The noncompliance of any state with its NPT obligations undermines the nonproliferation regime as a whole.”

The US supports a fully-funded IAEA that has adequate authority. “At the same time, we will work with others on preventing parties to the NPT from misusing the treaty by seeking key nuclear assistance under it and then withdrawing from it when they wish to violate its terms,” Rice said.

Without mentioning Iran by name, she said NPT violations are “corrosive.”

US Jewish groups, gearing up for the Iranian leader’s visit to New York, voiced loud opposition to Ahmadinejad’s participation in the NPT conference. The Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations contacted ambassadors of UN member states, and placed newspaper ads to appear on Monday, urging diplomats to walk out with he speaks on Monday morning.

“How ironic that the leading violator of the NPT and several Security Council resolutions would be allowed to speak and no doubt resort to the same vile accusations as in the past,” Chairman Alan Solow and Executive Vice Chairman Malcolm Hoenlein said in a statement. “The leaders of Iran who participate in the NPT Review Conference must understand the determination of countries that value democracy and freedom and oppose Iran’s hegemonic goals and aspirations toward a nuclear weapons capability.”

The Jewish Community Relations Council of New York issued an action alert urging readers to e-mail UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon at sg@un.org to protest Ahmadinejad’s inclusion in the conference.

The World Jewish Congress asked its member communities to contact their government representatives to persuade them to participate in the protest walkout, saying in a statement, “It is dismaying that, once again, the UN is allowing the head of a regime foremost in the sponsorship of terrorism and the abuse of human rights, who defies UN resolutions regarding its nuclear ambitions, to appear before the international body.”

Iran Set to Out-Maneuver Obama in A-Bomb Parley at United Nations – May 1, 2010 – The New York Sun.

UNITED NATIONS — President Ahmadinejad, in a political masterstroke, appears set to throw  President Obama’s disarmament strategy into turmoil – and all the Iranian flame thrower has to do is show up.

The Iranian is set to do this Monday, when he will seek to sway world opinion and turn the attention from his world-threatening nuclear program to Israel. In past administrations, such bait and switch tricks would have been laughed at, but the current administration’s Turtle Bay-based foreign policy favors Mr. Ahmadinejad.

Jewish organizations are calling on United Nations delegates to walk out when Mr. Ahmadinejad takes the podium midday Monday. Some may do just that, but the Iranian president is a big U.N. draw: even those who disagree with him know he is a headline-grabber and therefore they are transfixed by his star power.

Among the 188 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty signatories, only Iran sent a head of state to the treaty’s 5-year review conference, scheduled to open at the United Nations Monday. As the most senior official in the room, Mr. Ahmadinejad is slated to open the session, hoping to set the tone and agenda of the month-long conference.

Mr. Ahmadinejad is expected to plead with his audience to ignore Iran’s many violations of the NPT and concentrate instead on Israel’s nuclear program. Israel has pointedly declined to sign the NPT, while maintaining a policy of ambiguity about its possession of an arsenal that is widely believed to include nuclear weapons. India and Pakistan have not signed the treaty either, and North Korea withdrew from it to pursue a nuclear weapon.

As a non-signatory, Israel will not attend the U.N. conference. But its name is expected to be raised as often as that of Iran, as the many detractors of the Jewish state attempt to equate the two countries. Mr. Ahmadinejad will try to maximize a feeling among many U.N. members that there is a “double standard” where Israel’s weapons are left alone, while America and its allies continually punish Iran for pursuing a bomb.

The internationalists who surround Mr. Obama extol formal treaties and value declarations of peaceful intent. While saying America will not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons, some in Washington, though not all, seem to take seriously the accusation that Iran is being treated unfairly.

Secretary of State Clinton said last week that Mr. Ahmadinejad “can somehow divert attention from this very important global effort or cause confusion,” but, she added, “I don’t believe he’ll have a particularly receptive audience.”

Others in the administration are reportedly weighing an idea, pushed by Egypt and others, to convene a Middle East conference to promote a nuclear-free zone in the region. Israel will be hard pressed to join such a conference, which would force it to change a nuclear policy it believes has worked for decades to deter regional regimes that have threatened it with annihilation.

“The issue of the Middle East is a complicated and difficult one,” the American ambassador here, Susan Rice told this reporter last week. “It’s one that we’re working with Egypt and others on.” Yes, she added, Iran will be on the agenda of this week’s conference, but “we think that this is much bigger than any one country, and our aims are universal, and we will approach it in that vein.”

American administrations have long supported “the goal” of a Middle Eastern nuclear-free zone. Israel, too, supports the idea of a region without any weapons of mass destruction. But, like past American administrations, Israel believes such disarmament agreements could be signed only after all countries have signed peace treaties with it. Since the days of John F. Kennedy, no American administration has contemplated leaning on Israel to sign the NPT and end the ambiguity on its program.

The Obama administration, since its own declared December 2008 “deadline” for launching negotiations with the Islamic Republic, has attempted to end Iran’s nuclear threat at Turtle Bay, where the fastest way to unite everyone is to gang up on Israel.

“These are just distractions,” said John Bolton, the former permanent representative here. “The whole concept is a mistake,” he said of the Obama administration’s nuclear policy via formal treaties and international conferences. “It gives people the illusion that it’s safe.”

Lately, administration officials have publicly made favorable gestures toward Israel, fearing that if it feels isolated, the Jewish state might act unilaterally to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities. But with no other Iran strategy, Mr. Obama plays by U.N. rules, where the likes of Mr. Ahmadinejad are much more skilled players.

As for the recent rhetorical gestures toward Israel – “I wouldn’t take any comfort in that, given the way they have thrown Israel under the bus,” Mr. Bolton said.

Bill Maher on radical Islam.

Ahmadinejad: The roots of terrorism are in the USA.

Ahmadinejad’s most recent attack against the U.S. administration comes just two days before his trip to New York to attend a United Nation’s meeting to review the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. “We have documents to prove that the roots of global terrorism are in Washington. They have been supporting and encouraging militant groups for years,” said Ahmadinejad. He extended his rhetoric accusing Israel of similar charges: “You are also a major cause of terrorism. You also organize and support it”. Referring to the development and use of nuclear weapons, Ahmadinejad censured the U.S. for being “the only country in the world to use nuclear weapons and to continue bullying the world with its nuclear arsenal”, reported ISNA (Iranian Students News Agency). Washington and much of the international community accuse the Iranian regime to conceal under its civil nuclear program another hidden program aimed at acquiring an atomic arsenal. Iran emphatically denies those allegations

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Threatening Words | Before It’s News.

The US is turning up the heat as more information is coming to light regarding Syria and Lebanon rearming Hezbollah. Israel is claiming that since the war in 2006 Hezbollah has stockpiled more than 40,000 rockets, some with the ability to strike Tel Aviv and other major cities in Israel. In a speech on Thursday to the American Jewish Committee, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke with a stern warning to Syria’s President Bashar Al-Assad of the dangers he is creating if in fact they are transporting long-range Scud Missiles to the Lebanese terror organization. Of course, they are continuing to deny this.

In her speech Clinton stated that “these threats to Israel’s security are real, they are growing and they must be addressed.” She added: “over the past month we have attempted to remove any ambiguity. The President and his Administration have repeatedly reaffirmed our commitment to Israel’s security in word and deed.” But, it seemed from the audience’s response, as well as my own opinion, that her comments had little meaning or follow-up. Her purpose was purely to go on record that our government was making it perfectly clear to President Assad that the consequences of his actions could spark a regional war, destabilizing the region. The rest of her comments were purely blah, blah, blah, including her defense of the decision to return an ambassador to Syria after five years. Other than that, one has to note how impotent the Obama Administration has become in the Middle East.

On Friday we got to hear a response to Clinton’s comments from Iran’s First Vice President Mohammad Rida Rahimi: “We will cut off Israel’s feet if they attack Syria.” And who should be standing next to Rahimi in Damascus when he made that remark? Syrian Prime Minister Mohammad Naji al-Utri. Both were there in unity to show how “unshakeable” their bond really is. Rahimi continued his strong rhetoric saying the West is attempting to “isolate Iran economically” to gain control and Syria is a “strong country that is ready to confront any threat and Iran willback Syria with all its means and strength.”

Only hours later Iranian President Mahmoud Ahamdinejad spoke at a celebration being proclaimed ‘National Persian Gulf Day.’ After acknowledging that not only will he be attending the UN Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty review conference in New York, but he will also be part of the committee on the treatment of women (Are you shocked?), Ahamdinejad once again became emboldened and made this inflammatory statement: “Western powers want to dominate the Middle East because it is the center of civilization, culture, foreign affairs and control the world. That by dominating the Middle East, the West hopes to take control of the entire world.”

Folks, what we have here is an extremely volatile situation, waiting to be ignited at any time. Meanwhile, it was just announced by Clinton that the Mideast peace process will restart next week. However, these will not be direct talks with Israel and Palestinians, brokered by the US. Instead, special US envoy to the Middle East, George Mitchell, will be shuffling between the parties, without bringing them to the negotiating table at the same time. I have seen this stalemate several times already in my lifetime…and it feels like the useless dance is about to begin again.

gulfnews : Iran sends warning with naval exercises.

Iran is anticipating a military attack against its nuclear facilities for a number of reasons, such as the memo presented by the Pentagon to Obama’s office, indirectly criticising the US president for not having a clear strategy for Iran.

• The UN Security Council members, Germany and Israel are the main source of the dangers that may confront Iran because of its insistence on pursuing its nuclear programme.
• Image Credit: LUIS VAZQUEZ/Gulf News

Syria warns U.S. on accepting Israel scud claims: Washington Post

Reuters
Saturday, May 1, 2010; 2:41 PM