"Nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, pestilences and earthquakes in divers places. All these are the beginning of sorrows. Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake." (Matthew 24:8-9).
"Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done" (Mark 13:30).
March 26, 2012
Forecasting the Day After an Israeli Attack on Iran
Absent total war, the day after an Israeli attack on Iran would see a flurry of conventional spycraft, cyber snooping, and frantic diplomacy
No sane person would wish for a unilateral Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities — but nor would a sane person wish for a nuclear Iran. Because of the number of potential targets in Iran, and the distance between them, a successful bombing operation would be transcendently difficult, if not impossible. But if intelligence suggested an impending, existential threat to Israel, it's easy to imagine F-15I fighter jets planting GBU-28 bunker-busters in Iranian nuclear sites from the Caspian Sea to the Persian Gulf. And if that happens, the real question becomes, what next?
The most precious asset for diffusing World War III would be time. Diplomats would have the unenviable task of mollifying a reeling Tehran, cooling external actors, and censuring Israel — though not too much. It was, after all, no less than Saudi King Abdullah who beseeched the United States to strike first and strike hard against Iran, lest a nuclear weapon disrupt regional metastability.According to classified diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks, his now famous request was to "cut off the head of the snake." Likewise, King Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa of Bahrain made the same request, to be executed "by any means necessary." The United Arab Emirates also condoned actions against Iran, provided Abu Dhabi would be involved only as a "very last resort."
Spy games and computer viruses are the best case scenario for the day after Israeli air force squadrons depart Iranian airspace.
Though regional outrage against Israel would surely be boiling over the day after a strike on Iran, many of Iran's neighbors would likely be privately pleased. They're not going to be in a rush to retaliate. They may very well make a lot of noise, but they won't immediately endorse an Iranian attack on Israel. That buys time.
Of course, Iran might not wait for its neighbors' green light before launching a retaliatory strike against Israel. In that case, Israel would lean hard on its missile defense technologies. Earlier this month, the Iron Dome short-range missile defense system proved battle effective against rockets launched by militants in Gaza, with an astonishing 90 percent success rate. The type of missiles launched from Iran, however, fall under the aegis of Israel's Arrow II ballistic missile shield, which has seen action only in simulations and test-fires. We simply don't know how well Israel's Arrow II would hold up against Iranian missiles. Because a sustained, retaliatory onslaught would tax any missile defense system to the brink, it is hard to say if 90 percent is the new normal, or a best case.
An additional Iron Dome battery will be deployed near Tel Aviv next month. A third layer of missile defense, David's Sling, begins interception tests later this year. And Arrow III, which targets nuclear warheads, is still a year away from intercept testing.Depending on the speed with which these missile defense systems are deployed — and their success in the field — Israel might be able to buy extra weeks, or even months, to prevent its conflict with Iran from blowing up into a full-blown regional war.
But the day after a strike on Iran, Israel won't just be playing defense and looking to soothe regional actors.Remember, Israel is believed to have one of the world's most highly advanced cyber warfare capabilities.As demonstrated in 2009 with Stuxnet — called "the most sophisticated cyberweapon ever deployed" — not even 30 feet of reinforced concrete and earth could protect the subterranean Natanz Nuclear Facility in central Iran. In a two-stage attack, the computer virus overloaded and destroyed at least 1,000 enrichment centrifuges, all the while reporting the situation as normal to workers. Though nobody is taking credit for this setback to Iran's nuclear ambitions, observers believe it to have been a joint operation between the United States and Israel.
Cyber warfare will almost certainly play some role in both a strike on Iran and the days that follow. When Israel bombed a Syrian nuclear reactor in 2007, for example, its planes passed through radar apparently undetected. How? Perhaps the raid involved an electronic attack on the Syrian air defense infrastructure. Following an attack on Iran, Israel would likewise use any means necessary to slow the gears grinding toward war. This would mean deploying disruptive cyber technologies. Electric grids are the most obvious target, as they often contain the most porous defenses. But interfering with aircraft guidance systems and targeting surveillance systems would offer the most gain, without further disruption of Iranian civilian life.
The problem with predicting cyber warfare is its "fairy dust"-like nature. Planners and observers can scarcely foresee what capabilities exist and whether or not they will work in any case. Simply put, like missile defense it is not a magic solution. Even in the case of the devastatingly effective Stuxnet attack, 4,000 centrifuges at Natanz remained operational. Cyber is but one item in the toolbox; it's not the box itself.
The West's unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), meanwhile, have seen much of Iran, both in the sky and on the ground. Last year, a Central Intelligence Agency RQ-170 Sentinel drone was downed over Iranian airspace near the border with Afghanistan. Iran captured the aircraft (designed to monitor nuclear facilities) before U.S. commandos could mount a rescue.Iranian scientists have since worked to unlock the secrets within, and U.S. intelligence and defense officials must now work under the assumption that the drone's cryptographic and stealth capabilities are compromised. There is some question as to whether the drone simply malfunctioned and landed, or whether Iran seized control by electronic means. If the latter is the case, it would suggest an interesting juncture in the brief history of drone warfare and espionage, and paint a remarkable portrait of Iran's cyber warfare capabilities. For its part, Iran has an ambitious drone research and development program.
Early last year, Iranian officials announced production of its own stealth UAV called the Eagle Ray, designed for surveillance and bombing runs. (It is unknown what, if any, design cues it may have later taken from the Sentinel.) This is in addition to a fleet of drones that includes a long-range bomber known as Karrar, and a partnership with Venezuela to build drones in South America.After an Israeli bombing, unmanned aerial vehicles would offer the most reliable imagery intelligence (IMINT) without jeopardizing lives, and more importantly, without complicating matters with captured pilots. Such IMINT would track military movements, monitor launch sites, and generally gather intelligence for further military action, should it come to that.
When technology fails, or proves to be too much sword and not enough scalpel, both countries can lean on their well-honed tradecraft. Iranian operatives have long aided Hezbollah in both its rocket and ground assault campaigns, and have targeted Israeli diplomats across Asia. Meanwhile, the Mossad, Israel's intelligence agency, is thought responsible for the aggressive assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists, including the spectacular hit earlier this year involving motorcyclists attaching a magnetic bomb to a Natanz director's car. You can bet that the day after an Israeli strike on Iran, both countries would set their extensive spy networks into furious sleuthing and subterfuge campaigns.
Each of these techniques and technologies has been used, is being used, and will be used, with or without a strike by Israel against Iran. President Obama has taken a cautious line on the subject, warning of "consequences for Israel if action is taken prematurely," two days after saying, "I have Israel's back." Meanwhile, he has imposed on Iran some of the most restrictive sanctions ever placed on any country. For his part, Meir Dagan, former director of the Mossad, called an attack by Israel "the stupidest idea I've ever heard." And not without reason.Spy games and computer viruses are the best case scenario for the day after Israeli air force squadrons, their ordnance spent, depart Iranian airspace.The worst case, absent total victory, is total war.
Top U.S. Gen. Martin Dempsey met with IDF Chief of Staff Benny Gantz in Washington March 19, 2012 (CJCS Dempsey …A classified Pentagon war game this month forecast that an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities would likely draw the United States into a wider regional war in which hundreds of American forces could be killed, the New York Times reported Tuesday.
The war games' results have "raised fears among top American planners that it may be impossible to preclude American involvement in any escalating confrontation with Iran," the Times Mark Mazzetti and Thom Shanker wrote.
Defense experts said the reported war games results are another attempted warning signal to Israel not to go it alone or risk harming relations with the United States.
"The apparent results of the war game reported by the Times suggest that it will be much more difficult than Israeli leaders assume to keep the United States out of the conflict," former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Middle East Colin Kahl told Yahoo News by email. "In the retaliatory spasm following an Israeli strike, the odds that Iranian actions and miscalculations could drag the United States military are substantial."
The two-week war simulation exercise—dubbed "Internal Look"—took place from Feb. 26 -March 3 at U.S. Central Command's headquarters at MacDill Air Force base, near Tampa, Florida, and at some overseas locations, a spokesman for U.S. Central Command said Tuesday.
It was designed to "refine the command's battle rhythm and assess the staff's ability to coordinate and communicate on a modern battlefield," U.S. Central Command spokesman Col. John Robinson told Yahoo News in an email Tuesday.
The war game posited a scenario in which an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities led to Iran retaliating by striking a U.S.
"Navy warship in the Persian Gulf, killing about 200 Americans," thus drawing the United States into the war, the Times' report said.
But some former officials urged caution when interpreting the war games' reported results.
"It's clear the administration believes an Israeli strike on Iran would be extremely problematic," Ken Pollack, a national security expert at the Brookings Institution Saban Center for Middle East studies and a former director for Persian Gulf affairs at the National Security Council, told Yahoo News in a telephone interview Tuesday. "But it is not at all clear that the game demonstrates that an Israeli strike could produce American casualties."
Pollack, who has designed and directed many such war games, explained that the designers of the game could simply have created an Iranian attack on the U.S. Navy ship as a method for testing America's control system to see if it could handle it.
The report on the war games comes as Israeli Defense Forces Chief of Staff Gen. Benny Gantz is in Washington for consultations. Meantime, the State Department's lead international Iran nuclear negotiator, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Wendy Sherman, is in Brussels Tuesday for meetings with her international counterparts to prepare for upcoming high-stakes talks with Iran over its nuclear program, a State Department official told Yahoo News Tuesday.
March 20, 2012
Russian President Orders Military to Prepare Countermeasures Against U.S. Missile Shield
President Dmitry Medvedev says Russian armed forces must prepare to counter U.S. missile defence plans.
Medvedev said Tuesday that even though diplomatic efforts are continuing, Russia must be ready to mount a military response to the U.S.-led NATO missile shield.
He was quoted by Russian news agencies as saying that Russia should be ready to take retaliatory measures by 2017-2018.
NATO has said it wants to co-operate with Russia on the missile shield intended to fend off the Iranian missile threat, but it has rejected Russia's proposal to run the shield jointly.
Without a NATO-Russia co-operation deal, Medvedev has sought guarantees from the U.S. that any future missile defence is not aimed at Russia. He has threatened to aim missiles at the U.S. shield if no agreement is reached.
North Korea's new leader Kim Jong-Un has overseen an attack drill and ordered the military to "mercilessly wipe out" their enemies in case of war, according to Pyongyang's official news agency.
The agency in a report dated Wednesday did not say when or where Kim launched the "combined strike drill" by the army, navy and air force, which comes amid high tension with South Korea.
Many of the country's top military and civilian officials attended the exercise, which featured a simulated attack by planes, ships and artillery on enemy warships.
Kim was officially appointed supreme commander of the 1.2 million-member military after taking over the national leadership following the death of his father Kim Jong-Il on December 17.
His regime has agreed a surprise nuclear deal with the United States but has taken a consistently hostile tone with the South's conservative government.
It has several times threatened a "sacred" war against the South over perceived insults to the North's ruling dynasty, and Kim has toured a series of frontline military units.
Kim accused the North's enemies of awaiting a chance to make a surprise attack, the news agency said. He ordered troops "to mercilessly wipe out the enemies with arms of justice and revenge once they go into action".
South Korean troops are also planning a major military exercise. It will be held near the disputed Yellow Sea border late this month to mark the second anniversary of the sinking of one of Seoul's warships.
The South accused its neighbour of torpedoing the corvette on March 26, 2010, with the loss of 46 lives. The North denied responsibility but shelled a South Korean border island eight months later, killing four people.
South Korean and US troops are already conducting a separate annual field exercise known as "Foal Eagle". The North says such drills are rehearsals for invasion.
The South has ordered troops to stay vigilant before dozens of national leaders including US President Barack Obama gather for a Nuclear Security Summit in Seoul on March 26-27.
North Korea on Sunday rejected criticism of its planned long-range missile launch which threatens to upset its only major benefactor, China, and put relations with the United States back in the freezer just as they seemed to be starting to thaw.
Political analysts say the launch, which would violate U.N. resolutions on the heavily sanctioned state, is aimed at boosting the legitimacy of its young new ruler Kim Jong-un who inherited power after his father's death in December.
"The peaceful development and use of space is a universally recognized legitimate right of a sovereign state," the North's state KCNA news agency said.
North Korea says it is using the rocket to launch a satellite to mark the 100th anniversary of the birth of Kim Il-sung, the country's founding ruler and grandfather of the current ruler.
The United States, and others, say it is much the same as a ballistic missile test and therefore off-limits for the isolated state which has for years been trying to build a nuclear arsenal.
Washington, which last month agreed to supply North Korea with food in exchange for a suspension of nuclear tests, missile launches and uranium enrichment and to allow nuclear inspectors into the country, called the planned launch "highly provocative".
More troubling perhaps for Pyongyang, which is long accustomed to trading invective with Washington, Beijing called the planned launch a "worry" in a rare attempt to put public pressure on its impoverished ally.
The North has invited foreign observers and journalists to attend the launch.
It announced the planned launch on Friday just weeks after the deal with Washington. It will coincide with the 100th anniversary of the birth of its founder Kim Il-sung.
In April 2009, North Korea conducted a ballistic rocket launch that resulted in a new round of U.N. sanctions, squeezing the secretive state's already troubled economy and deepening its isolation.
That launch was dismissed as a failure after the first stage fell into the Sea of Japan without placing a satellite in orbit. Another test failed in similar circumstances in 1998.
The new launch is due to take place between April 12-16, to coincide with Kim Il-sung's centenary celebrations and will coincide with parliamentary elections in South Korea.
Japan has said it would consider deploying PAC3 missile interceptors as it did in a 2009 launch by North Korea.
March 11, 2012
Obama Pressed Netanyahu to Postpone Israeli Attack on Iranian Nuclear Facilities until After November Elections
White House tells Sunday Times Obama pressed Netanyahu to postpone Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities until after November, adding president 'might visit Israel in summer'
Ynet March 11, 2012
Israel will only strike Iranian nuclear facilities in September or after the United States presidential elections in November, a White House official told the British Sunday Times newspaper after a meeting between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Barack Obama last week.
According to the report, Obama has taken Israel's warnings about a possible strike in Iran very seriously. The Washington source added that the president “might visit in the summer to reassure the Israelis that the US commitment to defend Israel is unshakable and thus thwart a possible autumn attack.”
Obama insisted that any attack on Iran should be postponed until after the US presidential elections in November, possibly even until next spring. The source revealed that Netanyahu consented to delaying a strike, but wished to know until when.
“The question is how much time,” he reportedly said.
The White House source added that Netanyahu presented a number of demands Iran must fulfill in order to avoid an Israeli attack, including transferring 150 kilograms (330 pounds) of enriched uranium to a third party, stopping the enrichment process at the Fordow site near Qom and ceasing any further enrichment beyond the 3.5% required for power generation.
The source reported that Israel's National Security Advisor Yaakov Amidror presented US administration and military officials with new intelligence data about Iran's nuclear program. The findings included "Project 111," a project to develop an intercontinental ballistic missile warhead and conduct large-scale high-explosive experiments, the Sunday Times reported. Amidror also noted that a Russian expert in Tehran had been involved for the past six years in helping develop Iran's nuclear program.
Israel rejected US claims that any official order from Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, to develop a nuclear bomb would soon reach them.
In the meeting, one Israel official told the Americans:
“We’ll not know beforehand about such an order, you’ll not know, and probably Allah himself will not know. The time we’ll know for sure is when we wake up to a nuclear test.”
Iranian Defense Minister says Israel "on the verge of dissolution," and that a military strike would "lead to the collapse" of the Jewish State, according to state-run TV
Jerusalem Post February 25, 2012
An Israeli military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities will result in "the collapse" of the Jewish state, Iranian state-run Press TV quoted Iranian Defense Minister Brig.-Gen. Ahmad Vahidi as saying on Saturday.
“The Zionist regime is on the verge of dissolution… a military attack by the Zionist regime will undoubtedly lead to the collapse of this regime,” the Press TV website quoted Vahidi as saying.
“Israeli officials’ remarks about launching an attack against Iran are ridicules [sic].”
According to Press TV, Vahidi made the comments on Thursday, a day ahead of the UN nuclear watchdog's latest report on the Iranian nuclear program.
The report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said Iran has yet to clarify a discrepancy in uranium quantities at a Tehran research site after measurements by international inspectors last year failed to match the amount declared by the laboratory.
The United States has expressed concern the material may have been diverted to suspected weapons-related research activity.
UN inspectors have sought information from Iran to help explain the issue after their inventory last August of natural uranium metal and process waste at the research facility in Tehran measured 19.8 kg less than the laboratory's count.
Experts say such a small quantity of natural uranium could not be used for a bomb, but that the metal could be relevant to weapons-linked tests.
"The discrepancy remains to be clarified," said report, issued to IAEA member states on Friday evening.
Israeli officials have reportedly let it be known that they won't give their United States counterparts a heads up if the country decides to launch an airstrike against Iran. According to the Associated Press, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has told this fact to every American official coming to Israeli hoping to talk them out of a pre-emptive strike of Iranian nuclear facilities. Officials say it's for the U.S.'s own good, since if they don't know about the strike in advance, they can't be blamed for failing to stop it. Never mind that most of Israel's enemies don't trust anything they say and would likely assume that the Americans were behind it anyway. [Source]
Israeli officials are pushing back against what appears to be a growing perception among experts and analysts that its military lacks the capability to deal a significant blow to Iran nuclear installations, warning skeptics not to underestimate the Jewish state.
The officials, including currently serving political figures and retired military officers, pointed out in interviews with The Daily Beast that Israel has a history of surprising its enemies and surpassing expectations, from the lightning assault of the 1967 war to the daring rescue operation for hostages at Entebbe in 1976.
Their remarks seemed calculated to counter reports like the one in The New York Times last week that suggested Israeli planes would face huge challenges in reaching Iran and destroying its nuclear installations, which are buried deep in the ground and scattered throughout the country.
But even as the officials sought to cast doubt about the assessments, they were unlikely to dispel the suspicion that Israel might be deliberately overstating its capabilities in order to prod the United States and other powers to deepen economic sanctions against Iran and, if necessary, launch their own military action to stop Tehran’s uranium enrichment.
“These reports don’t tell the whole story,” said one senior official who, like all the others, asked not be identified discussing Iran. “If we need to do it [attack Iran’s nuclear facilities], believe me, there are enough ways.”
Others echoed the remarks, including a retired senior officer who said:
“People take us seriously because we have a record in these things. Nobody should doubt us.”
Israel has been warning for years that Iran is developing nuclear weapons capability, a claim that was largely substantiated by an International Atomic Energy Agency report last November.Tension over the Iranian program has risen dramatically in recent months, with Israeli leaders repeatedly vowing to prevent Iran from crossing the nuclear threshold by whatever means necessary.
The United States takes the threat seriously. Fearing an Israeli attack would set the Middle East ablaze and tilt the world economy back toward an economic recession, President Obama has dispatched to Jerusalem a series of high-ranking officials to pressure Israel to give the latest round of sanctions – including an oil embargo and measures against Iran’s central bank—a chance to work.
Obama is expected to press the point personally with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu when the two men meet in Washington next month.
But a growing number of analysts, including Israelis, are now saying openly that Israel’s warnings are at least partly a disinformation campaign.
The skeptics include Martin van Creveld, Israel’s preeminent military historian and theorist, who said in an interview that Israel could do some damage to the Iranian program but could not knock it out.
“I would not be surprised if there was a strong element of political theater” to the Israeli threats, he said.
Barry Rubin, an Israeli expert on terrorism and international affairs, described the notion that Israel would attack Iran as “an absurd idea” and concluded:
“It isn’t going to happen.”
“So why are Israelis talking about a potential attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities? Because that’s a good way—indeed, the only way Israel has—to pressure Western countries to work harder on the issue, to increase sanctions and diplomatic efforts,” Rubin wrote on Pajamas Media.
The officials who spoke to The Daily Beast said the doubters weren’t seeing the whole picture. One alluded to advanced technology that Israel possesses that could not be factored into the analysis of experts because it remains secret. Others said some skepticism—from analysts or even from government insiders—always preceded Israel’s major operations, including its 1981 attack on Iraq’s nuclear plant.
One former Israeli official, speaking to a group of journalists recently, also rejected the idea that Iran’s response to an Israeli attack would upend the region.
“My assessment is that Iran will react but it will be calculated and according to Iranian means. The Iranians cannot set the Middle East on fire,” the former official said. “It will not be the doomsday promises of Iran… They do not have the capability to do what they threaten to do.”
Asked if Israel has the capability to deal a serious blow to Iran’s program, he said:
Tehran and Washington have discovered a surprising common bond: to pretend that they might be heading toward serious negotiations to curb Iran’s nuclear capacity. What’s more, they are pretending for the same reason: to ward off an Israeli attack on Iran.
Their moves are barely noticeable—vague diplomatic pronouncements, op-eds, lots of behind-the-scenes orchestration by Russia. They don’t want much attention—just enough to persuade Israel to wait on military action, to buy time. The American line is that the economic sanctions are working and weakening Tehran’s will. Iran’s line is we’re willing to compromise, but we’re not going to be pushovers.
Of course, there is no actual collusion between Iran and the United States; they don’t trust each other. But both have reached the conclusion that war is worse than continued uncertainty—at least for the time being, as far as the United States is concerned.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has been driving the process. Moscow is one of Tehran’s last reliable friends, which makes Russia agreeable to Iran, but suspect in the West. Nonetheless, Lavrov has presented Iran with an unpublished, and perhaps vague, step-by-step proposal with reciprocity at each step. The idea is for both sides to move forward gradually toward Iran’s limiting (not eliminating) its nuclear capacity, plus extensive inspections and the West’s lifting economic sanctions against Iran plus giving security guarantees.
U.S. officials and other sources claim a breakthrough occurred in the Russian-Iranian talks last month. The big concessions, they said, were made by Tehran. Iran would hold its uranium enrichment to 5 percent, well below the threshold needed to make nuclear weapons, maintain only one uranium facility, and allow extensive inspections. These diplomatic mumblings were never spelled out in an official document.Instead, they were followed by a general and short letter sent from Saeed Jalili, head of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council. The addressee was EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton, posting officer for the P-5+1 (the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany).
Next comes a small, but consequential buy-in to this process by the United States. At a press conference last week with Ashton, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called the letter “an important step.” Ashton pronounced herself “cautious and optimistic.” In diplomatic parlance, that’s not chicken feed. And remember, they were making nice to a mere 200 word letter that said practically nothing, suggesting they were really giving a nod to something else going on.
A variety of diplomats said that the hidden information was spelled out in a recent op-ed by Hossein Mousavian, a key figure on Iranian nuclear matters.In it, he urged each side to meet the other’s bottom line.The West would allow Iran to produce reliable civilian nuclear energy (in other words, continue uranium enrichment at low levels), and Iran would commit to intrusive inspections. Also, Iran would agree to provisions that would prevent its development of nuclear weapons or a short-notice breakout capability. In return, the West would remove sanctions, and normalize Iran’s nuclear standing at the U.N. Security Council and the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Mousavian added that he regarded the Lavrov plan as well as statements by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (proposing to limit uranium enrichment to 20% in return for the West supplying fuel rods for Iran’s research reactor) to be “the most conducive path to reaching such a deal.” This, again, was a nice little link to the authenticity of the Russian plan, but still nothing official.
The players in this game awaited another positive signal earlier this week, when international inspectors arrived back in Iran. But they were denied access to a key military facility and publicly announced their disappointment and departure Wednesday. Those who say the game goes on insist this is just a temporary setback, part of an Iranian strategy to look tough at home even as they maneuver abroad.The chest-thumping for home consumption was further punctuated this week by a senior Iranian general threatening a preemptive military strike against any “enemy” who threatened Iran.
To look on the bright side of things, all the tough moves and talk could be aimed at Iran’s parliamentary elections set for next week. This will pit President Ahmadinejad’s “moderate” governmental party against even more conservative groups. (The reformers just don’t count this time.) It is said that Ahmadinejad doesn’t want to be outflanked on the right by the conservatives; thus the tough talk. Afterwards, he would resume positive negotiating steps toward the West. Or maybe Iran is just a political mess with no one really in control.
So, to see what Iran might be up to, the West will have to wait until April, at the earliest. However, this could have a devastating effect on the Iranian-American maneuvers to hold off an Israeli attack. It’s hard to convince Israel that the sanctions are working and that Iran is bending in the face of Tehran’s stone-walling the international inspectors and threatening pre-emptive assault.But that still appears to be the main play of the Obama administration.
General Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told CNN on Sunday that an Israeli attack would be “premature” and “destabilizing.”Those are fighting diplomatic words against fighting. But they come from America’s top general, and they undoubtedly reinforce National Security Adviser Tom Donilon’s private messages to Israeli leaders in Jerusalem last week.
The mutual moves Tehran and Washington are making to convince Israel that serious negotiations are on the horizon are wearing thin. There isn’t enough happening in the diplomatic back channels. Thus, two choices remain:
Ahmadinejad has to defy the conservatives and be more forthcoming publicly. Not likely.
Alternatively, President Obama will have to suck it up in an election year and offer a comprehensive proposal of its own. Also unlikely.
At this point, then, Tehran’s and Washington’s subtle maneuvering to buy time is less a strategy than a prayer.
As the U.S. and Europe place sanctions on Iran for the nuclear program suspected of having a military aim, Iran continues to insist its work is for peaceful purposes only.That claim will likely suffer a setback by an interview published Tuesday in the semi-official Fars News Agency.
The wife of slain nuclear scientistMostafa Ahmadi Roshan tells Fars her husband wholeheartedly sought Israel’s destruction.
Roshan, a chemistry expert and a director of the Natanz uranium enrichment facility, was killed during morning rush hour in Tehran in January after a magnetic bomb was attached to his car.
No one has claimed responsibility for killing the nuclear scientist, but Iran has blamed the CIA, MI6 and Mossad for a string of assassinations targeting its nuclear scientists.
Wife of Assassinated Scientist: Annihilation of Israel "Mostafa's Ultimate Goal"
TEHRAN (FNA) - The wife of Martyr Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan Behdast, who was assassinated by Mossad agents in Tehran in January, reiterated on Tuesday that her husband sought the annihilation of the Zionist regime wholeheartedly.
"Mostafa's ultimate goal was the annihilation of Israel,"Fatemeh Bolouri Kashani told FNA on Tuesday.
Bolouri Kashani also underlined that her spouse loved any resistance figure in his life who was willing to fight the Zionist regime and supported the rights of the oppressed Palestinian nation.
This is not the first time Iranian officials have been quoted calling for Israel’s destruction. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said that Israel “must be erased from the page of time” and that the solution to the Middle East conflict is the “elimination” of Israel.
The combination of these calls for annihilation along with the prospects of the Islamic Republic being one day armed with a doomsday weapon is at the core of the debate over whether Israel should attempt a military attack to thwart Iran’s nuclear progress.
King Abdullah II on Tuesday blamed Israel for deadlocked Mideast peacemaking in a meeting with U.S. Jewish leaders, the official Petra News Agency said.
But the king's guests offered a more optimistic version of events, saying Abdullah had also been complimentary of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's position in recent peace talks.
Jordan last month played host to talks that have subsequently been broken off.Palestinian and Israeli negotiators have blamed the other for the cut-off.
Petra said Abdullah was specifically concerned over Israel's "unilateral policies." It said that included changing the identity of the traditionally Arab sector in East Jerusalem and tampering with Muslim holy shrines there.
It said Abdullah's remarks came in a meeting Tuesday with representatives of the New York-based Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish American Organizations — a central coordinating body for American Jewry, representing 52 national Jewish agencies.
Delegation leader Malcolm Hoenlein, speaking after the meeting, acknowledged the king's concerns about unilateral Israeli action, particularly in east Jerusalem.
But he also said Abdullah had in fact been complimentary of Netanyahu's peace efforts and had even asked him to convey a message of thanks for Israel's proposals in the latest round of peace talks.
"He praised Netanyahu and asked that we specifically at the end to please give a message to 'my friend' that I appreciate his taking risks by putting forth the package that he did ... a package that he knew was difficult to do, but he created a climate to enable the process to move forward and for negotiations to take place," Hoenlein said.
The talks, hosted by Jordan, began last month, but were soon cut off with the Palestinians complaining that Israel's offers were insufficient. The Palestinians are supposed to decide shortly whether to resume the talks.
Although Israel's position was not made public, officials have suggested it included handing over to the Palestinians most of the territory, but keeping large chunks that contain most of the Jewish settlements in the area.
Critically, the offer reportedly did not include east Jerusalem, where the Palestinians want to locate their capital. Officials say Israel wants to maximize the number of Israelis who end up under Israeli control, while maximizing the number of Palestinians who live in a future Palestine.
Petra said that Abdullah also warned that failure to realize a Mideast settlement would exacerbate tensions in a region engulfed by uprisings that have unseated four Arab leaders — a report not contradicted by Hoenlein.
"He said he doesn't think that it's over," said Hoenlein, who is the executive vice chairman of the Jewish umbrella group. "He also explained why it would be critical given all the developments in the region and that Israelis and Arabs are moving closer together a common agenda on the threat from Iran."
Israel is coming under increased pressure from Washington and Europe to hold off from attacking Iran over its disputed nuclear drive and allow time for a regime of tight international sanctions to kick in.
Pressure is being exerted from all directions, officials acknowledge, with Washington's concern over a pre-emptive Israeli strike reflected in the steady stream of senior officials arriving in Jerusalem for top-level talks.
The latest visitor was US National Security Adviser Tom Donilon, who on Sunday held a two-hour meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and held similar in-depth talks with Defence Minister Ehud Barak, whose "hawkish line" on Iran is worrying Washington, Haaretz newspaper reported on Monday.
Later this week, US intelligence chief James Clapper is also due to arrive, press reports said.
Barak, Netanyahu's de facto deputy, has been "summoned" to Washington next week, media reports said, ahead of a visit by the premier himself on March 5.
"Israel is under pressure from all sides. The Americans don't want to be surprised and faced with a fait accompli of an Israeli attack," a senior Israeli official told AFP, speaking on condition of anonymity.
"They are telling us to be patient and see if the international sanctions against Tehran will eventually work," he said.
In an interview with CNN this weekend, top US military commander Martin Dempsey gave a blunt assessment that it would be "premature" to launch military action against Iran.
For several weeks, Israel has blown hot and cold over the possibility of a pre-emptive military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, which much of the West believes masks a weapons drive.
"For now, we are trying to nurture a certain vagueness, partly to push the international community to impose even tougher sanctions against Iran," he said.
"But at the same time, we are dealing with the usual polyphony from Israel's political class," he acknowledged.
The United States is not alone in wanting to curb the warlike tendencies apparent in some Israeli circles.
On Sunday, Britain's Foreign Secretary William Hague said it would not be "wise" for Israel to take military action against Iran, echoing comments earlier this month by French President Nicolas Sarkozy.
"The solution is never military, the solution is political, the solution is diplomatic, the solution lies in sanctions," he told French Jewish leaders on February 8.
Even back home, Netanyahu is coming under pressure, with opposition leader Tzipi Livni accusing him of pursuing policies which isolate Israel.
"The prime minister's policies have brought about a situation in which the world is calling on us through loudspeakers to do this or not to do that," she told public radio on Monday.
"The whole world is running after us to stop us," she said.
Such policies, she charged, had meant Israel was "doubly isolated" -- over the Iranian issue and over the stalled peace process with the Palestinians.
In an editorial entitled "An American Warning," the left-leaning Haaretz newspaper urged the government to heed the warnings from Washington.
"Fear of Iran's nuclear programme is pushing Israel into a dangerous corner," it said.
"The state could find itself in a conflict of interest, or even on a collision course with the American administration just when it needs US support more than ever before."
Israel, it argued, "must listen to the warnings coming out of Washington and refrain, for now, from unilateral measures."
In 1981, Israel launched a pre-emptive strike on the unfinished Osirak reactor outside Baghdad, leaving US officials stunned and earning it a sharp rebuke from its American ally.
Meanwhile, Iran on Monday deployed warplanes and missiles in an "exercise" to protect its nuclear sites and warned it may cut oil exports to more European Union nations unless sanctions were lifted.
The moves were announced the same day as officials from the UN nuclear watchdog, the IAEA, arrived in Tehran for a second round of talks focused on "the possible military dimensions of Iran's nuclear programme."
Iran has repeatedly said it will not give up its nuclear ambitions, which it insists are purely peaceful.
March 10, 2012
Fifteen Palestinians Killed by Israeli Airstrikes, the Deadliest Gaza Violence in Over a Year
Israel pounded Gaza for the second day in a row Saturday, trading airstrikes and rocket fire with Palestinian militants and killing 15 of them as the deadliest Gaza violence in over a year showed no signs of abating.
Despite Egyptian efforts to mediate a cease-fire, Palestinians fired more than 100 rockets, some striking major cities in southern Israel and seriously wounding an Israeli civilian. The military responded with more than a dozen airstrikes and the targeted killings of Palestinian militants from various Gaza organizations.
Israel's lauded Iron Dome missile defense system intercepted more than 25 projectiles. Still, residents were told to stay close to home and the cities of Beersheba, Ashdod and Ashkelon called off school for Sunday.
Tit-for-tat exchanges between Israel and Palestinians have been routine since the 2009 war, but a flare-up of this intensity is rare. The Arab League called the Israeli attacks a "massacre." The United Nations and the State Department condemned the violence and called on both sides to exercise restraint.
"This round in Gaza is far from being over," Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said in a visit to southern Israel. "We will not allow anyone to harm the citizens of the country and we will act against anyone who attempts to launch rockets. They will pay a heavy price, and no one will have immunity."
The latest spate of violence got under way Friday afternoon, when an Israeli airstrike on a car in Gaza City killed top militant commander Zuhair al-Qaissi and two of his underlings. It was the highest-profile killing Israel has carried out in many months, interrupting a period of relative calm on the volatile southern front.
Almost immediately, Gaza militants unleashed a barrage of rockets toward southern Israeli border communities.
So far, militants have fired more than 100 rockets since al-Qaissi's killing, a major escalation from recent months. Palestinian militants fired some 50 rockets toward Israel in the previous three months.
Gaza's militant Islamic Hamas rulers condemned the Israeli strike but, pointedly, their fighters did not fire rockets at Israel. Instead, they quietly allowed other smaller Palestinian militants to unleash salvos.
In previous flare-ups, Hamas has used such a strategy to allow Palestinian militants to burn off their anger, with an eye toward the exchange of strikes eventually quieting down.
Hamas hasn't been eager to participate in rocket barrages since Israel conducted a punishing three-week war against the militant group in 2009. Hundreds of Palestinian civilians and militants were killed and the air and ground assault destroyed much of Hamas' infrastructure.
Since then, Hamas has sought to shore up its Gaza rule and amass a better weapons arsenal.Still, Israel's military said Hamas, as the territory's ruler, would "bear the consequences" for any attacks that emerged from Gaza.
Egypt, which has helped arrange truces in the past, said Saturday it was trying to cobble together a cease-fire.
"(We) won't give this occupation a free truce while our leaders and heroes are being killed," said Abu Mujahid, spokesman for al-Qaissi's group.
The U.N. and the State Department on Saturday called for an end to the violence.
"We deplore the fact that civilians are once again paying the price," said Richard Miron, a spokesman for Robert Serry, the U.N.'s special coordinator for the Middle East peace process. "This goes to prove finally that the situation in Gaza in very fragile and unsustainable."
In Washington, State Department spokesman Victornia Nuland said, "we condemn in the strongest terms the rocket fire from Gaza by terrorists into southern Israel in recent days, which has dramatically and dangerously escalated in the past day. We call on those responsible to take immediate action to stop these cowardly acts."
Israel released a number of video clips showing militants who were apparently hit by airstrikes moments before they were to fire rockets.
Palestinian rockets against Israeli communities have killed more than a dozen Israelis in the past decade.
This weekend's events are the deadliest in Gaza in more than a year.
Last April, Israeli killed 11 Palestinians, including four civilians, after Palestinian militants fired a rocket that hit a school bus and badly wounded a 16-year-old boy.
In August, Israel assassinated Kamal al-Nairab, al-Qaissi's predecessor as leader of the Popular Resistance Committees, after the group carried out an attack from Sinai that killed eight Israelis and injured 40.
Barak said al-Qaissi was preparing a similar attack. He said he couldn't say yet whether the plan had been completely thwarted.
The Popular Resistance Committees is a group closely aligned with Hamas that is best known for the 2006 abduction of Israeli soldier Gilad Schalit. Schalit was freed last year in exchange for over 1,000 Palestinian prisoners.
The current fighting could spiral out of control if Palestinian militants manage to kill Israeli civilians or if the Israeli strikes kill Palestinian civilians or another top militant.
On Saturday, the low whooshing noise of rocket fire from border areas toward Israel was palpably heard inside Gaza City. Israeli drones hovered in the skies above. Tens of thousands of Palestinian mourners marched through the streets in funeral processions. They carried slain militants in coffins, their bodies too torn up to be wrapped in cloth, as Muslim tradition dictates. Masked militants sprayed machine gun fire above the mourners' heads in angry grief.
"Revenge, revenge!" chanted the crowds.
Airstrikes continued throughout the day. The latest airstrike hit militants in the southern city of Rafah, near where an elaborate network of smuggling tunnels runs between the coastal strip and Egypt's Sinai peninsula. Palestinian officials said one militant was killed and three others wounded. An earlier strike killed two Palestinian militants on a motorbike in the border town of Bani Suheila in southeast Gaza.
Palestinian officials acknowledged that several of the dead were preparing to fire rockets.
This post contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
