Iran and Russia

U.S. and Israel Reiterate to Moscow: Military Option Is On the Table

DEBKAfile Special Report
October 31, 2009

DEBKAfile's US intelligence sources report indications of impending war preparations against Iran after Tehran's rejections of the UN-brokered proposal to ship its enriched uranium overseas for further enrichment. These sources reveal that the administration is seeking congressional authorization to open America's Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). Furthermore, the US-Israeli joint US-Israel Juniper Cobra ballistic exercise is in full swing. Finally, US and Israel officials have been instructed to warn Moscow that the military option is still on the table if Iran's nuclear program is not halted by diplomatic means.

The US SPR which contains 727 million barrels of petroleum is only opened in time of war. Under an agreement signed with Israel in 1975, Washington undertakes to supply Israel with its fuel needs for five years in an emergency.

Word of these apparent war preparations appeared Saturday Oct. 31, the day after Iran's senior nuclear negotiator delivered a counter-proposal to the UN-brokered plan to the IAEA in Vienna which excised its main object, which was to reduce the enriched uranium stocks in hand for Iran to make a nuclear bomb.

The joint US-Israeli military exercise which ends Tuesday, Nov. 3, moved to the Tel Aviv arena last Tuesday with US forces drilling defensive action against a prospective Iranian missile attack or a seaborne strike from the Mediterranean on Israel's central conurbation.

For the last three days, Moscow has had nothing to say about the Iranian rejection of a plan which would have sent Iranian uranium to Russia for reprocessing, although Tehran previously indicated to the Kremlin that the international plan would sail through. DEBKAfile's Moscow sources regard the rebuff as Tehran's response to the suspension of Russian S-300 missile defense batteries after they had already been packed for delivery to Iran.

2007: Tensions Rise Again Between the United States and Russia over Missile Defense and Iran

In March 2007, the U.S. announced plans to build an anti-ballistic missile missile defense installation in Poland and a radar station in the Czech Republic, both relatively near the Russian borders. American officials said that the system was intended to protect the United States and Europe from possible nuclear missile attacks by far off Iran or North Korea. Russia naturally saw this as a way of making a U.S. first strike easier. In response Russia tested a long-range intercontinental ballistic missile which it claimed could defeat any defense system. In June 2007, Putin warned that if the U.S. built the installations, Russia would target missiles at Poland and the Czech Republic.

On October 16, 2007, Vladimir Putin visited Iran to discuss Russia's aid to Iran's nuclear power program and "insisted that the use of force was unacceptable.” On October 17, Bush stated "if you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon," understood as a message to Putin. On October 26 Putin compared U.S. plans to put up a missile defense system near Russia's border as analogous to when the Soviet Union deployed missiles in Cuba, prompting the Cuban Missile Crisis which brought the US and the Soviet Union close to nuclear war in 1962.

This doubtless was a reference to Israel's "Samson Option" - its willingness to use nuclear weapons against not only enemy Arab and Muslim nations but even against nations which have given them diplomatic or military support. This would include Russia, which would promptly attack the United States back. It is unclear if Bush agrees with this threat or has been bullied by Israel into accepting its reality. See Israeli Nuclear Threats and Blackmail.

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Israel, the U.S. and the Arab World

Iran Lawmakers Reject UN-Drafted Uranium Plan

Associated Press
October 31, 2009

Senior Iranian lawmakers rejected on Saturday a U.N.-backed plan to ship much of the country's uranium abroad for further enrichment, raising further doubts about the likelihood Tehran will finally approve the deal.

The UN-brokered plan requires Iran to send 1.2 tons (1,100 kilograms) of low-enriched uranium — around 70 percent of its stockpile — to Russia in one batch by the end of the year, easing concerns the material would be used for a bomb.

After further enrichment in Russia, France would convert the uranium into fuel rods that would be returned to Iran for use in a reactor in Tehran that produces medical isotopes.

Iran has indicated that it may agree to send only "part" of its stockpile in several shipments. Should the talks fail to help Iran obtain the fuel from abroad, Iran has threatened to enrich uranium to the higher level needed to power the research reactor itself domestically.

The Tehran reactor needs uranium enriched to about 20 percent, higher than the 3.5 percent-enriched uranium Iran is producing for a nuclear power plant it plans to build in southwestern Iran. Enriching uranium to even higher levels can produce weapons-grade materials.

"We are totally opposed to the proposal to send 3.5 percent enriched uranium in return for 20 percent enriched fuel," senior lawmaker Alaeddin Boroujerdi was quoted by the semiofficial ISNA news agency as saying.

Boroujerdi, who heads the parliament's National Security Committee, said the priority for Iran was to buy nuclear fuel and hold on to its own uranium. He also said there was no guarantee that Russia or France will keep to the deal and supply nuclear fuel to Iran if Tehran ships them its enriched uranium.

"The preferred option is to buy fuel ... there is no guarantee that they will give us fuel ... in return for enriched uranium. We can't trust the West," ISNA quoted Boroujerdi as saying.

Kazem Jalali, another senior lawmaker, said Iran wants nuclear fuel first before agreeing to ship its enriched uranium stocks to Russia and France even if it decides to strike a deal.

"They need to deliver nuclear fuel to Iran first ... the West is not trustworthy," the official IRNA news agency quoted him as saying.

Jalali said Iran needs fuel and putting conditions to deliver it for the research reactor is unacceptable.

"Countries possessing fuel are required, under international rules, to provide fuel for such reactors. Putting conditions is basically wrong," he said.

Jalali said these conditions for the fuel was teaching Iran new lessons.

"Western approach toward Iran's demand for fuel is only straightening Iran's resolve to continue its peaceful nuclear program," he added.

The lawmaker said France has reneged on previous agreements and that Tehran doesn't trust Paris.

He said Iran holds a 10 percent share in a Eurodif nuclear plant in France purchased more then three decades earlier but is not allowed to get a gram of the uranium it produces as an example that Iran can't trust the West.

Tehran says it has paid for 50 tons of UF-6 gas, which can be turned into enriched uranium, in Eurodif's plant but has not been allowed to use it.

"Iran is a shareholder in Eurodif but doesn't enjoy its rights. This shows the French are not reliable," Jalali said.

Areva, the state-run French nuclear company, has described Iran as a "sleeping partner" in Eurodif.

The U.S. and its allies have been pushing the U.N.-backed agreement as a way to ease their concerns that Iran is using its nuclear program as a way to covertly develop weapons capability.

US: Time Not 'Unlimited' on Iran Nuclear Offer

Middle East Online
October 30, 2009

The United States warned on Friday that Iran did not have unlimited time to accept a UN-drafted deal with global powers on its nuclear program, as reports said Tehran wanted more talks on the offer.

Washington increased the pressure after waiting a week for Iran's response to the package, which proposes shipping out low-enriched uranium (LEU) from Iran to be converted into fuel for a Tehran reactor.

"The president's time is not unlimited, this was not about talking for the sake of talking," said White House spokesman Robert Gibbs.

"This was about reaching an agreement that just a few weeks ago seemed to be something that the Iranians wanted," Gibbs said.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said on Thursday it has received an "initial response" from Iran to the deal, but the Iranian news service IRNA said that was not Tehran's "answer" to the UN-backed plan.

IRNA also reported, quoting an unnamed informed source, that the Islamic Republic was "ready" to have more negotiations in the reactor project.

The deal would have the affect of taking substantial uranium supplies out of Iran and leaving the Islamic Republic without sufficient material to make a nuclear weapon, at least from stockpiles known to the international community.

Iran denies western claims that it is bent on producing nuclear weapons, but the crisis escalated in September, when it and the United States revealed the existence of a previously unexposed nuclear plant at Qom.

From the US point of view, the deal would give Washington and its allies time to negotiate a more far-reaching agreement with Iran, and defuse the crisis.

Amid growing international impatience, IRNA indicated Tehran's initial message to the IAEA was "not an answer to the draft agreement."

Iran would state its full position after more negotiations, the agency said.

But IRNA reported that Iran was expected to insist it will hand over its LEU at the same time it receives the fuel for the Tehran reactor. The agency did not elaborate.

Iran had been initially due to give its response to the deal by October 23.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Friday the United States was still trying to determine the extent of Iran's initial response to the IAEA.

"We are working to determine exactly what they are willing to do, whether this was an initial response that is an end response or whether it's the beginning of getting to where we expect them to end up," she told CNN.

The plan calls for Iran to export to Russia more than 2,640 pounds (1,200 kilos) of its 3.5 percent low-enriched uranium (LEU) for refining up to 20 percent to fuel a Tehran reactor that makes medical isotopes.

France would then fashion the material into fuel rods for the reactor.

As Iran-European Gap Widens Over Overseas Enrichment, Ahmadinejad Boasts: "We Rule World Opinion"

DEBKAfile Special Analysis
October 31, 2009

Mounting opposition leaves only two leaders in favor of the UN-brokered plan for Iran to send most of its enriched uranium to Russia and France for further processing:

US President Barack Obama and Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who Friday praised the proposal "to have Iran withdraw its enriched uranium, or a good portion of it, outside Iran as a positive first step." He commended the US president's efforts to deal with Iran's nuclear program.

But Saturday, European leaders struck the opposite note. In Vienna, European officials called the new Iranian ultimatum for a balance between sending uranium abroad and receiving a fresh supply as "unacceptable."

In Brussels, European leaders began drafting a communiqué expressing "grave concern" over Iran's nuclear enrichment activities and persistent failure to meet its international obligations.

The "counter-proposal" incorporating this ultimatum, which was conveyed by Iran's nuclear negotiator to the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna Friday, cancels out the whole point of the plan offered, to reduce the level of uranium stocks usable by Iran for making a nuclear bomb. Tehran also called for more negotiations before Tehran delivered its final response.

Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt, rotating presidency of the European Union, told AP that Iran's approach of "back-and-forth talks" were reminiscent of its "same old tricks."

Saturday, president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad issued a veiled warning:

"We hope the negotiations continue and evil powers don't indulge in mischief because the Zionist regime and other domineering powers are unhappy with the talks," he said in an Iranian state TV interview: "Today, Westerners know that without engaging Iran, they cannot rule the world, because Iran… rules world public opinion."

Within hours, fellow hardliners in Tehran chipped in. Deputy parliament speaker Aleddin Boroujerdi said the second time this week:

"We are completely opposed to the proposals. We have deep mistrust of Westerners."

Qazem Jalili, a member of the Iranian parliament's foreign affairs and security committee (who is related to Iran's nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili) dismissed the world powers' proposal as "completely out of the question."

Netanyahu's words of praise for president Obama when he met Middle East peace envoy George Mitchell Friday followed an informal message from Washington asking Israel's political, military and intelligence spokesmen to align their conduct and statements on the Iran issue with the UK, France and Germany.

The Israeli prime minister made no reference to Iran's negative response to the compromise it was offered in the framework of Obama's engagement policy. Nor did he indicate where this left Israel.

That Iran's counter-proposal was a resounding "no" to an initiative backed by the world's powers and the UN was far from clear in secretary of state Hillary Clinton's tortuous remarks Friday:

"We are working to determine exactly what they are willing to do, whether this was an initial response that is an end response or the beginning of getting to where we expect them to end up," she said, urging: "The process must play out."

She may be in denial, but Tehran's rebuff will certainly play out in Obama's other diplomatic initiatives.

After being badly mauled in Pakistan over US drone attacks on Taliban bastions and US policy in general, Clinton arrives in Jerusalem Saturday, Oct. 31, to administer yet another push for getting Israel-Palestinian peace talks restarted.

When he met her earlier in Abu Dhabi, Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas made it clear that he stood by his precondition for talks: Israel must halt settlement construction on the West Bank and Jerusalem. Netanyahu, whom she meets Saturday night, will probably agree to negotiations without preconditions.

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Gaza: Thousands Rally for Islamic Jihad

Associated Press
October 30, 2009

Tens of thousands of Islamic Jihad loyalists held a rally in Gaza on Friday to commemorate the group's slain founder.

Holding plastic models of rockets and wearing masks and mock suicide bomber's vests, the members chanted "death to Israel" and "Muhammad's army will be back to wipe off the Hebrew state."

An Islamic Jihad leader, Nafez Azzam, called on the crowd Friday to reject negotiations with Israel and support violent resistance.

The group was founded in 1979 by Fathi Shikaki as an offshoot of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. Shikaki was gunned down in Malta in October 1995 by a man on a motorcycle in attack widely attributed to Israel.

Islamic Jihad, a smaller organization than Hamas, has carried out dozens of suicide bombings and other attacks against Israeli civilians.

Jerusalem Poses New Crisis for Obama As Tensions Rise

By Andrew Lee Butters, Time
October 28, 2009

Disputes between religious communities over access to holy places are a staple of life in Jerusalem's Old City, but it was more than just another sectarian turf battle that saw Israeli police on Oct. 25 enter the Muslim-controlled area on the Temple Mount to quell stone-throwing by Palestinians. Instead, the riot in the Holy City was yet another sign that, in the absence of any real peace process, the two sides may be headed for renewed confrontation.

For weeks now, tensions have been mounting in Jerusalem. Spurred by the Obama Administration's efforts to revive final-status negotiations and emboldened by its successful rebuff of Washington's demand for a settlement freeze, Israel has moved to consolidate its control of occupied East Jerusalem by demolishing Palestinian homes and expanding Israeli construction there. Islamist groups have seized on archeological excavations in the Old City to claim that Israel plans to seize control of the Muslim holy sites - a charge vehemently denied by Israel, but one that has nonetheless roused outrage across the Muslim world.

In response to feared protests, Israel has barred Palestinians under 50 or not resident in Jerusalem from access to the al-Aqsa Mosque complex on the Temple Mount - known to Muslims as the Noble Sanctuary - and that, in turn, has only heightened Muslim suspicions over Israel's intentions.

The clashes on Oct. 25 came after Islamist groups called for Palestinians to "defend" the site after Israel had allowed Israelis to enter it the previous day. The confrontation may have had less to do with keeping Jews from praying at al-Aqsa, however, than with the erosion in Palestinian faith in President Mahmoud Abbas' path of negotiating peace with the Israelis and Americans. Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal set the tone that day by declaring, "Jerusalem's fate will be decided with jihad and resistance, and not negotiations."

The symbolic power of the Jerusalem issue has a radicalizing effect not only on the Palestinians, but all across the Arab and Muslim world, with anti-Israel sentiment at a fever pitch even in Turkey, a long-standing Israel ally.

Although Hamas supporters may have played a leading role in the Jerusalem protests, there was plenty of evidence of Fatah supporters fighting alongside them - a fact noticed by the Israeli government, which banished the Palestinian Authority official responsible for the holy sites for two weeks. Nor is that a new development: while Abbas continues go through the motions demanded by the Obama Administration, he has reportedly threatened to quit and warned that no peace is possible with the hawkish government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. And many leaders of Abbas' own Fatah movement are now privately talking about going back to the barricades.

A split has emerged between Abbas and a younger generation of Fatah commanders who have lost patience with his faith in a U.S.-led peace process that has left them no closer to statehood than they were a decade ago. There are daily confrontations between the old guard and the new guard, says Hassan Bakir, chairman of the Palestinian Center for Research and Documentation in Beirut. They are tired of listening to Abbas, who hasn't lived up to his promises. The new guard is calling for a return to resistance.

Rather than restore Palestinian faith in the peace process, the Obama Administration's efforts may have only fueled the backlash. Any optimism over renewed peace efforts that had been generated by President Obama's Cairo speech quickly dissipated as Washington failed to win Israeli compliance with its demand for a settlement freeze. And the Administration put Abbas in an untenable position earlier this month by leaning on him to revoke Palestinian support for the U.N. discussing the Goldstone Report, which accused Israel and Hamas of committing war crimes during last winter's fighting in Gaza. So intense was the outcry that followed among Palestinians, including top leaders of Fatah, that Abbas was forced to make a humiliating about-face.

If Israel's relations with the Palestinians are deteriorating and propelling a less accommodating Palestinian leadership to the fore, the scuffles in Jerusalem are also deepening Israel's isolation in the Muslim world. France this week had to cancel plans for a summit of Mediterranean countries after Egypt refused to attend a meeting with Israel's hard-line Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman. And in Jordan on Oct. 26, the 15th anniversary of a peace deal with Israel was observed by demonstrators burning an Israeli flag and calls by the parliamentary opposition for the pact to be rescinded.

Obama raised expectations after taking office by promising the region speedy movement toward settling the Middle East's most toxic conflict. So far, the Administration's efforts have produced precious little progress - and unfortunately for Obama, the Palestinians may no longer be waiting for Washington to do more to press the Israelis. Instead, they are growing more inclined to do that themselves, in ways that could quickly turn the Middle East into a crisis for the Administration.

- With reporting by Rami Aysha / Beirut and Jamil Hamad / Bethlehem

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Israel, the U.S. and the Arab World

US-Israeli Missile Defense War Game Signals Israeli Attack on Iran

Paul Craig Roberts, Infowars
October 28, 2009

There’s no word in the Western press, but Aljazeera reports (story below) that the US and Israel are conducting tests of the high altitude missile defense system that the US has provided to Israel.

The anti-missile system is useless against the short range rockets of Hamas and Hezbollah. Its purpose is to protect Israel from longer range Iranian missiles.

Everyone understands that Iran would not attack Israel except in retaliation. It is logical to conclude that the missile defense system signals an upcoming Israeli attack on Iran.

If the US were opposed to an Israeli attack on Iran, the US would not provide Israel with protection against retaliation and would not engage in war games with Israel to test the system. The best way to prevent an Israeli attack on Iran is to leave Israel open to retaliation.

This decision by the United States government is irresponsible in the extreme. It enables Israel to spread aggression in the Middle East. By signaling an attack, it would encourage a less cautious country than Iran to strike first before the Israeli missile defense system is operative.

The joint US-Israeli war games involving 2000 troops from the US European Command, the Israeli Army, and 17 US Navy ships is further indication to the world that no matter what crimes the Israelis commit, the US will protect Israel from being held accountable.

In the world today, the US and Israel are the two threats to peace.

US-Israeli Missile War Games Begin

Aljazeera
October 22, 2009

The United States and Israel have begun more than two weeks of tests to simulate missile attacks on the only country in the Middle East to possess nuclear weapons.

According to the Yediot Aharonot newspaper on Wednesday, the Juniper Cobra drills will simulate the firing of long-range missiles against Israel and will include a live missile interception.

The 16-day defence drill involves 2,000 troops from the US European Command and the Israeli army. It will put the Israeli Arrow missile defence system and three US systems through their paces.

Testing the Terminal High Altitude Area Defence, the ship-based Aegis Ballistic Missile Defence System and Patriot anti-aircraft systems has required Washington to dispatch 17 warships to the region.

Monitoring from the Negev desert, the US-made Forward Based X-band Tactical radar - capable of detecting long-range missiles - will track the Arrow missile system while transmitting data to a US joint tactical ground station.

The war games come as Susan Rice, the US ambassador to the United Nations, called for an end to "anti-Israel vitriol" at the United Nations.

"Member states must once and for all replace anti-Israeli vitriol with recognition of Israel's legitimacy and right to exist in peace and security," she said at a conference in Jerusalem organised by Shimon Peres, the Israeli president.

She also stressed Washington's commitment to fighting extremism.

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Iran and Russia

Putin's Game: Why Russia Won't Cooperate on Iranian Sanctions

Seth Robinson, The New Republic
October 27, 2009

After years of stalemate, negotiations over Iran's controversial nuclear development program seemed to progress last week when an Iranian delegation in Vienna agreed to the export and modification of its low-enriched uranium. The resulting optimism did not last. Officials in Tehran demurred, insisting that they needed more time to study the proposal and could not meet Friday's deadline to ratify the agreement. While Iran's stonewalling came as a disappointment to the United States, it did not come as a surprise. Over the past month, the White House has signaled that it is preparing a new, more severe round of sanctions in case current negotiations fail.

The United States has reached out to many countries for help in implementing its strategy, but none more so than Russia, which has come to play an increasingly central role in the battle over the Iranian nuclear program. In September, President Dmitri Medvedev stirred hopes after he emerged from a meeting with President Barack Obama and hinted that the Kremlin might be open to the idea of new sanctions on Iran.

Together with China, Russia has long been considered Tehran's patron at the UN, and many U.S. analysts believe that sincere Russian cooperation may prove to be the key component in bringing the program in line with international strictures.

Yet recent events suggest that U.S. confidence in Russia's willingness to wield both carrot and stick may have been misplaced. After a visit from Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated that "threats, sanctions, and threats of pressure in the present situation are counter-productive." Ensuring the point was lost on no one, Vladimir Putin, Russia's prime minister and erstwhile president, said that talk of sanctions was "premature."

Russia's evasiveness is sure to frustrate the Obama administration, which will need Moscow's support if it seeks effective sanctions against Tehran. But any attempt to gain such cooperation must take into account Russia's history with and interests in the Iranian nuclear project. A U.S. plan that underestimates the deep and extensive ties that bind the two countries will leave the United States bereft of Russian support at the negotiating table.

In January 1995, Viktor Mikhailov, the Russian minister of atomic energy, and Reza Amrollahi, the chair of the Atomic Energy Agency of Iran, negotiated an $800 million contract to complete a reactor in the Iranian city of Bushehr, which a German firm had abandoned after the 1979 revolution. Construction at the original Bushehr plant had marked Iran's foray into the development of nuclear power. (Previous reactors, supplied primarily by the United States, were dedicated to research.) Russia's decision to revive the reactor infuriated U.S. officials and hindered efforts to thaw relations between the two countries.

Cooperation between Russia and Iran continued relatively smoothly over the following years, and leaders from both sides were quick to redress any emerging problems. When work on Bushehr fell behind schedule in 1998, Russian Atomic Energy Minister Yevgeny Adamov visited Iran and pledged greater involvement of Russian technicians in the project.

Under the stewardship of Vladimir Putin, Russia intensified the nuclear cooperation, even as the United States placed increasing pressure on Moscow to help curtail the program. While President Bill Clinton successfully persuaded Boris Yeltsin to cancel plans to supply Iran with gas-centrifuge uranium technology in the summer of 1995, his administration failed to extract meaningful concessions from Putin. Moscow brushed off accusations in 1998 that Russian firms were transferring missile technology to the Iranians, including designs that could carry nuclear warheads. In 2000, a series of high-level, bilateral meetings that included Vice President Al Gore and Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson failed to convince Russia to curb support for the project.

Still, Russian support for Iran has at times appeared to wane: in 2002, Moscow chastised Iranian leaders for concealing details of a uranium enrichment program, and in June of 2004, Russia pledged that it would halt work at Bushehr if Iran continued to defy international demands. In February of 2007, officials delayed a fuel shipment over alleged "missed payments"; eight months later, after the return home of some Russian nuclear technicians from Iran, Putin reiterated that Tehran must comply with UN resolutions before Bushehr could be completed.

Yet despite its threats, Russia has shown little willingness to enforce its own demands. Moscow has built continuously at Bushehr and provided key technical guidance to Iran. Perhaps more troubling to the United States, Russia has trained more than 1,500 Iranian nuclear scientists, equipping them with the ability to carry out nuclear research indigenously and potentially transform a latent capability into weapons technology.

How does Russia benefit from its nuclear cooperation with Iran? Simple economics provides a compelling first answer: The Russian economy has not only reaped the benefits of the Bushehr deal, but it has also been bolstered by the sale of fuel and the potential sale of additional reactors. What's more, the nuclear project is only one of many economic agreements between the two countries. Total bilateral trade hovers around $2 billion, as Russia supplies Iran with consumer goods, oil and gas equipment, and military technology. Russia also enjoys privileged access (along with China) to Iran's Southern Pars gas fields.

Russia's withdrawal of support for the Iranian nuclear program might jeopardize these other lucrative deals. Even more problematic, Russian government officials rarely resign from their high-power positions at state-owned companies, so they stand to gain personally from continued or increasing ties with Iran. This enmeshing of public and private interests has complicated Russian foreign policy for years, and would make Moscow's break with Iran tremendously difficult.

Second, Iran is still a powerbroker in the Caspian oil trade; its position on the Caspian Sea, which is estimated to hold more than 10 billion tons of oil reserves, makes it an important and influential partner for Russia. Tehran has been extensively involved in coordinating transnational oil and gas deals, arranging transportation of exports with a number of regional states.

Russia is in a position to use its good relations with Iran to challenge Washington's efforts to create new pipelines and foreign direct investment in the Caspian region. Iran has already proven an effective regional ally for Russia--in addition to cooperating on energy deals, Tehran has pointedly refrained from criticizing Moscow's Chechnya policy and has held strategic meetings with Moscow on the Taliban.

Finally, Russian nuclear cooperation with Iran provides the Kremlin with leverage over the United States. Moscow remains guarded against Western advances into its "near abroad," and has fought to keep neighboring states from being brought into the NATO fold. By dangling the Iranian nuclear issue in front of the United States, Moscow may believe it has a means to maintain regional dominance. Russian leaders have already extracted concessions from Washington, as the United States recently altered plans for missile defense in Poland and the Czech Republic. Yielding on the Iran issue would strip Moscow of the ability to coerce the United States and damage its own ability to reassert local influence.

If the United States seeks true Russian support, it must find a way to compensate Moscow for the losses it will incur by forsaking Iran. Washington will continue negotiating with both countries, and it remains possible that the parties may agree on a compromise that would give Iran a reprieve from further sanctions. But the Obama administration, wary of Tehran's promises, is likely to continue laying the groundwork for future penalties in the case of Iranian backtracking. As it does so, it is worth remembering that Russia has already supported multiple rounds of UN Security Council sanctions, but only those that have not imperiled its own interests. Efforts to court Russia that do not account for the country's long and profitable investment in the Iranian nuclear program rely on misplaced optimism, and will likely end in diplomatic disappointment.

Seth Robinson, a former staff member of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, is a PhD candidate in International Relations at Georgetown University.

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Israeli-Iranian Conflict

Ahmadinejad: Iran Will Keep Nukes as Long as Israel Does

JTA
October 27, 2009

Iran will continue to progress in its nuclear program as long as Israel continues to have nuclear weapons, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said.

The Iranian president made the remarks Tuesday during a meeting with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the semi-official state news agency ISNR reported.

"When an illegal regime possesses nuclear weapons, the other countries' rights for peaceful nuclear energy cannot be denied," ISNR quoted Ahmadinejad as saying.

Israel is widely believed to possess nuclear weapons but has never admitted to having them.

"The Zionist regime is a threat to all nations and it wants the region to be free of strong countries," Ahmadinejad reportedly told Erdogan. "Today we see that applying force in Gaza was not enough for them, so they are attacking holy Jerusalem."

Ahmadinejad called on the countries to stand together to overcome regional "threats."

The meeting came as United Nations nuclear inspectors visited the site of a previously unknown underground nuclear enrichment plant, and two weeks after Turkey canceled a NATO military exercise due to Israeli participation.

French FM: Israel Could Strike Iran

Jerusalem Post
October 26, 2009

If world powers are not successful in efforts to contain the Iranian nuclear threat, an Israeli strike on Iran could become a reality, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said during a visit to Beirut, the Daily Telegraph reported Monday.

The French foreign minister suggested that time was indeed short for a solution to the Iranian threat.

"There is the time that Israel will offer us before reacting, because Israel will react as soon as they know clearly that there is a threat."

"Israel will not tolerate an Iranian bomb. We know that, all of us," said Kouchner, adding that for this reason the world must work to "decrease the tension and solve the problem."

"Hopefully we are going to stop this race to a confrontation," Kouchner said.

The US, EU and UN are awaiting an expected response from Iran, set to be delivered on Wednesday, to the proposal for out-of-country processing of uranium for the purposes of fuel production.

If the proposal is rejected and additional sanctions sought, Kouchner expressed concern as to whether such sanctions would have the desired effect of dissuading Iran from a pursuit of nuclear weapons.

"Certainly, the upper people in the Iranian government, they will not suffer from sanctions. But the people of the bazaar and the people on the street, the women and the youngsters, they will certainly suffer from that."

While dialogue is still on the agenda and sanctions may be a future step, Kouchner suggested that in the end, Iran's people - and not its regime - would be the ones to pay the price.

"I have witnessed sanctions all over the world and it's always targeting the poor people more than the rich people."

"We are not looking for sanctions and as I said my personal experience is not to look for sanctions targeted on people. There is an opposition, people are demonstrating, very courageously they were in the streets. Why are we targeting them? I don't know. We are not for the time being looking for sanctions."

Also speaking on the Iranian issue was Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, who asked world powers to exercise patience where Teheran was concerned, in an interview published Monday in the Vremya Novostei daily.

"Let's leave history to historians," said the deputy foreign minister, urging Western countries to cast aside suspicions and past failures and turn over a new leaf in negotiations with Iran.

Ryabkov, who was part of the Russian delegation to negotiations conducted in Geneva between six powers and Iran, expressed pride in the crucial role Moscow had played in building trust between the parties involved.

During the multilateral talks, Russia had offered to process a large percentage of Iran's declared low-enriched uranium stockpile, to be used in a small research reactor in Teheran. A draft agreement was constructed in Vienna last week, and on Monday Iran announced its partial agreement to the initiative.

Ryabkov was quoted as saying that the document, though "balanced and fair," only outlined a basic framework for the initiative, while the technical aspects had not yet been decided upon.

When asked about failed deals and Teheran's past refusal to cooperate with the West, Ryabkov stated that Iran has indicated that it could easily purchase fuel without submitting to "complicated schemes," and that its willingness to do so was a positive sign.

The deputy foreign minister explained that despite ongoing nuclear activity in Iran's Natanz reactor, there was no evidence that Iran was engaged in military nuclear activity, adding that it would not be possible to build confidence and seize the current momentum "if we assume that the Iranians are stalling."

Throughout the interview, Ryabkov stressed that despite media attention, the Teheran research reactor and the low-grade enriched uranium were not at the heart of the controversy, but only a way to implement cooperation and trust between the six powers and Iran.

Earlier in October, during US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton's first official visit to Moscow, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov issued a statement saying sanctions against Iran would be "counterproductive" at this point.

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Blaming Israel, Palestinians Say No Talks Soon

Reuters
October 26, 2009

Israeli-Palestinian peace talks are unlikely to resume in the near future, Palestinian chief negotiator Saeb Erekat said on Monday, blaming Israel for the impasse and urging Washington to do the same.

"The gap is still wide and Israel does not give a single sign of meeting its obligations under the road map, halting settlement activities and resuming negotiations where they left off," he told Voice of Palestine radio.

"I do not see any possibility for restarting peace talks in the near future," he said, in an assessment echoed by Israeli government officials.

The U.S.-backed peace "road map" of 2003, which charts a course to Palestinian statehood, commits Israel to halting settlement activity in the occupied West Bank.

"If President (Barack) Obama's administration cannot make Israel abide by its commitments, it has to announce that Israel is the party that is obstructing the launching of peace negotiations," Erekat said, referring to the road map agreements.

Resisting U.S. pressure to comply, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has ruled out a complete cessation of construction within settlements, saying the needs of growing settler families must be accommodated.

Israel also accuses Palestinians of failing to meet their road map commitments to curb violence and incitement against Israel, notably by Hamas Islamists who control the Gaza Strip.

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said Obama's Middle East envoy, George Mitchell, would return to the region on Wednesday to continue his efforts to revive peace talks.

Barak said that Netanyahu would apparently meet Obama in the second week of November, when the Israeli leader is due to address an American Jewish group in Washington.

"We intend to do our best to bring about the opening of significant negotiations with the Palestinians as soon as possible. This is important, necessary and, I would say, urgent," Barak told legislators from his Labour Party.

LAND FOR PEACE

Netanyahu has rejected Palestinian demands to abide by what they said were land-for-peace understandings reached with his predecessor, Ehud Olmert, in a year of negotiations that followed a U.S.-sponsored peace conference in November 2007.

Israeli government officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said talks with the Palestinians were unlikely in the coming months.

They expressed doubt Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas could show flexibility toward Israel before planned Palestinian elections in January, opposed by Hamas. Netanyahu has called on Abbas to resume negotiations immediately without preconditions.

On Thursday, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave Obama a less-than-glowing assessment of peace efforts.

Her report followed separate meetings in Washington between Mitchell and Israeli and Palestinian negotiators aimed at restarting direct talks suspended since December.

Few analysts believe there is a high risk of Palestinian frustration turning into a new uprising of the kind seen in the years of Intifada from 2000. However, clashes between youths and Israeli police around Jerusalem's al-Aqsa mosque, most recently on Sunday, have aroused concerns about instability.

Israeli Police, Arabs Clash Near Jerusalem Mosque

Reuters
October 25, 2009

Israeli police stormed Jerusalem's al-Aqsa mosque compound on Sunday, hurling stun grenades at Palestinians who threw rocks at them, in another outbreak of violence at the holy city's most sensitive site.

A Palestinian Red Crescent medic said 18 Palestinians were injured. Police reported that three officers were hurt.

The unrest, following a similar incident a month ago, did not appear to herald any immediate slide into widespread violence that could disrupt U.S.-led efforts to revive Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, suspended since December.

But the confrontation between Israeli police in riot gear and rock-throwing Muslims alarmed by rumors that right-wing Jews planned to enter the site was a reminder that Jerusalem remains a cauldron of heated religious and political passions.

At the nearby Qalandiya checkpoint into the occupied West Bank, a Palestinian woman stabbed and lightly wounded an Israeli security officer, police said. She was arrested.

Police, who also used tear gas in the Jerusalem clashes, did not go into al-Aqsa mosque, situated on al-Haram al-Sharif (the Noble Sanctuary), regarded by Muslims as the third-holiest site after the cities of Mecca and Medina in Saudi Arabia.

The compound is revered by Jews as the Temple Mount, where the two destroyed biblical temples once stood. Israel captured the site in a 1967 war, along with the rest of East Jerusalem, which it annexed, and adjoining parts of the West Bank.

Police said the violence began after Palestinians threw stones at officers on patrol in the area. Police then rushed onto the compound behind riot shields, using stun grenades and batons to repel protesters, who retreated into the mosque.

During the clash, dozens of young Arab men threw rocks, lumps of masonry and water tanks from the roofs of houses at police in the narrow alleyways around the mosque compound, which overlooks the Western Wall, Judaism's key place of prayer.

A police spokesman said 16 people were arrested and that calm had largely returned to the area, several hours after the clashes erupted and police reinforcements deployed across East Jerusalem. Tourists continued to walk through the Old City and Jewish prayers at the Western Wall were held as normal.

PALESTINIAN CONDEMNATION

Nabil Abu Rdainah, a spokesman for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, condemned "the storming of Haram al-Sharif by Israeli forces." He called on the international community "to put pressure on Israel...and prevent tension in the region."

Internal Palestinian tensions have also risen over a decision by the Western-backed Abbas on Friday to push ahead with presidential and parliamentary elections on January 24 in the absence of a unity deal with the rival Hamas Islamist group.

Hamas, which won a 2006 election, suggested it may hold its own ballot in the Gaza Strip, territory it seized in fighting with forces loyal to Abbas's Fatah movement in 2007.

Palestinians have been united in their concern that Israel is tightening its grip on the Old City and Arab East Jerusalem.

Israel views all of Jerusalem as its capital, a claim that has not been recognized internationally, and has said construction for Jewish housing would continue there despite Palestinian and international calls for a settlement freeze.

Palestinians want East Jerusalem as the capital of a state they hope to establish in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Ghassan Khatib, head of the Palestinian government press office, voiced concern over "dangerous Israeli provocations" in Jerusalem, which he said included restrictions on the entry of Muslim worshippers to al-Aqsa compound.

Israeli security forces control access to the area and regularly prohibit young Muslim men from entering the stone esplanade in the walled Old City, citing security concerns.

Diplomats have said that some tensions have been raised by factional disputes among Muslim groups using the mosque compound, with some local Islamic leaders challenging the authority of established clerics.

A Palestinian uprising erupted nine years ago after then-Israeli opposition leader Ariel Sharon toured the site.

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Iran

Iran Would Need 18 Months for Atom Bomb

Reuters
October 26, 2009

Intelligence agencies estimate that it would probably take Iran a minimum of 18 months to develop a nuclear weapon if it chose to build one, Western diplomats and intelligence officials said.

For years the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, Britain's MI6, Israel's Mossad, their French and German counterparts and other spy agencies have been struggling to penetrate Iran's secretive nuclear program, often disagreeing internally and with each other on when Iran could have a nuclear weapon.

Tehran insists that its nuclear program is peaceful and says Western spies are lying when they suggest Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons. Some officials at the U.N. nuclear watchdog in Vienna have warned against exaggerating the case against Iran, as happened with prewar Iraq.

But several Western diplomats told Reuters that the top spy agencies generally agreed that Tehran would need at least 18 months to build an atomic weapon if it decided to make one -- a much shorter timeline than some of the agencies' publicly released assessments of Iran's nuclear plans.

"It's not a formal assessment or formal agreement but a rough agreement that we can all work with more or less," one Western diplomat told Reuters on condition of anonymity. He said it was a "worst-case scenario," not the most likely one.

Another Western diplomat confirmed the agreement, adding that the assessment was based on the assumption that Tehran would need at least six months to purify its uranium stocks to weapons-grade level and another 12 months for "weaponization" -- building the actual nuclear weapon.

The minimum possible timeline is crucial because it gives an indication of how much time the six countries spearheading efforts to persuade Iran to halt its enrichment program -- the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China -- have before Tehran could theoretically have an atomic weapon.

Iran has so far rejected offers of economic and political incentives from the six in exchange for suspending enrichment, despite getting hit with three rounds of U.N. sanctions.

TECHNICAL OBSTACLES

A plan under discussion in Vienna that would move most of Iran's low enriched uranium stocks to Russia and France for enrichment and fabrication into fuel rods would add another 12 months onto the timeline if Tehran accepts it, the diplomats said. Tehran needs a specialized fuel assembly for a medical reactor but is reluctant to send its uranium abroad.

The diplomats also pointed out that the 18-month estimate did not account for technical obstacles and bottlenecks that could be expected to slow down the process of building an actual weapon. Nor does it assume Tehran has already made a strategic decision to build such a weapon.

U.S. Director of National Intelligence said in February that Iran would not realistically be able to a get a nuclear weapon until 2013. Mossad Chief Meir Dagan was more cautious, saying recently that it would take the Iranians until 2014.

But an Israeli official linked to the country's security cabinet described the 18-month timeline as "reasonable."

A recently retired Israeli government intelligence analyst who still has access to briefings also said the reasoning was solid:

"You can argue about the timeline -- a few months here or there -- but that's not relevant to the big picture."

David Albright, a former U.N. weapons inspector and head of the Institute for Science and International Security think-tank, said it was in line with information he has.

"It's consistent with what I was told by a senior European intelligence official," he said.

But one Western intelligence official expressed doubt that Iran would be able to produce a bomb so quickly, describing the 18-month minimum timeline as unrealistic.

"Do they have the knowledge and wherewithal to produce highly enriched uranium now?" the official said. "I'm skeptical."

The diplomats who described the timeline said there was much about Iran's nuclear program that intelligence agencies and the Vienna-based U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) were ignorant about because of Tehran's secretiveness.

"We are all very mindful of what happened in Iraq," one diplomat said. "There is so much we don't know."

One of the justifications for the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003 had been U.S. and British assertions -- now known to have been erroneous -- that Iraq's late leader Saddam Hussein had revived his clandestine nuclear arms program.

The diplomats said it was very possible Iran had another undeclared enrichment plant hidden somewhere, similar to the recently exposed site near Qom which IAEA inspectors visited for the first time on Sunday. The Qom site's existence was revealed last month by the United States, Britain and France.

One intelligence official told Reuters that even if Iran had another such plant it would probably not be able to produce significant quantities of enriched uranium and would therefore not have much of an impact on the presumed timeline.

The diplomats said Western intelligence agencies continued to have their disagreements on Iran, above all regarding the U.S. 2007 National Intelligence Assessment (NIE) that concluded Iran had ended its nuclear weaponization program in 2003.

Israeli and European intelligence experts disagree with that assessment and believe Iran's research on fabricating a nuclear weapon has continued. The diplomats said U.S. intelligence agencies were considering revising the 2007 NIE.

Iran Fails to Accept UN Uranium Enrichment Plan

Associated Press
October 23, 2009

Iran on Friday failed to accept a U.N.-drafted plan that would ship most of the country's uranium abroad for enrichment, saying instead it would prefer to buy the nuclear fuel it needs for a reactor that makes medical isotopes.

The response will come as a disappointment to the U.S., Russia and France, which endorsed the U.N. plan Friday they drafted in discussions with Iran earlier in the week. The agreement was meant to ease Western fears about Iran's potential to make a nuclear weapon.

While Iran did not reject the plan outright, state TV said that Tehran was waiting for a response to its own proposal to buy nuclear fuel rather than ship low-enriched uranium to Russia for further enrichment. Iran has often used counterproposals as a way to draw out nuclear negotiations with the West.

"The Islamic Republic of Iran is waiting for a constructive and confidence building response to the clear proposal of buying fuel for the Tehran research reactor," state TV quoted an unnamed source close to Iran's negotiating team as saying Friday.

Iranian opposition to the U.N. plan could be driven by concerns that it weakens Iran's control over its stockpiles of nuclear fuel and could be perceived as a concession to the U.S., which suspects Iran is using its nuclear program as a way to covertly develop weapons -- an allegation denied by Tehran.

An unnamed member of Iran's negotiating team urged world powers Friday to "refrain from past mistakes in violating agreements and make efforts to win the trust of the Iranian nation," according to state TV.

President Barack Obama has stepped up diplomatic engagement with Iran since he took office in January and has faulted the Bush administration for refusing to talk to U.S. adversaries. But he has also threatened harsher sanctions if Iran does not cooperate to ease fears about the nature of its nuclear program.

The U.N. Security Council has already passed three sets of sanctions against Iran for failing to suspend uranium enrichment, but the U.S. faces a serious challenge in convincing Russia and China to go even further because of their close ties to Tehran.

The draft U.N. agreement was formalized Wednesday after three days of discussions in Vienna. The talks followed a similar meeting at the beginning of October in Geneva that included the highest-level bilateral contact between the U.S. and Iran in years.

The head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog, Mohamed ElBaradei, said after the completion of the Vienna talks that he hoped Iran and its three interlocutors -- the U.S., Russia and France -- would approve the plan by Friday.

The three countries heeded his call Friday before Iran announced its preference to buy the 20 percent-enriched uranium it needs for its Tehran reactor, which has been producing medical isotopes for the past few decades.

The country is currently enriching uranium to a 3.5 percent level for a nuclear power plant it is planning to build in southwestern Iran. Iranian officials have said it is more economical to purchase the more highly-enriched uranium needed for the Tehran reactor than produce it domestically.

The Vienna-brokered plan would have required Iran to send 1.2 tons (1,100 kilograms) of low-enriched uranium -- around 70 percent of its stockpile -- to Russia in one batch by the end of the year, French Foreign Ministry spokesman Bernard Valero said Thursday.

After further enrichment in Russia, France would have converted the uranium into fuel rods that would be returned to Iran for use in the Tehran reactor, he said.

Iran agreeing to ship most of its enriched uranium abroad would significantly ease fears about Tehran's nuclear program, since 2,205 pounds (0.98 tons, 1,000 kilograms) is the commonly accepted amount of low-enriched uranium needed to produce weapons-grade uranium for a single nuclear bomb.

Based on the present Iranian stockpile, the U.S. has estimated that Tehran could produce a nuclear weapon between 2010 and 2015, an assessment that broadly matches those from Israel and other nations.

International concerns about Iran's nuclear program spiked in September when it was revealed the country was constructing a previously undisclosed uranium enrichment facility near the holy city of Qom.

Iran subsequently agreed to allow U.N. inspectors to visit the facility, and the official Islamic Republic News Agency said Friday that representatives from the International Atomic Energy Agency would arrive Saturday to start the inspection.

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Iraq

The Jews are leaderless. And, once again, their ‘leaders’ are leading them to slaughter.
Gaza is now ready for Egypt’s genocidal assault. It remains to prepare the West Bank so that Jordan and Saudi Arabia -- also armed to the teeth by the US -- can attack from there, and Netanyahu is already pushing for this outcome. Once that is achieved, all that will remain is for the US government to pull its troops from Iraq, and everything will be ready. If you want a countdown, that's it: the US withdrawal. Because, you see, the invasion of Iraq has given Iraq to Iran (the US ruling elite really is very consistent). Iran already controls Hezbollah, Lebanon, and Syria, so once the US troops leave, Iran will have a land corridor going all the way to the northern border of Israel. They will hardly need to wait for nuclear capability. Don’t wait for the US to attack Iran. As HIR predicted a long time ago, this is not going to happen. - Francisco Gil-White, Historical and Investigative Research, What If Hamas and Fatah Are Not Really Enemies?, June 30, 2007

Obama Stands By Iraqi Troop Pullout

Associated Press
October 20, 2009

President Barack Obama renewed his vow Tuesday to have all U.S. combat troops out of Iraq by next August, while nudging Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to see that his parliament quickly passes a critical election law essential to a nationwide vote in January.

Without an election law, the vote could be delayed, snarling American plans to begin significantly scaling back U.S. troop presence after the national referendum.

"We have seen in the last several months a consolidation of a commitment to democratic politics inside of Iraq," Obama said. "We are very interested, both of us, in making sure that Iraq has an election law that is completed on time so that elections can take place on time in January."

Vice President Joe Biden also pressed al-Maliki on the election legislation when they met a day earlier.

As Obama promised to hold to U.S. withdrawal plans, which would see all troops leave Iraq by the end of 2011, Obama also told al-Maliki that he was glad the two leaders were now able to expand their talks beyond warfare to the "enormous opportunities for our countries to do business together."

The Iraqi leader was in the United States in conjunction with a conference designed to boost international business and investment in Iraq, where six years of war have devastated the national infrastructure, factories and all-important oil sector.

"We didn't just talk about military and security issues," the president said. "What is wonderful about this trip is that it represents a transition in our bilateral relationship so that we are moving now to issues beyond security and we are beginning to talk about economy, trade, commerce."

The U.S. negotiated a status of forces agreement in the latter months of the Bush administration which commits the United States to having all combat troops out of the country by the end of August and all other forces - counterinsurgency and support troops - gone by the end of 2011.

Beyond its significance for the U.S. pullout, the January election will be critical for the Iraqis with the potential for important political and power realignments. It could threaten al-Maliki's hold on power after the powerful political bloc of his Shiite Islam co-religionists excluded him from its coalition going into the vote.

It that estrangement holds, it would require that al-Maliki turn for political allies among Sunni Muslims, whose insurgency took the country to the brink of civil war in 2006 and 2007, and secular parties.

Al-Maliki also repeated his call for help from the Obama administration in the cancellation of all U.N. sanctions and resolutions adopted after Saddam Hussein's 1990 invasion of Kuwait, saying Iraq is a democracy and has no weapons of mass destruction.

"This is important to move Iraq forward and to promote investment," the Iraqi leader said.

Obama nodded as he listened to a translation of al-Maliki's remarks, but neither leader took questions after their brief statements in the White House Oval Office.

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Iran Smuggling Missiles to Palestinian Hamas

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report
October 20, 2009

Iran is making a huge effort to smuggle to the Palestinian Hamas Fajr-5 ground-to-ground rockets that bring Tel Aviv within range of the Gaza Strip. DEBKAfile's military sources also disclose that Syria, Iran's second ally with an Israeli border, has decided to transfer one-third of its missile stockpile to the Hizballah in Lebanon, topping up its arsenal with medium-range rockets that can cover central as well as northern Israel, which was heavily blitzed in the 2006 war.

Israel's top strategists are studying these massive missile transfers to hostile entities to find answers to a number of key questions:

1. Syria has destined some 250 surface missiles of its stockpile of 800 for Hizballah. Are they Scuds B, C and D whose ranges exceed 800 kilometers, or Iranian-Syrian made projectiles whose range is shorter?

2. Do the transfers mean Iran and its allies are gearing up for a major Middle East conflict in the months ahead, possibly in early 2010?

3. Will Syria hand over to Hizballah some of its chemicals-tipped missiles?

4. Will some batteries be installed atop the mountain ranges running down central Lebanon, together with air defense systems supplied at the same time by Syria?

Israel is particularly concerned by the Lebanese Druze leader Walid Jumblatt's recent decision to turn coat against the pro-Western camp led by Saad Hariri in favor of deals with Tehran and Damascus.

Incorporated in these under-the-counter deals are secret military clauses which permit Hizballah to deploy its missiles on highlands of his Druze fief. Israel would think twice at least before attacking areas populated by Druze villages.

In the south, Iran's Revolutionary Guards terrorist arm, the Al Qods Brigades, its bending all its smuggling resources to getting the Fajr-5 missiles into the Gaza Strip, thereby extending Hamas' rocket range to 75 kilometers and central Israel.

According to our intelligence sources, the rockets are traveling by sea from Iran to Hamas training bases in Sudan, dismantled into 8-10 segments , transported to the northern shores of the Gulf of Suez and unloaded in Sinai. From there the segments move through tunnels into the Gaza Strip.

Military sources wonder what the Netanyahu government is doing to halt the missile stranglehold tightening around Israel. Nothing is apparent as yet.

Abdullah: U.S. Focusing Too Much on Iran

Jerusalem Post
October 19, 2009

Jordan's king said in comments published Monday that the US administration seems to be focusing more of its attention on Iran and less on resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, saying time was running out to make peace.

In an interview with Italian daily La Repubblica, King Abdullah II said the region's hopes for peace were huge at the start of the Obama administration, but now sees the "goal getting farther away."

"I've heard people in Washington talking about Iran, again Iran, always Iran," Abdullah was quoted as saying. "But I insist on, and keep insisting on the Palestinian question: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the most serious threat to the stability of the region and the Mediterranean."

Abdullah granted the interview on the eve of a visit to Italy starting Monday.

He said the two sides have a window of opportunity over the next year to make progress on creating a two-state solution, after which point the possibility of a Palestinian state will disappear as more Arab land gets swallowed up by Jewish settlements.

"The window of opportunity will soon close," he was quoted as saying. "By the end of 2010, if Israel doesn't believe in the two-state solution, the possibility of a future Palestinian state will disappear because of geographic reasons: already the land is fragmented into cantons."

He urged Washington and the EU to put pressure on Israel to sit down with the Palestinians to negotiate peace, even though he remains suspicious of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and somewhat disillusioned with the US effort to date.

"I'll be sincere; I had expected more, sooner," he said of the US efforts and the seven missions already conducted by the US envoy George Mitchell.



"I believed in a decisive turn at the beginning of the summer, ahead of a true peace negotiation at the United Nations," he said. "But the question of Israeli settlements - which are illegal according to the international community - remains central."

Obama began his term in office with a Mideast peace push that included an unequivocal call for Israel to halt settlement activity in the West Bank. Though Netanyahu agreed in principle to the formation of a Palestinian state and said he would limit settlement construction for a limited time, he refused to agree to a full halt.

The White House recently appears to have softened its position, saying it was time for the sides to start talking again even if settlement work continues.

Hamas TV Program: English is Enemy's Language

Jerusalem Post
October 18, 2009

The Hamas children's television program, Tomorrow's Pioneers, last week included a part in which children were told it is important to know English, because it is "the language of their enemy."

Following is the transcript provided by Palestinian Media Watch:

Child host: What do you want to be in the future, Allah willing?

Child caller: A teacher of the English language.

Host: Why do you want to be specifically an English teacher?

Child: To teach children the language of their enemy. (Child host smiles.)

Host: Very nice. A great field. It is not enough for us to know our own language... We also want to study the language of our enemies, to know how to have contacts with them, and so that we can convey the message of Palestinian children...

Nassur (the bear-puppet host): Like me! Just like I know the Zionist enemy's language.

Host: Really?

Nassur: Hebrew.

Host: Okay, speak (in Hebrew).

Nassur: I can't! (Laughs).

(Al-Aqsa TV, October 16, 2009)

Transcribed by Palestinian Media Watch

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Iran

Iran: US, UK, Pakistan Behind Bomb

Jerusalem Post
October 19, 2009

The chief of Iran's powerful Revolutionary Guard accused the United States, Britain and Pakistan on Monday of having links with Sunni militants responsible for a suicide bombing that killed five senior Guard commanders and 37 others.

Iranian medical personnel bring a wounded man to a medical facility in the Pishin district after Sunday's bomb.

World Iran's president said those behind Sunday's bombing are hiding across the border in Pakistan, and in a phone call with his Pakistani counterpart on Monday he demanded their arrest.

The accusations put more strain on the tense relationship that Iran and Pakistan have had for years over the issue of Islamic extremism. Monday's statements marked the first time Iran has publicly accused its neighbor's intelligence service of supporting the Sunni rebel group known as Jundallah, or Soldiers of God.

Jundallah, which emerged in 2002 in Iran's remote and mountainous southeast, has waged a low-level insurgency there to protest what it says is government persecution of the Baluchi ethnic minority. Baluchis follow the Sunni branch of Islam and are a minority in predominantly Shiite, Persian Iran.

A claim of responsibility in the name of the group was posted Monday on an Islamic Web site that usually publishes al-Qaida statements. The posting, whose authenticity could not be verified, made no mention of any assistance from foreign powers.

The group has carried out sporadic kidnappings and attacks in recent years - including targeting the Revolutionary Guard and Shiite civilians. In Sunday's attack, a suicide bomber with explosives strapped around his waist struck as senior Guard commanders were entering a sports complex to meet tribal leaders to discuss Sunni-Shiite cooperation in the Pishin district near the Pakistani border.

Revolutionary Guard chief Gen. Mohammad Ali Jafari vowed Monday to deliver a "crushing" response.

"New evidence has been obtained proving the link between yesterday's terrorist attack and the US, British and Pakistani intelligence services," state TV quoted Jafari as saying.

He said the attack was "undoubtedly" planned and ordered by the three nation's intelligence services and that a delegation would soon travel to Pakistan to present evidence.

Iran often accuses Western countries, especially the US, of stoking unrest among the country's religious and ethnic minorities - allegations those nations have denied. Iran has also claimed that Jundallah receives support from al-Qaida and Taliban militants who operate across the border in Pakistan's Baluchistan province, where Baluchi nationalists have been waging a militant campaign for independence from the Pakistani government.

Iran's Jundallah, by contrast, does not appear to seek independence, but rather improved rights for the area's Baluchi people. In 2007, the group adopted a more secular name, the Iranian Popular Resistance Movement, and said it did not depend entirely on armed struggle, but also on political and peaceful efforts to achieve Baluchi rights. The group is still widely referred to by its previous name.

Several analysts who have studied Jundallah say the group likely receives inspiration and material support from Baluchi nationalists in Pakistan. But they say there is little evidence of an operational relationship between Jundallah and militants, including al-Qaida and the Taliban, that operate across the border.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had harsh words Monday for his Pakistani counterpart, Asif Ali Zardari.

"The presence of terrorist elements in Pakistan is not justifiable and the Pakistani government needs to help arrest and punish the criminals as soon as possible," state TV quoted Ahmadinejad as telling Zardari.

"We've heard that some officers in Pakistan cooperate with the main elements behind such terrorist attacks and we consider it our right to demand these criminals from them," he was quoted as saying.

Zardari telephoned Ahmadinejad to strongly condemn the suicide attack, said a statement from the Pakistani president's office. President Zardari said the incident was "gruesome and barbaric" and bore the "signatures of a cowardly enemy on the run."

He said both Pakistan and Iran have deep historical ties and he pledged that Pakistan will continue to support and cooperate with Iran in curbing militancy and fighting extremism and terrorism.

In a sign of how heated the situation has become, an Iranian lawmaker representing the capital of Iran's southeastern Sistan-Baluchistan Province called on the Guard to carry out military operations inside Pakistan to root out militants. It's unclear whether such an operation would be considered.

In the Internet claim of responsibility, a statement in the name of Jundallah said the attack was carried out in "retaliation for the Iranian regime's crimes against the unarmed people of Baluchistan." The statement also identified the man it said carried out the attack as Abdel-Wahed Mohammadi Sarawani, suggesting he is from the small town of Sarawan, 25 miles (40 kilometers) from the Pakistani border. It also accused the Iranian government of executing many people merely because they are Sunnis or Baluchis.

In May, Jundallah said it sent a suicide bomber into a Shiite mosque in the southeastern city of Zahedan, killing 25 worshippers. Sunday's attack, however, would mark the group's highest-level target. The victims included the deputy commander of the Guard's ground forces, Gen. Noor Ali Shooshtari, as well as a chief provincial Guard commander, Rajab Ali Mohammadzadeh. The others killed were Guard members or tribal leaders, it said.

Iran Threatens to Invade Pakistan, 'Crushing Response' for US, UK

DEBKAfile Special Report
October 19, 2009

The commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) Maj. Gen. Mohammad Ali Jafary, Monday, Oct. 19, threatened "crushing" retaliation against the US, UK and Pakistan including the invasion of its eastern neighbor. Tehran links all three to the suicide bombing attack in Sistan-Baluchistan Sunday, Oct. 18, which killed 42 people including seven senior Guards officers. One was Gen. Nur Ali Shoustari, Jafari's deputy, who was identified by DEBKAfile's counter-terror sources as commander of the al Qods clandestine terror bases in Iraq, Pakistan, Lebanon and the Gaza Strip.

Jafary said: "Behind this scene are the American and British intelligence apparatus and there will have to be retaliatory measures to punish them."

DEBKAfile's Iranian sources note that is the first time in Iran's 30-year Islamic revolution that a military leader has gone to the extreme lengths of threatening to strike US and British military targets, a measure of the damage the regime and Guards suffered from the suicide attack, which has since been condemned and denied by Washington.

Jafari expanded on his charge by saying: "New evidence has been obtained proving the link between yesterday's terror attack and the US, British and Pakistani intelligence services." He spoke of evidence showing that all three supported the group. "A delegation would soon travel to Pakistan to present it," he said.

A military official in Tehran then suggested Iran might launch a military thrust into Pakistan against the group blamed for the attack. Lawmaker Payman Forouzesh said: "There is even unanimity that these operations (could) take place in Pakistan territory."

Tehran accuses the Sunni secessionist terrorist group Jundallah of Baluchistan, which is fighting for the predominantly Sunni province's independence, of carrying out the suicide bombing in provincial town of Pisheen near the Pakistan and Afghanistan borders. In the past, Tehran has charged the Pakistani Inter-Service Intelligence agency and the CIA of supporting the group. It has carried out a string of terrorist attacks on regime and Shiite targets including in 2007 a failed assassination attempt on president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

DEBKAfile's Iranian sources report that Tehran will have to make good on its threats without too much delay or lose face among the political and ethnic minority dissidents plaguing on the regime, especially those who rose up in protest against the tainted June 20 presidential election. Hesitation will be seen as weakness.

Past Iranian reprisals were usually carried against the US or Britain indirectly in the Persian Gulf or by local Islamic surrogates like Hizballah in Iraq. Jafari's words point to a more direct showdown this time by the IRGC or its terrorist arm al Qods.

Iran Warns U.S., U.K. of Retaliation After Attack

Fox News
October 19, 2009

The chief of Iran's Revolutionary Guard on Monday accused the United States, Britain and Pakistan of having links with the Sunni militants responsible for a homicide bombing that killed five senior Guard commanders and 37 others.

"Behind this scene are the American and British intelligence apparatus and there will have to be retaliatory measures to punish them," Major General Mohammad Ali Jafari said, vowing a "crushing" response.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said those behind Sunday's bombing are hiding across the border in Pakistan, and in a phone call with his Pakistani counterpart on Monday he demanded their arrest.

"The presence of terrorist elements in Pakistan is not justifiable and the Pakistani government needs to help arrest and punish the criminals as soon as possible," state TV quoted Ahmadinejad as telling Asif Ali Zardari.

Earlier Monday, an Iranian military official went as far as to raise the prospect of a possible military offensive into Pakistan against the group blamed for the attack.

"There is even unanimity that these operations (could) take place in Pakistan territory," the ISNA news agency quoted MP Payman Forouzesh as saying.

The Sunni rebel group known as Jundallah, or Soldiers of God, has waged a low-level insurgency in Iran's southeast to protest what it says is the government's persecution of an ethnic minority there claimed responsibility for Sunday's attack. The claim was posted Monday on an Islamic Web site that usually publishes Al Qaeda statements. Its authenticity could not be verified.

The official IRNA news agency said Sunday the dead included the deputy commander of the Guard's ground force, Gen. Noor Ali Shooshtari, as well as a chief provincial Guard commander for the area, Rajab Ali Mohammadzadeh. The other dead were Guard members or local tribal leaders. More than two dozen others were wounded, state radio reported.

The headquarters of Iran's armed forces blamed the bombing on "terrorists" backed by "the Great Satan America and its ally Britain," Fars News Agency said Sunday.

"Not in the distant future we will take revenge," Iran's statement read, according to Reuters. Iran's forces claim the country "will clear this region from terrorists and criminals."

"The global arrogance, with the provocation of its local mercenaries, targeted the meeting of the Guard with local tribal leaders," said the Guard statement read out on state TV.

The United States, however, condemned the attacks on Sunday and denied any involvement.

"We condemn this act of terrorism and mourn the loss of innocent lives. Reports of alleged U.S. involvement are completely false," U.S. State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said in a brief statement.

The Revoutionary Guard commanders were inside a car on their way to a meeting with local tribal leaders in the Pishin district near Iran's border with Pakistan when an attacker with explosives blew himself up, IRNA said.

Iran's state-owned English language TV channel, Press TV, said there were two simultaneous explosions: one at the meeting and another targeting an additional convoy of Guards on their way to the gathering.

The region's top prosecutor was quoted by the semi-official ISNA news agency as saying the Sunni rebel group Jundallah claimed responsibility for the blast.

There was no immediate statement directly from the group.

The group accuses Iran's Shiite-dominated government of persecution and has carried out attacks against the Revolutionary Guard and Shiite targets in the southeast.

That campaign is one of several ethnic and religious small-scale insurgencies in Iran that have fueled sporadic and sometimes deadly attacks in recent years — though none have amounted to a serious threat to the government.

The Guard commanders targeted Sunday were heading to a meeting with local tribal leaders to promote unity between the Shiite and Sunni Muslim communities.

In April, Iran increased security in Sistan-Baluchistan Province, at the center of the tension, by placing it under the command of the Guard, which took over from local police forces.

The 120,000-strong Revolutionary Guard controls Iran's missile program and has its own ground, naval and air units.

Iran's parliamentary speaker, Ali Larijani, condemned the assassination of the Guard commanders, saying the bombing was aimed at disrupting security in southeastern Iran.

"We express our condolences for their martyrdom. ... The intention of the terrorists was definitely to disrupt security in Sistan-Baluchistan

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Russia and China

Russia’s Leaders See China as Template for Ruling

New York Times
October 17, 2009

Nearly two decades after the collapse of the Communist Party, Russia’s rulers have hit upon a model for future success: the Communist Party.

Like an envious underachiever, Vladimir V. Putin’s party, United Russia, is increasingly examining how it can emulate the Chinese Communist Party, especially its skill in shepherding China through the financial crisis relatively unbowed.

United Russia’s leaders even convened a special meeting this month with senior Chinese Communist Party officials to hear firsthand how they wield power.

In truth, the Russians express no desire to return to Communism as a far-reaching Marxist-Leninist ideology, whether the Soviet version or the much attenuated one in Beijing. What they admire, it seems, is the Chinese ability to use a one-party system to keep tight control over the country while still driving significant economic growth.

It is a historical turnabout that resonates, given that the Chinese Communists were inspired by the Soviets, before the two sides had a lengthy rift.

For the Russians, what matters is the countries’ divergent paths in recent decades. They are acutely aware that even as Russia has endured many dark days in its transition to a market economy, China appears to have carried out a fairly similar shift more artfully.

The Russians also seem almost ashamed that their economy is highly dependent on oil, gas and other natural resources, as if Russia were a third world nation, while China excels at manufacturing products sought by the world.

“The accomplishments of China’s Communist Party in developing its government deserve the highest marks,” Aleksandr D. Zhukov, a deputy prime minister and senior Putin aide, declared at the meeting with Chinese officials on Oct. 9 in the border city of Suifenhe, China, northwest of Vladivostok. “The practical experience they have should be intensely studied.”

Mr. Zhukov invited President Hu Jintao, general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party, to United Russia’s convention, in November in St. Petersburg.

The meeting in Suifenhe capped several months of increased contacts between the political parties. In the spring, a high-level United Russia delegation visited Beijing for several days of talks, and United Russia announced that it would open an office in Beijing for its research arm.

The fascination with the Chinese Communist Party underscores United Russia’s lack of a core philosophy. The party has functioned largely as an arm of Mr. Putin’s authority, even campaigning on the slogan “Putin’s Plan.” Lately, it has championed “Russian Conservatism,” without detailing what exactly that is.

Indeed, whether United Russia’s effort to learn from the Chinese Communist Party is anything more than an intellectual exercise is an open question.

Whatever the motivation, Russia in recent years has started moving toward the Chinese model politically and economically. After the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, Russia plunged into capitalism haphazardly, selling off many industries and loosening regulation. Under Mr. Putin, the government has reversed course, seizing more control over many sectors.

Today, both countries govern with a potent centralized authority, overseeing economies with a mix of private and state industries, although the Russians have long seemed less disciplined in doing so.

Corruption is worse in Russia than China, according to global indexes, and foreign companies generally consider Russia’s investment climate less hospitable as well, in part because of less respect for property rights.

Russia has also been unable to match China in modernizing roads, airports, power plants and other infrastructure. And Russia is grappling with myriad health and social problems that have reduced the average life expectancy for men to 60. One consequence is a demographic crisis that is expected to drag down growth.

The world financial crisis accentuated comparisons between the economies, drawing attention to Moscow’s policies. In June, the World Bank projected that China’s economy would grow by 7.2 percent in 2009, while Russia’s would shrink by 7.9 percent.

Politically, Russia remains more open than China, with independent (though often co-opted) opposition parties and more freedom of speech. The most obvious contrast involves the Internet, which is censored in China but not in Russia.

Even so, Mr. Putin’s political aides have long studied how to move the political system to the kind that took root for many decades in countries like Japan and Mexico, with a de facto one-party government under a democratic guise, political analysts said. The Russians tend to gloss over the fact that in many of those countries, long-serving ruling parties have fallen...

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Iran

U.S. Mulling New Assessment of Nucleur Threat from Iran

Reuters
October 16, 2009

U.S. spy agencies are considering whether to rewrite a controversial 2007 intelligence report that asserted Tehran halted its efforts to build nuclear weapons in 2003, the Wall Street Journal reported Friday.

The possible reassessment comes as pressure is mounting from Congress and among U.S. allies for the Obama administration to redo the 2007 assessment, after last month's revelation of a second uranium enrichment plant in Iran.

German, French and British intelligence agencies have all disputed the conclusions of the 2007 National Intelligence Estimate, or NIE, in recent months, the Journal said, citing European officials briefed on the exchanges.

The report reversed earlier findings that Iran was pursuing a nuclear-weapons program. It found with "high confidence" that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003, and with "moderate confidence" that it hadn't been restarted as of mid-2007.

So far, intelligence officials are not "ready to declare that invalid," a senior U.S. intelligence official told the Journal, emphasizing the judgment covered the 2003-2007 time frame only. That leaves room for a reassessment of the period since the December 2007 report was completed, the official suggested.

The spy agencies "have a lot more information since we last did" a national intelligence estimate, the official said. Some of it "tracks precisely with what we've seen before," while other information "causes us to reassess what we've seen before," the official added.

U.S. intelligence officials have been discussing whether to update the 2007 report, though no decision has been made yet on whether to proceed, a senior U.S. intelligence official told the Journal.

If undertaken, a new NIE likely wouldn't be available for months, the Journal said. The United States and its allies have imposed an informal December deadline for Iran to comply with Western demands to cease enriching uranium or face fresh economic sanctions.

The 2007 U.S. intelligence estimate at the time dampened international support for further sanctions on Iran, which denies any plans for atomic weapons and says its uranium enrichment work is intended only for electricity production.

Iran's Dampans Western Expectations to Seal the Deal on Nuclear Talks

Reuters
October 16, 2009

World powers will seek to finalize an agreement with Iran next week on processing its uranium abroad to help allay Western fears it is developing nuclear weapons.

But Iran has dampened Western expectations it is ready to seal the deal. "Time is on our side," a senior Iranian official said. Tehran would send junior officials rather than its nuclear energy chief to the talks starting on Monday in Vienna, he said.

The International Atomic Energy Agency was ready for up to three days of talks on its premises but no one knew how long they would run, a diplomat close to the U.N. watchdog said.

Iran won itself a reprieve from the threat of harsher U.N. sanctions by engaging six powers in rare high-level talks on October 1 in Geneva that opened the door to detente over its disputed nuclear program after a seven-year standoff.

Iran stuck to its refusal to curb uranium enrichment. But it made two gestures of transparency that the powers touted as a basis for further steps they say Iran should make to disprove suspicions of a clandestine agenda to develop nuclear weapons.

Iran granted U.N. inspections at a hitherto hidden uranium enrichment site, and agreed in principle to have Iranian uranium processed in Russia and France for use by a Tehran reactor that makes cancer-care isotopes but is running out of imported fuel. Two days later, IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei pinned down October 25 to start surveillance of the site near Qom.

The United States, Britain, France and Germany indicate they will pursue sanctions targeting Iran's vital oil sector if the diplomacy begun in Geneva does not get Iran to temper and open up its nuclear program to scrutiny by the end of this year.

The Vienna talks to flesh out technical and legal aspects of the uranium proposal will be the first chance for Iran to make good on new prospects for nuclear cooperation raised in Geneva. But the proposal faces pitfalls due to differences over exactly what was agreed on October 1 and what each side wants out of the deal, and Iran's continued refusal to curb enrichment.

Western diplomats said Iran assented in principle to sending about 80 percent of its declared stockpile of low-enriched uranium (LEU) to Russia for further refinement, then on to France for fabrication into fuel assemblies. The material would then be returned for use by the Tehran reactor to replace fuel, obtained from Argentina in 1993 but set to run out in about a year, in a form resistant to being enriched to a very high -- or weapons-grade -- degree.

For world powers, the deal's benefit lies in greatly cutting Iran's LEU stockpile. This has no apparent civilian use since Iran has no operating nuclear power plants, but is enough to fuel one atomic bomb, if Tehran chose to purify it further.

Iran, which says it is enriching uranium only for future electricity, would save its medical isotope production despite sanctions that make it hard for it to import nuclear materials.

Russian, French, U.S. and IAEA officials want to wrap up key conditions with Iran next week, including a timetable and anti-proliferation guarantees once Iran recovers the material. French officials said the deal should entail Iran shipping out all 1.2 tonnes of the LEU before the end of this year.

"This is a win-win deal, a real opportunity for Iran to turn around perceptions of its nuclear behavior, so they ought to take the commitment they made in Geneva seriously," said a senior Western diplomat close to the negotiations.

But Tehran has signaled it may not be prepared to make binding decisions next week by not sending Ali Akbar Salehi, the nuclear energy program chief. Tehran has also denied tentatively agreeing to any details of the plan in Geneva. It said it was also looking into buying the needed fuel abroad, and warned it could enrich to higher levels itself if a deal could not be done with the powers.

"We have conditions and suggestions that need to be discussed," a senior Iranian nuclear official said.

He suggested strongly that these issues would take longer to resolve, without saying how long or what Iran had in mind.

Diplomats said Iran seemed to be again employing a savvy strategy of ambiguity to draw out dialogue, keeping deal-making channels open to give Russia and China enough political cover to continue blocking tougher U.N. sanctions against Tehran. More importantly, Iran would be buying time to achieve its industrial enrichment ambitions and overcome technical barriers.

Shoring up Iran's position, China said on Wednesday only "practical cooperation and close coordination" with Iran could resolve nuclear issues peacefully. Russia deflected a U.S. attempt in talks to obtain commitments to broader sanctions if Iran did not live up to new expectations of cooperation.

The uranium deal may not mean much in the longer run unless the Islamic Republic caps or halts enrichment -- to lock in the non-proliferation gains accrued from shipping LEU abroad. But Iran rules out any freeze or suspension of enrichment activity as an offence to national pride and sovereignty.

The major powers will press Iran on that issue at the next round of high-level diplomatic negotiations due in late October.

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page