Showing posts with label Isreal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Isreal. Show all posts

Sunday, September 7, 2014

Khamenei: Muslims Have ‘Upper Hand’ in Israeli-Palestinian Conflict


Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei today told a group of organizers of the upcoming Hajj that the “defeat” of Israel in the 50-day Gaza war was a manifestation of Muslim power.

“The defeat of the Zionist regime (Israel) in the 50-day war was the defeat of the symbol of Western power in the region at the hands of Gazan people,” Khamenei said. “The Gaza victory proved that Muslims are strong and have many capabilities, can defend themselves and challenge all enemies.” (Fars News Agency, 7 September)

“In the Palestinian issue, the Muslim fortunately have the upper hand,” Khamenei said, without any further explanations.

Photo credit: Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (FNA)

Tuesday, October 1, 2013

Netanyahu: No Partial Deal with Iran


‘Iran Needs to Fully Dismantles its Nuclear Weapons Program’
Addressing the United Nations General Assembly today, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu devoted his speech to Iran and Iranian nuclear issue. Following are some key passages. 

“Today our hope for the future is challenged by a nuclear-armed Iran that seeks our destruction. But I want you to know, that wasn't always the case. Some 2,500 years ago the great Persian king Cyrus ended the Babylonian exile of the Jewish people.

“President Rouhani, like the presidents who came before him, is a loyal servant of the regime. He was one of only six candidates the regime permitted to run for office. See, nearly 700 other candidates were rejected.

“Rouhani headed Iran's Supreme National Security Council from 1989 through 2003. During that time Iran's henchmen gunned down opposition leaders in a Berlin restaurant. They murdered 85 people at the Jewish community center in Buenos Aires. They killed 19 American soldiers by blowing up the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia.

“Rouhani doesn't sound like Ahmadinejad. But when it comes to Iran's nuclear weapons program, the only difference between them is this: Ahmadinejad was a wolf in wolf's clothing. Rouhani is a wolf in sheep's clothing, a wolf who thinks he can pull the eyes -- the wool over the eyes of the international community.

“Why would a country intent on merely civilian nuclear programs continue to defy multiple Security Council resolutions and incur the tremendous cost of crippling sanctions on its economy?

“And why would a country with a peaceful nuclear program develop intercontinental ballistic missiles, whose sole purpose is to deliver nuclear warheads? You don't build ICBMs to carry TNT thousands of miles away; you build them for one purpose, to carry nuclear warheads.

“Ladies and gentlemen, underground nuclear facilities, heavy water reactors, advanced centrifuges, ICMBs. See, it's not that it's hard to find evidence that Iran has a nuclear program, a nuclear weapons program; it's hard to find evidence that Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapons program.

“Last year when I spoke here at the U.N. I drew a red line. Now, Iran has been very careful not to cross that line but Iran is positioning itself to race across that line in the future at a time of its choosing.

“Israel will not allow Iran to get nuclear weapons. If Israel is forced to stand alone, Israel will stand alone.

(To Iran): “First, cease all uranium enrichment. This is called for by several Security Council resolutions. Second, remove from Iran's territory the stockpiles of enriched uranium. Third, dismantle the infrastructure for nuclear breakout capability, including the underground facility at Qom and the advanced centrifuges in Natanz. And, four, stop all work at the heavy water reactor in Arak aimed at the production of plutonium.

(To international community): “First, keep up the sanctions. If Iran advances its nuclear weapons program during negotiations, strengthen the sanctions.

Second, don't agree to a partial deal. A partial deal would lift international sanctions that have taken years to put in place in exchange for cosmetic concessions that will take only weeks for Iran to reverse.

Third, lift the sanctions only when Iran fully dismantles its nuclear weapons program. My friends, the international community has Iran on the ropes. If you want to knock out Iran's nuclear weapons program peacefully, don't let up the pressure. Keep it up.”

To read Netanyahu’s full remarks, published by Israeli Embassy in Washington, please click here.

File photo: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressing UN General Assembly. New York, 1 October 201 (Haaretz)

Sunday, February 10, 2013

Obama to Up Iran Heat in Return for Peace Talks - Report


Netanyahu's aides will visit U.S. in an attempt to link Iranian, Palestinian issues, the Jerusalem Post reported today, citing a report that will be published by the Sunday Times.

“US President Barack Obama is willing to up pressure against the Iranian nuclear program if Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu will open talks with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas on borders and security issues,” the report says. (JP, 10 February)

According to the report, “the US promised to raise the heat on the Iran issue in return for more open talks with the Palestinian leader even if core issues such as Jerusalem and the issues of Palestinian refugees is not raised.”

To read the Jerusalem Post report, please click here.
File Photo: Netanyahu and Obama at the White House. (Amos Ben Gershom/GPO/JP)

Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Iran Pulls Back from Nuclear Weapon – Israel Defense Minister

Iran has pulled back from its goal of building a nuclear weapon, said Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak. He told Britain's Daily Telegraph newspaper on Tuesday that an immediate crisis was avoided when Iran chose to use more than a third of its medium-enriched uranium for civilian purposes earlier this year. That decision, Barak added, “allows contemplating delaying the moment of truth by eight to ten months.” (Reuters, 30 October)

“There could be at least three explanations. One is the public discourse about a possible Israeli or American (military) operation deterred them from trying to come closer,” Barak said.

“It could probably be a diplomatic gambit that they have launched in order to avoid this issue culminating before the American election, just to gain some time.

It could be a way of telling the IAEA 'oh we comply with our commitments’.”

The Israeli defense minister added however that he believed Iran was still resolved to build nuclear weapons.

“We all agree that the Iranians are determined to turn into a military nuclear power and we all share the declaration that we are determined to prevent Iran from turning nuclear and all options are on the table,” Barak was quoted by Telegraph as saying. 

Tuesday, October 9, 2012

A perfect time to attack


The irony of recent events vis-à-vis Iran and Israel is that if Israel was planning an attack this would be a perfect time for one. Before any readers jump into any conclusions, this statement doesn't mean that I am advocating, or am in favor of, an immediate attack, but it is merely an observation.

Here is why I think this might be the perfect time for an Israeli attack against Iran:

The Israeli prime minister publicly retreated from his prior aggressive positions, opting instead for a higher threshold of tolerance for uranium enrichment by Iran, per his UN speech. Mr. Natanyahu appeared to acknowledge, and accept, the reality that United States' only red line is the one they have devised for Israel, which is: "don't drag us into war without our consent". The Iranians could be forgiven for thinking that the danger has passed, at least for now. 

To add to the sense of normalcy, the Israeli prime minister called for early elections. Again, no one would expect an attack on Iran in the midst of Israeli elections, but the rub is that the same players are expected to win this election, so there is really no political uncertainty to preclude an attack against Iran.

If Israel wanted to regain the element of surprise, then the recent, Israeli made, events have given it that element back, and all the pieces seem to be in place if they were to chose to attack, even as there seem to be no doubt that an attack is no longer considered imminent.

Another element needed, other than surprise, is the pretext for military movements. To that end, Israel has planned maneuvers in the Negev desert under the pretext of preparing for events in Syria in case the chemical weapon stockpiles are moved by the Syrian regime.

On the US end, the Israelis maybe sensing some room to maneuver as the US election is now more tightly contested making it difficult for President Obama to speak out against any Israeli military action if it were to occur. In fact, as I had written in the past, President Obama might hate the notion of war with Iran but such war would almost guarantee his reelection, so it's a "win win scenario" for him.

So, if Israel was actually planning to attack Iran in the next few weeks, hypothetically speaking of course, what would we expect it to say or do in prelude to war?

One might expect the following:

- Hint to the world that they are backing down, perhaps by using a UN speech to convey that message.

- Create additional diversions, like calling for early elections which could have been easily done after the US election or post new year.

- Keep the strike force on alert with preplanned maneuvers like the one already planned in the Negev.

- Strike when no one expects it.


I could be wrong, and all this could just be a cluster of coincidents.



Friday, September 7, 2012

Explosive Confrontation Between Netanyahu and the American Ambassador Dan Shapiro

According to the Atlantic magazine (based in Washington DC) Republican congressman Mike Rogers from Michigan, told WJR radio station in an interview, that a meeting last month between the Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the American ambassador Dan Shapiro had degenerated into a sharp confrontation. He indicated that he had never been witness to such high-level confrontation before. He went on to say that Israeli leaders as being at "wits' end" over what they see as President Obama's unwillingness to provide them with his "red lines" in the effort to stop Iran's nuclear program.

It is my observation, after reading the article, that while representative Rogers seems to paint a picture of Mr. Netanyahu being aggrieved by the Obama administration's lack of aggressiveness towards Iran, this event illustrate how Mr. Netanyahu maybe overplaying his cards during a crucial election season in the United States.

It wouldn't be a stretch to assume that no American president likes to be openly bullied into changing his or (future her) foreign policy.

Israel risks long term damage to its strategic relationship with the United States if it fails to bridge the gap between its expectations of the United States, and what the US is willing to do. Even if Mr. Romney gets elected, he may not want to look like he is copy-pasting his foreign policy from Mr. Netanyahu's wish list.

Israel's image with Jewish Americans, at least those who happen to be solid supporters of president Obama, is also at stake. It is worth noting that ambassador Dan Shapiro is a former National Security Council official, and a former Obama campaign Jewish liaison. Mr. Netanyahu should be careful whom he yells at.

Last but not least, It is interesting that congressman Rogers didn't find it disturbing that a foreign leader was sharply confronting the ambassador of the United States, and forcefully demanding a change in US policy, how unpatriotic of the congressman!

To read the Atlantic magazine report please go to:

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/09/intelligence-committee-chair-describes-explosive-confrontation-between-netanyahu-and-american-ambassador/262056/