Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu illustrates his concerns over Iran's nuclear ambitions: September 27, 2012.
Photo by AP ~ BUT ~attack not on horizon ~ Israel scolds U.S. for a leak accusing it of
striking Syria on July 5; but if the attack did take place, it was
Israel - not the U.S. - that increased the risk of war. http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.535951
The suspected
uranium-enrichment facility of Fordow near Qom, 156 km southwest of
Tehran, seen in this September 27, 2009 satellite photograph released by
DigitalGlobe on September 28, 2009.
Photo by Reuters
That Netanyahu prefers security questions as a way of avoiding oppressive economic matters cannot be ignored. But the prime minister truly views Iran's threat to Israel as being as serious as all the others put together. He is certain it was only his strong stand that has made the United States take the lead in imposing extensive sanctions in recent years. Netanyahu believes he needs to keep a credible military threat hanging over Iran if he wants the international community to impose a convenient compromise for Israel on the ayatollahs.
When it turned out, as predicted, that many in the West saw Hassan Rohani's election as Iran's president as license to stop worrying about the Iranian nuclear threat, Netanyahu reiterated his warnings. But there are greater obstacles than ever on Netanyahu's route to any potential attack.
First, it is hard to be persuaded of the seriousness of his intent to attack after he did not make good on his threat for three years running. Second, not only do America and the rest of the world object to an Israeli attack, there is also domestic opposition to one at this time. And so, talk of an attack seems more likely to come up again only in the spring of 2014, after the next round of talks between the world powers and Iran has been completed.
A new Israeli claim has been presented in recent days that, with the new centrifuges Iran is now installing, it can easily skip from 3.5 percent uranium enrichment to the 90 percent enrichment needed to make a nuclear bomb. This is a significant claim, but it is difficult to see the Americans buying it at this point.
Even if Israel pushes as hard as it can, it might end up having to agree to a compromise with the Iranians, if one is indeed attained. Indirect evidence of this direction can be seen in the multiyear program that the Israel Defense Forces presented last year. Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz spoke of a window of opportunity in the military threat against Israel, which allows him to cut units and reduce training for a limited time. Renewed discussion of Iran distracts attention from increased tensions between Israel and Syria.
Voices in the Israeli media scolded the American administration last week for a leak accusing Israel of being behind the July 5 attack on the coastal city of Latakia, Syria, and the depot storing Yakhont antiship missiles.
These claims ignore a basic fact: If Israel did indeed attack Syria on July 5 - for the fourth time this year, as the international media says - it was Israel and not the United States that increased the risk of war. The Israeli reasoning is familiar: Syrian President Bashar Assad wants to give advanced weaponry to Hezbollah to thank it for its support against the rebels. The weapons will change the balance in Lebanon, and Israel is within its rights to thwart the move.
The Israeli action (if it indeed took place) seems to have been based on two assumptions. First, Assad does not want a direct confrontation with militarily superior Israel and, as long as both sides deny the action, Assad is not humiliated and can hold back. But Israel is playing with fire. Assad could reach breaking point and decide to attack, in revenge for the breach of his sovereignty, even if he pays a price. Second, the claims supporting the attack on the Yakhont missiles cite the threat to Israel's offshore gas rigs. But what if Assad decides to fire one of his remaining missiles at the gas rig in response to the attack, or "just" fire one of his less precise missiles at an air force base in the north.
Will Israel embark on the first gas war?
Another point missing from the discussion is provocation of the Russians. According to reports from Syria, Russian weapons systems were hit in two of the four attacks. Moscow supports Assad's murderous regime and helps Israel's enemies without pangs of conscience. But if Russia decides that the last attacks are a provocation, it could, under extreme circumstances, encourage Assad to respond. Under less extreme circumstances, it could continue to ignore Israel's entreaties not to supply Assad with new S-300 antiaircraft systems.
|
|||||||
by Stephen Lendman
Israel reflects the worst of rogue state governance. It's contemptuous of international laws, treaties, conventions, its own statutes, and High Court decisions. It's out-of-control. It's unaccountable. It makes its own rules. It maintains lawless militarized occupation harshness. It force-feeds austerity on its own citizens. It suffocates 1.7 million Gazans. It attacks other countries with impunity. It's waging undeclared war on Syria. It's partnering with Washington doing so. It supports terrorist fighters. It supplies arms and munitions. It hospitalizes wounded ones. Netanyahu lied saying Israel's sole interest is preventing Syrian weapons transfers to Hezbollah. At issue is partnering with Washington's war. It's about regime change. It's about ravaging another country doing so. It's about eliminating a regional rival. Since conflict began in March 2011, Israel launched several cross-border ground attacks. It made one or more incursions. It conducted four air attacks. These incidents are acts of war. They're lawless aggression. No nation may attack another except in self-defense. Israel does it often. UN condemnation doesn't follow. US vetoes prevent Security Council action. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's a complicit imperial tool. He disgraces the office he holds. He betrays the world community. He spurns his oath "to exercise in all loyalty, discretion and conscience the functions entrusted to (him) to discharge these functions and regulate (his) conduct with the interests of the United Nations only in view, and not to seek or accept instructions in regard to the performance of (his) duties from any government or other authority external to the Organization." He lets America and Israel get away with mass murder. He virtually ignores Israeli air attacks. Doing so lets them strike Syria with impunity. His pro forma statements are deplorable. They're offensive. They're reprehensible. They reflect gross hypocrisy. Calling "on all sides to exercise maximum calm and restraint" shows contempt for UN Charter provisions. Since January, Israel struck Syria four times by air. It acted preemptively. It did so lawlessly. It remains unaccountable for clear acts of war. On July 5, Israel's most recent attack occurred. A major Latakia-based weapons depot was struck. Reports indicated total destruction. Russian-made S-300 anti-aircraft missile components were targeted. Perhaps Yakhont anti-ship cruise missiles also. Free Syrian Army forces initially took credit. They had nothing to do with it. They later denied it. Netanyahu said he's "not in the habit of saying what we did or didn't do." Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon evaded the subject when asked, saying: "We have set red lines in regards to our own interests, and we keep them." "There is an attack here, an explosion there, various versions - in any event, in the Middle East it is usually we who are blamed for most." It's for good reason. Ya'alon didn't explain. In late January, Israel struck one or more targets on the Syrian-Lebanese border. Around the same time, Israeli warplanes attacked a military research center in Jamraya. It's about 10 miles from the Lebanese border. On May 3 and 5, the Damascus al-Hameh area was struck. Syria called doing so naked aggression. The attacks show direct involvement in Washington's war. They indicate support for armed terrorist groups. Video footage showed multiple explosions. Huge fires followed. Obama ignored Israel's naked aggression. He claimed it's entitled to defend itself against enemies. He lied saying so. Israel and Washington share responsibility. These type incidents are jointly planned. They're acts of aggression. Both nations partner in imperial wars. Doing so is longstanding. Syria remains in the eye of the storm. On July 5, Israel targeted Russian-made SA-300 air defense missile components. Perhaps Yakhont anti-ship cruise missiles also. On July 14, Russia Today (RT) cited Britain's Sunday Times. It claimed Israeli Dolphin-class submarines were involved. It said "50 Russian-made Yakhont P-800 missiles" were struck. Doing so was "closely coordinated with the US." Israeli "German-built submarines launched a cruise missile at the weapons cache after which Syrian rebels reportedly attested to hearing early-morning explosions at a Syrian port-side naval barracks." Israel neither confirmed or denied involvement. On July 12, CNN headlined "Israel believed behind recent Syria strike," saying: Three anonymous US officials said Israeli warplanes struck Latakia. No one officially claimed responsibility. On July 15, RT headlined "Israeli strike on Syria was carried out from Turkish base," saying: A "reliable source" said so. According to RT's Paula Slier: "Our source is telling us that Israeli planes left a military base inside Turkey and approached Latakia from the sea to make sure that they stayed out of Syrian airspace so that they cannot become a legitimate target for the Syrian air force." Perhaps warplanes and submarines launching cruise missiles carried out the attack jointly. Doing so would assure greater chance for success. It shows Israel has multiple ways to strike targets. It does so without fear of retaliation. Israel and Turkey normalized relations months earlier. Killing nine Turkish nationals attempting to deliver humanitarian aid to Gaza no longer matters. Perhaps it never did. Each side values strategic ties to the other. Petty squabbles are less important. They're NATO partners. Israel's a Mediterranean Dialogue member. So are Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Mauritania, Morocco and Tunisia. Imperial priorities matter most. Israel and Turkey are Washington partners against Syria. They're involved in other imperial initiatives. They're rogue states. Rule of law principles don't matter. Hurriyet News said Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu denied reports about Israel using one its air bases against Syria. It's "totally untrue," he said. "Turkey will neither be a part nor a partner of such 'attacks,' " he stressed. "The ones who claim this want to damage Turkey's power and reputation." "It is out of the question that Turkey and Israel are part of a joint military operation." An anonymous "high ranking Turkish official" told Hurriyet the same thing. Plausible deniability is standard practice unless or until nations wish to tip their hands. Separately, Netanyahu warned Iran. He told CBS News Face the Nation "(t)here edging up to the red line. They haven't crossed it yet." "They're getting closer and closer to the bomb. And they have to be told in no uncertain terms that that will not be allowed to happen." Israel has a narrower timetable than Washington, he stressed. He stopped short of saying Israel would act unilaterally. He's more bluster than follow-through. He prefers joint US/Israeli action. He won't attack unilaterally without Washington's permission. He lets words substitute for action. Attacking Iran assures certain retaliation. Israel's small and vulnerable. If Iranian nuclear sites are struck, Israel's likely will in response. Doing so is lose-lose for both sides. Whether Israel's foolish enough to risk enormous harm remains to be seen. It doesn't deter Netanyahu's bluster. He said "(o)ur clocks are ticking at a different pace. We're closer than the United States. We're more vulnerable." "And therefore, we'll have to address this question of how to stop Iran, perhaps before the United States does." Asked when he'll decide whether to attack, he said "I can tell you one thing - before it's too late." "I am determined to defend my country from a regime that threatens us with renewed annihilation." Netanyahu repeats this canard often. He knows it's untrue. He claims it anyway. It's red meat for hardliners. It's wearing thin. Iran hasn't attacked another country in centuries. Israel does it often. Tehran's program is peaceful. Israel knows it. So does America. Bluster persists anyway. Iran's building "faster centrifuges that would enable them to jump the line, so to speak, at a much faster rate - that is, within a few weeks," said Netanyahu. He expects no change under President-elect Hassan Rohani. He called him a "wolf in sheep's clothing." His strategy is "(s)mile and build a bomb." He lied saying so. Netanyahu and Obama are serial liars. They're rogue leaders. They menace humanity. They make more enemies than friends. They do so for good reason. They spurn peace. They prioritize regional conflicts. They consider mass killing and destruction strategically important. Netanyahu wants Obama to stand by his red line. He wants Iran told military force "is truly on the table." "We've spoken many times, President Obama and I, about the need to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons," he said. "What is important is to convey to them that (the) policy will not change." "If sanctions don't work, they have to know that you'll be prepared to take military action - that's the only thing that will get their attention." He claimed Tehran's developing ICBMs. They're to reach America, he said. He lied saying so. On Sunday, he told cabinet ministers "(n)ow more than ever" it's important to intensify the economic sanctions and present a credible military option." "A month has passed since the Iranian presidential elections and Iran continues to surge forward quickly toward developing its nuclear military capability." "Iran is expanding and refining its enrichment process and developing a plutonium reactor at the same time." Netanyahu wants all uranium enrichment stopped. He wants enriched materials inside Iran's borders removed. He wants its Qom facility closed. Tehran intends to continue its peaceful program. It has every right to do so. On August 3, Rohani will be inaugurated. He's been clear saying legitimate activities will continue. He's conciliatory. He'll negotiate responsibly with P5 +1 countries. He deserves similar treatment in return. He won't get it. Washington remains hardline. US officials said pressure won't ease. Doing so assures no resolution. What follows remains to be seen. |
No comments:
Post a Comment