19 sept 2013
Iran President Hassan Rouhani has criticized the Israeli regime for doing “injustice to people of the Middle East” and sowing instability in the region.
Speaking in an exclusive interview with the American TV channel, NBC, Rouhani described the Israeli regime as "occupier and usurper" and one which does injustice to regional people and has brought instability to the region through its warmongering policies.
He also responded to a tirade by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who had described Rouhani as “a wolf in sheep's clothing” shortly after his election as Iran's 11th president.
“Israel should not allow itself to comment on an administration that has come to power through a democratic and free election,” said the Iranian president, who garnered more than half of the votes cast on June 14 in a national election marked by a turnout of more than 72 percent.
Rouhani, however, noted that Iran does not seek war with anyone in the region, saying that Tehran is after regional peace and stability.
On Tuesday, Netanyahu repeated his call for tougher international pressure on Iran over its nuclear energy program and said halting Iran’s nuclear energy program tops his agenda during his upcoming visit to the US in late September.
He argued that all diplomatic efforts aimed at resolving the issue over Iran's nuclear energy program must be accompanied by a “credible military threat.”
But Rouhani emphasized that Tehran will never develop nuclear weapons and has never pursued that path.
The US, Israel and some of their allies accuse Iran of pursuing non-civilian objectives in its nuclear energy program with the Israeli regime repeatedly threatening to attack Iran's nuclear facilities.
Iran argues that as a committed signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency, it has every right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.
Tehran has also vowed a crushing response to any act of aggression against the country. (Video on the link)
Speaking in an exclusive interview with the American TV channel, NBC, Rouhani described the Israeli regime as "occupier and usurper" and one which does injustice to regional people and has brought instability to the region through its warmongering policies.
He also responded to a tirade by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who had described Rouhani as “a wolf in sheep's clothing” shortly after his election as Iran's 11th president.
“Israel should not allow itself to comment on an administration that has come to power through a democratic and free election,” said the Iranian president, who garnered more than half of the votes cast on June 14 in a national election marked by a turnout of more than 72 percent.
Rouhani, however, noted that Iran does not seek war with anyone in the region, saying that Tehran is after regional peace and stability.
On Tuesday, Netanyahu repeated his call for tougher international pressure on Iran over its nuclear energy program and said halting Iran’s nuclear energy program tops his agenda during his upcoming visit to the US in late September.
He argued that all diplomatic efforts aimed at resolving the issue over Iran's nuclear energy program must be accompanied by a “credible military threat.”
But Rouhani emphasized that Tehran will never develop nuclear weapons and has never pursued that path.
The US, Israel and some of their allies accuse Iran of pursuing non-civilian objectives in its nuclear energy program with the Israeli regime repeatedly threatening to attack Iran's nuclear facilities.
Iran argues that as a committed signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency, it has every right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.
Tehran has also vowed a crushing response to any act of aggression against the country. (Video on the link)
The White House says President Barack Obama believes that the “window of opportunity” is open for diplomacy with Iran over its nuclear program.
Obama has told Iranian President Hassan Rouhani in an exchange of letters that Washington is ready to resolve the nuclear standoff with Iran diplomatically, White House spokesman Jay Carney said Wednesday, Reuters reported.
"In his letter the president indicated that the US is ready to resolve the nuclear issue in a way that allows Iran to demonstrate that its nuclear program is for exclusively peaceful purposes," Carney said.
"The letter also conveyed the need to act with a sense of urgency to address this issue because, as we have long said, the window of opportunity for resolving this diplomatically is open, but it will not remain open indefinitely," he said.
Obama first confirmed publicly during an interview with ABC on Sunday that he has exchanged letters with Rouhani and expressed hope the two can “strike a deal” over the nuclear issue.
In an interview aired Tuesday by Spanish-language network Telemundo, President Obama said, “There are indications that Rouhani, the new president, is somebody who is looking to open dialog with the West and with the United States, in a way that we haven't seen in the past. And so we should test it.”
On Tuesday, Iran’s Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Marziyeh Afkham also confirmed the exchange of letters, saying Obama had congratulated Rouhani on his election as Iran’s president. She also said that Rouhani had written back to Obama and had thanked him for the message and expressed his views on several subjects.
Obama and Rouhani will both be in New York City next week to attend the United Nations General Assembly.
“No meeting with American officials is on the agenda during Dr. Rouhani’s trip,” Afkham said Tuesday. The White House had earlier said that there were “currently no plans” for Obama to meet with his Iranian counterpart in New York.
The United States, Israel, and some of their allies accuse Iran of pursuing non-civilian objectives in its nuclear energy program.
Iran rejects the allegations, arguing that as a committed signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), it has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.
Obama has told Iranian President Hassan Rouhani in an exchange of letters that Washington is ready to resolve the nuclear standoff with Iran diplomatically, White House spokesman Jay Carney said Wednesday, Reuters reported.
"In his letter the president indicated that the US is ready to resolve the nuclear issue in a way that allows Iran to demonstrate that its nuclear program is for exclusively peaceful purposes," Carney said.
"The letter also conveyed the need to act with a sense of urgency to address this issue because, as we have long said, the window of opportunity for resolving this diplomatically is open, but it will not remain open indefinitely," he said.
Obama first confirmed publicly during an interview with ABC on Sunday that he has exchanged letters with Rouhani and expressed hope the two can “strike a deal” over the nuclear issue.
In an interview aired Tuesday by Spanish-language network Telemundo, President Obama said, “There are indications that Rouhani, the new president, is somebody who is looking to open dialog with the West and with the United States, in a way that we haven't seen in the past. And so we should test it.”
On Tuesday, Iran’s Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Marziyeh Afkham also confirmed the exchange of letters, saying Obama had congratulated Rouhani on his election as Iran’s president. She also said that Rouhani had written back to Obama and had thanked him for the message and expressed his views on several subjects.
Obama and Rouhani will both be in New York City next week to attend the United Nations General Assembly.
“No meeting with American officials is on the agenda during Dr. Rouhani’s trip,” Afkham said Tuesday. The White House had earlier said that there were “currently no plans” for Obama to meet with his Iranian counterpart in New York.
The United States, Israel, and some of their allies accuse Iran of pursuing non-civilian objectives in its nuclear energy program.
Iran rejects the allegations, arguing that as a committed signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), it has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.
17 sept 2013
The White House says US President Barack Obama will not meet with his Iranian counterpart Hassan Rouhani on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York next week.
“There are currently no plans for the president and President Rouhani to meet at UNGA,” National Security Council spokeswoman Bernadette Meehan said in an email to American newspaper The Hill.
"As we have said, we hope that this new Iranian government will engage substantively in order to reach a diplomatic solution that will fully address the international community’s concerns about Iran’s nuclear program,” Meehan said.
“We remain ready to engage with the Rouhani government on the basis of mutual respect to achieve a peaceful resolution to the nuclear issue," she added.
The denial came one day after British newspaper The Guardian reported on Sunday that an exchange of letters between Obama and Rouhani “has set the stage for a possible meeting.”
President Obama in an interview with ABC on Sunday said that he had contacted his Iranian counterpart via letters.
Obama also said Iran should not interpret the diplomatic course on Syria as suggesting the United States would not attack Iran. He signaled that it was possible to resolve Iran’s nuclear program standoff diplomatically.
“My view is that if you have both a credible threat of force, combined with a rigorous diplomatic effort, that, in fact you can... strike a deal,” he said.
The United States, Israel, and some of their allies accuse Iran of pursuing non-civilian objectives in its nuclear energy program.
Iran rejects the allegations, arguing that as a committed signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), it has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.
“There are currently no plans for the president and President Rouhani to meet at UNGA,” National Security Council spokeswoman Bernadette Meehan said in an email to American newspaper The Hill.
"As we have said, we hope that this new Iranian government will engage substantively in order to reach a diplomatic solution that will fully address the international community’s concerns about Iran’s nuclear program,” Meehan said.
“We remain ready to engage with the Rouhani government on the basis of mutual respect to achieve a peaceful resolution to the nuclear issue," she added.
The denial came one day after British newspaper The Guardian reported on Sunday that an exchange of letters between Obama and Rouhani “has set the stage for a possible meeting.”
President Obama in an interview with ABC on Sunday said that he had contacted his Iranian counterpart via letters.
Obama also said Iran should not interpret the diplomatic course on Syria as suggesting the United States would not attack Iran. He signaled that it was possible to resolve Iran’s nuclear program standoff diplomatically.
“My view is that if you have both a credible threat of force, combined with a rigorous diplomatic effort, that, in fact you can... strike a deal,” he said.
The United States, Israel, and some of their allies accuse Iran of pursuing non-civilian objectives in its nuclear energy program.
Iran rejects the allegations, arguing that as a committed signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), it has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.
US President Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will meet in Washington DC on September 30, an Israeli newspaper reported Tuesday.
Topics expected to be covered include the crisis in Syria and Iran’s nuclear program. The meeting will be incorporated into Netanyahu’s scheduled attendance at the United Nations General Assembly, according to Jerusalem Post.
Netanyahu met with US Secretary of State John Kerry earlier this week for a briefing on the US-Russia brokered deal to have Syria dismantle its chemical weapons arsenal, an agreement that was met with “tempered optimism” from Israeli officials, according to the report.
Topics expected to be covered include the crisis in Syria and Iran’s nuclear program. The meeting will be incorporated into Netanyahu’s scheduled attendance at the United Nations General Assembly, according to Jerusalem Post.
Netanyahu met with US Secretary of State John Kerry earlier this week for a briefing on the US-Russia brokered deal to have Syria dismantle its chemical weapons arsenal, an agreement that was met with “tempered optimism” from Israeli officials, according to the report.
12 sept 2013
Israel says Iran continues to seek nuclear arms under its new and more moderate president, voicing a harder line than the United States toward Iran at a UN nuclear agency meeting. Israeli delegate Ehud Azoulay said Thursday that the change in Iran's presidency does not mean a "change in their (nuclear) policy."
Iran says it will cooperate with UN nuclear watchdog
Report: Obama may meet Rohani this month outside UN conference
Report: Obama may meet Rohani this month outside UN conference
9 sept 2013
The London-based Arabic-language al-Hayat newspaper reports that US President Barack Obama relayed an appeasing message to Iranian President Hassan Rohani recently in a bid to turn over a new leaf in the relations between the two countries.
According to the report, in his message to Rohani through Oman ruler Qaboos bin Said al-Said, Obama said the US was willing to ease the economic sanctions on Iran and advance negotiations on the Islamic Republic's nuclear program.
According to the report, in his message to Rohani through Oman ruler Qaboos bin Said al-Said, Obama said the US was willing to ease the economic sanctions on Iran and advance negotiations on the Islamic Republic's nuclear program.
7 sept 2013
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Saturday dismissed seemingly conciliatory statements from Iran as a smokescreen to divert attention from Tehran's efforts to build nuclear arms.
In a statement from his office, Netanyahu brushed off remarks in which Iranian officials condemned the Holocaust and even wished Jews a happy new year.
He called on the international community to increase pressure on the Islamic republic.
"I am not impressed by greetings coming from the regime which just last week threatened to destroy Israel," said Netanyahu.
"The Iranian regime will be judged solely on its deeds, not its greetings, whose only purpose it to distract attention from the fact that even after the elections it continues to enrich uranium and build a plutonium reactor with the aim of acquiring a nuclear weapon which will threaten Israel and the whole world."
Iran's army chief of staff General Hassan Firouzabadi was quoted by the official IRNA news agency on August 29 as saying that a US-led military strike against Tehran's ally Syria would leave American protege Israel in flames.
In contrast, new Iranian President Hassan Rowhani is waging a public relations campaign to improve the Islamic republic's image, after years of bad press over Tehran's atomic ambitions and incendiary comments by former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
In his first remarks since Rowhani tasked him with taking over Iran's sensitive nuclear talks with world powers, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said Tehran wants to calm fears over its atomic program.
"Allaying international concerns is in our interest because atomic weapons do not form part of the Islamic republic's policies," Zarif said on Friday.
Iran says its nuclear ambitions are for entirely peaceful purposes, despite fears in Israel and among world powers that its uranium enrichment masks a covert weapons drive.
Zarif, a US-educated moderate and former ambassador to the United Nations, said on Facebook this week that Tehran condemns the World War II Nazi massacre of the Jews, in stark contract to Holocaust denials by Ahmadinejad.
In an interview published on his Facebook page, he confirmed reports he had tweeted best wishes for the Jewish new year in an exchange with Christine Pelosi, daughter of the Democratic leader in the US House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi.
In a statement from his office, Netanyahu brushed off remarks in which Iranian officials condemned the Holocaust and even wished Jews a happy new year.
He called on the international community to increase pressure on the Islamic republic.
"I am not impressed by greetings coming from the regime which just last week threatened to destroy Israel," said Netanyahu.
"The Iranian regime will be judged solely on its deeds, not its greetings, whose only purpose it to distract attention from the fact that even after the elections it continues to enrich uranium and build a plutonium reactor with the aim of acquiring a nuclear weapon which will threaten Israel and the whole world."
Iran's army chief of staff General Hassan Firouzabadi was quoted by the official IRNA news agency on August 29 as saying that a US-led military strike against Tehran's ally Syria would leave American protege Israel in flames.
In contrast, new Iranian President Hassan Rowhani is waging a public relations campaign to improve the Islamic republic's image, after years of bad press over Tehran's atomic ambitions and incendiary comments by former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
In his first remarks since Rowhani tasked him with taking over Iran's sensitive nuclear talks with world powers, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said Tehran wants to calm fears over its atomic program.
"Allaying international concerns is in our interest because atomic weapons do not form part of the Islamic republic's policies," Zarif said on Friday.
Iran says its nuclear ambitions are for entirely peaceful purposes, despite fears in Israel and among world powers that its uranium enrichment masks a covert weapons drive.
Zarif, a US-educated moderate and former ambassador to the United Nations, said on Facebook this week that Tehran condemns the World War II Nazi massacre of the Jews, in stark contract to Holocaust denials by Ahmadinejad.
In an interview published on his Facebook page, he confirmed reports he had tweeted best wishes for the Jewish new year in an exchange with Christine Pelosi, daughter of the Democratic leader in the US House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi.
6 sept 2013
Iran's President Hassan Rowhani (L) with Mohammad Javad Zarif in Tehran on August 5, 2013
Iran's foreign minister said on Facebook that Tehran condemns the World War II Nazi massacre of the Jews, in stark contract to Holocaust denials by former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
"We condemn the massacre of Jews by the Nazis, and we condemn the massacre of Palestinians by the Zionists," Mohammad Javad Zarif wrote on his Facebook page, where he published the text of an interview he gave to the Tasnim news agency.
Zarif was also asked whether he wished Jews "Happy Rosh Hashanah" (new year), and had had an exchange about the Holocaust on Twitter.
"I replied to a question from a person who appeared to be the daughter of the ex-speaker of the US House of Representatives," Nancy Pelosi, he wrote.
On his recently activated Twitter account, Zarif wrote in English "Happy Rosh Hashanah," and Christine Pelosi replied, thanking him.
"Thanks. The new year would be even sweeter if you would end Iran's Holocaust denial, sir," she wrote.
Zarif replied: "Iran never denied it (the Holocaust). The man who was perceived to be denying it is now gone. Happy New Year."
Tehran does not recognize Israel and Ahmadinejad's eight years in office were filled with anti-Israeli diatribes and denial of the Holocaust.
The controversial Ahmadinejad was succeeded as president by Hassan Rowhani, who won a surprise election victory over five conservatives on June 14.
The former president's anti-Israel diatribes and Iran's controversial nuclear program both contributed to its increased international isolation.
Rowhani's website on Thursday said he has tasked the foreign ministry with handling sensitive nuclear talks, in a possible signal of a less confrontational approach with world powers.
It was not immediately clear, but his announcement would seem to indicate that Zarif, a moderate who has lived in the West and negotiated with it, would take on the role personally.
"Every year we wish happy new year to our Christian compatriots," Zarif told Tasnim.
"We also have a Jewish minority that is represented in parliament by one deputy," he said.
"We have nothing against Jews and Judaism, but we do not allow Zionists to present Iran as being anti-Semitic and bellicose in their propaganda so they can continue to repress the Palestinian people ... and have their crimes forgotten," he added.
Iran's foreign minister said on Facebook that Tehran condemns the World War II Nazi massacre of the Jews, in stark contract to Holocaust denials by former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
"We condemn the massacre of Jews by the Nazis, and we condemn the massacre of Palestinians by the Zionists," Mohammad Javad Zarif wrote on his Facebook page, where he published the text of an interview he gave to the Tasnim news agency.
Zarif was also asked whether he wished Jews "Happy Rosh Hashanah" (new year), and had had an exchange about the Holocaust on Twitter.
"I replied to a question from a person who appeared to be the daughter of the ex-speaker of the US House of Representatives," Nancy Pelosi, he wrote.
On his recently activated Twitter account, Zarif wrote in English "Happy Rosh Hashanah," and Christine Pelosi replied, thanking him.
"Thanks. The new year would be even sweeter if you would end Iran's Holocaust denial, sir," she wrote.
Zarif replied: "Iran never denied it (the Holocaust). The man who was perceived to be denying it is now gone. Happy New Year."
Tehran does not recognize Israel and Ahmadinejad's eight years in office were filled with anti-Israeli diatribes and denial of the Holocaust.
The controversial Ahmadinejad was succeeded as president by Hassan Rowhani, who won a surprise election victory over five conservatives on June 14.
The former president's anti-Israel diatribes and Iran's controversial nuclear program both contributed to its increased international isolation.
Rowhani's website on Thursday said he has tasked the foreign ministry with handling sensitive nuclear talks, in a possible signal of a less confrontational approach with world powers.
It was not immediately clear, but his announcement would seem to indicate that Zarif, a moderate who has lived in the West and negotiated with it, would take on the role personally.
"Every year we wish happy new year to our Christian compatriots," Zarif told Tasnim.
"We also have a Jewish minority that is represented in parliament by one deputy," he said.
"We have nothing against Jews and Judaism, but we do not allow Zionists to present Iran as being anti-Semitic and bellicose in their propaganda so they can continue to repress the Palestinian people ... and have their crimes forgotten," he added.
4 sept 2013
Former US congressman Ron Paul says the United States is planning to strike Syria because Damascus is the doorstep for entering Iran.
“The whole theory is we’re going to Syria because that’s the way you march into Iran,” Paul said in an interview with CNN on Tuesday.
“At the same time, we’ve made it tougher... We’ve made it tougher for people who want to live in peace… and now we’re just stirring it up in Syria,” he argued.
US President Barack Obama, who is waiting for congressional authorization to attack Syria, won critical support from key congressional leaders on Tuesday to launch military strikes against Syria.
Following a meeting with Obama, House Speaker John Boehner said the US has "enemies around the world that need to understand that we're not going to tolerate this type of behavior. We also have allies around the world and allies in the region who also need to know that America will be there and stand up when it's necessary."
Ron Paul also criticized the Obama administration for interfering in the internal affairs of Syria.
“It's a civil war and there's no way you're going to figure it out. I smell Iraq all over again. I remember the assurances that were given us 10 years ago and members of Congress believed that. But let me tell you, the situation is a lot different. The American people are on my side on this issue today and there's a lot more people in Congress now who are saying, it makes no sense,” he said.
“And just listen to the military commanders. They said, you know, we don't even have the money for this. We have to have a supplemental. Now, how about all these warmongers getting ready to bomb and kill and invade or do whatever they think necessary and they don't even have the money and then they have to appropriate the money, which means more money drained from our economy,” Paul argued.
Paul also experienced “technical difficulties” with his satellite connection during his interview with CNN.
Meanwhile, recent polls show the American people are against Syria war under the pretext of the alleged use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government.
An ABC News/Washington Post poll released Tuesday said 59 percent of Americans oppose unilateral US military action. Pew Research also found that opponents of a strike outnumber supporters, 48 percent to 29 percent.
“The whole theory is we’re going to Syria because that’s the way you march into Iran,” Paul said in an interview with CNN on Tuesday.
“At the same time, we’ve made it tougher... We’ve made it tougher for people who want to live in peace… and now we’re just stirring it up in Syria,” he argued.
US President Barack Obama, who is waiting for congressional authorization to attack Syria, won critical support from key congressional leaders on Tuesday to launch military strikes against Syria.
Following a meeting with Obama, House Speaker John Boehner said the US has "enemies around the world that need to understand that we're not going to tolerate this type of behavior. We also have allies around the world and allies in the region who also need to know that America will be there and stand up when it's necessary."
Ron Paul also criticized the Obama administration for interfering in the internal affairs of Syria.
“It's a civil war and there's no way you're going to figure it out. I smell Iraq all over again. I remember the assurances that were given us 10 years ago and members of Congress believed that. But let me tell you, the situation is a lot different. The American people are on my side on this issue today and there's a lot more people in Congress now who are saying, it makes no sense,” he said.
“And just listen to the military commanders. They said, you know, we don't even have the money for this. We have to have a supplemental. Now, how about all these warmongers getting ready to bomb and kill and invade or do whatever they think necessary and they don't even have the money and then they have to appropriate the money, which means more money drained from our economy,” Paul argued.
Paul also experienced “technical difficulties” with his satellite connection during his interview with CNN.
Meanwhile, recent polls show the American people are against Syria war under the pretext of the alleged use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government.
An ABC News/Washington Post poll released Tuesday said 59 percent of Americans oppose unilateral US military action. Pew Research also found that opponents of a strike outnumber supporters, 48 percent to 29 percent.
1 sept 2013
In Syria, Iran and Lebanon, the president’s decision to seek Congressional approval for a military strike is recognized as proof of weakness and hesitancy. In Jerusalem, too.
Bashar Assad can relax. Barack Obama blinked, and entrusted the decision on whether to attack Syria to Congress.
It may be that this was a necessary step from Obama’s point of view. It may be that it was a wise decision politically, in an America traumatized by Iraq and Afghanistan. But the smiles on the faces of decision-makers in Syria, Lebanon and Iran, on hearing Obama’s Saturday speech, tell their own story.
Until Saturday, Obama’s Middle East policies were generally regarded by the Arab world as confused and incoherent. As of Saturday, he will be perceived as one of the weakest presidents in American history.
That scent of weakness has emphatically reached Iran. Amir Mousavi, the head of Tehran’s Center for Strategic Defense Studies, told Al-Jazeera in the immediate wake of the speech that Obama is uncertain and hesitant. At around the same time, Revolutionary Guards commander Mohammad Ali Jafari boasted that “the United States is mistaken if it thinks that the reaction to a strike on Syria will be limited to Syrian territory.”
This was likely part of an effort to deter members of Congress from supporting military intervention against the Assad regime for its use of chemical weapons. In an act of solidarity, meanwhile, an Iranian parliamentary delegation, led by Alaeddin Boroujerdi, who heads the Security and Foreign Policy Committee and is close to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, is currently on a visit to Damascus.
Drawing the connection between Syria and Iran is unavoidable. If after Assad’s use of weapons of mass destruction to kill what Secretary of State John Kerry specified were 1,429 of his own people, Obama hesitates — when Assad has no real capacity to substantially harm American interests — what is he likely to do if Iran decides to develop nuclear weapons? Khamenei and his advisers recognize that the likelihood of this administration using military force against a country with Iran’s military capability are very low, if not nonexistent.
And they’re not the only ones who realize this. The same conclusions are being drawn by Hezbollah and al-Qaeda.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his cabinet colleagues, who will doubtless have been watching the Rose Garden speech, will have internalized what they had long suspected: that Washington will not be the place from which good news will emanate about thwarting Iran’s nuclear drive.
Meantime, Syria now returns to the routine of civil war. The Syrian army is fighting bitter battles against rebel forces across the country, and Assad is utilizing his air force to bomb residential neighborhoods — not, heaven forbid, with chemical weapons, merely with conventional weaponry.
It is clear to the Assad regime that an American response will ultimately come. But it will be limited and weak — of a scale that will enable Bashar Assad not merely to survive, but to hail victory.
Bashar Assad can relax. Barack Obama blinked, and entrusted the decision on whether to attack Syria to Congress.
It may be that this was a necessary step from Obama’s point of view. It may be that it was a wise decision politically, in an America traumatized by Iraq and Afghanistan. But the smiles on the faces of decision-makers in Syria, Lebanon and Iran, on hearing Obama’s Saturday speech, tell their own story.
Until Saturday, Obama’s Middle East policies were generally regarded by the Arab world as confused and incoherent. As of Saturday, he will be perceived as one of the weakest presidents in American history.
That scent of weakness has emphatically reached Iran. Amir Mousavi, the head of Tehran’s Center for Strategic Defense Studies, told Al-Jazeera in the immediate wake of the speech that Obama is uncertain and hesitant. At around the same time, Revolutionary Guards commander Mohammad Ali Jafari boasted that “the United States is mistaken if it thinks that the reaction to a strike on Syria will be limited to Syrian territory.”
This was likely part of an effort to deter members of Congress from supporting military intervention against the Assad regime for its use of chemical weapons. In an act of solidarity, meanwhile, an Iranian parliamentary delegation, led by Alaeddin Boroujerdi, who heads the Security and Foreign Policy Committee and is close to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, is currently on a visit to Damascus.
Drawing the connection between Syria and Iran is unavoidable. If after Assad’s use of weapons of mass destruction to kill what Secretary of State John Kerry specified were 1,429 of his own people, Obama hesitates — when Assad has no real capacity to substantially harm American interests — what is he likely to do if Iran decides to develop nuclear weapons? Khamenei and his advisers recognize that the likelihood of this administration using military force against a country with Iran’s military capability are very low, if not nonexistent.
And they’re not the only ones who realize this. The same conclusions are being drawn by Hezbollah and al-Qaeda.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his cabinet colleagues, who will doubtless have been watching the Rose Garden speech, will have internalized what they had long suspected: that Washington will not be the place from which good news will emanate about thwarting Iran’s nuclear drive.
Meantime, Syria now returns to the routine of civil war. The Syrian army is fighting bitter battles against rebel forces across the country, and Assad is utilizing his air force to bomb residential neighborhoods — not, heaven forbid, with chemical weapons, merely with conventional weaponry.
It is clear to the Assad regime that an American response will ultimately come. But it will be limited and weak — of a scale that will enable Bashar Assad not merely to survive, but to hail victory.
Israel wants to believe the US will yet intervene to stop Assad’s use of chemical weapons, undoing some of the damage caused by the president’s zigzag. For the leadership here, the alternative is too awful to contemplate.
The Israeli political and security leadership is privately horrified by President Barack Obama’s 11th-hour turnaround on striking Syria — a decision he took alone, after he had sent his Secretary of State John Kerry to speak out passionately and urgently in favor of military action. It is now fearful that, in the end, domestic politics or global diplomacy will ultimately lead the US to hold its fire altogether.
It is worried, furthermore, at the ever-deeper perception of Obama’s America in the Middle East as weak, hesitant and confused — most especially in the view of the region’s most radical forces, notably including Bashar Assad, Hezbollah, and Iran.
And it is profoundly concerned that the president has set a precedent, in seeking an authorization from Congress that he had no legal requirement to seek — and that Congress was not loudly demanding — that may complicate, delay or even rule out credible action to thwart a challenge that dwarfs Assad’s chemical weapons capability: Iran’s drive to nuclear weapons.
Israel’s Channel 2 reported Sunday night that, once Obama had zigzagged to his decision not to strike for now, the White House contacted Israel’s leadership to convey the news. The goal, successfully achieved, was to ensure that there would be no avalanche of publicly aired criticism of the president by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his ministers. Only the hawkish minister of housing, Uri Ariel, defied the prime minister’s restraining order, complaining bitterly in an Army Radio interview Sunday morning that Assad was a cowardly murderer “who needs to be taken care of, already.” Ariel thus earned himself a dressing-down by Netanyahu, who told him at the Cabinet table that personally attacking the president of the United States did not serve Israel’s “security interests.”
But privately, Israel’s silently appalled political and security leaderships have no doubt that Obama’s last-minute change of heart harms Israel’s security interests far more critically than any marginal minister’s inconvenient outburst possibly could.
Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel are reported to have briefed Israel’s leaders to the effect that Obama’s firm intention remains to strike back at Assad for what Kerry said Friday was the carefully planned August 21 use of chemical weapons to kill over 1,400 of his own Syrian people.
The Israeli leadership wants to believe that this is the case. The notion that the US would turn its back on the toxic crimes of a murderous dictator, whom Kerry bracketed Sunday with Adolf Hitler and Saddam Hussein, is too dire to consider in an Israel facing more than one hostile regime relentlessly seeking to exploit any military and moral weakness in order to expedite the Jewish state’s demise.
Though dutifully silent in public, Jerusalem has quickly internalized the damage already done — by the sight of an uncertain president, all too plainly wary of grappling with a regime that has gradually escalated its use of poison gas to mass murder its own people; a regime, moreover, that can do relatively little damage to the United States, and whose threats Israel’s leadership and most of its people were taking in their stride.
At the very least, Obama has given Assad more time to ensure that any eventual strike causes a minimum of damage, and to claim initial victory in facing down the United States. At the very least, too, Obama has led the Iranians to believe that presidential promises to prevent them attaining nuclear weapons need not necessarily be taken at face value.
If a formidable strike does ultimately come, some of that damage can yet be undone, the Israeli leadership believes. American military intervention can yet be significant — in deterring Assad from ongoing use of chemical weapons, and bolstering American influence and credibility in the region.
But if Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, who will be hosting the G20 later this week, inserts himself into the equation, and Obama is distracted by endless machinations ostensibly designed to see Assad stripped of his chemical weapons, machinations that ultimately are sure to lead nowhere, the damage will only deepen. If there is no strike, the United States — hitherto Israel’s only dependable military ally — will be definitively perceived in these parts as a paper tiger, with dire implications for its regional interests. And for Israel.
Jerusalem is worried, too, of a direct line between requesting Congressional approval for military action against Syria — a relatively straightforward target — and feeling compelled to honor the precedent, should the imperative arise, by requesting Congressional approval for military action against Iran — a far more potent enemy, where legislators’ worries about the US being dragged deep into regional conflict would be far more resonant.
Israel remains hopeful that, to put it bluntly, Obama’s America will yet remember that it is, well, America. The alternative, it rather seems, is something the leadership in Jerusalem finds too awful to so much as contemplate just yet.
The Israeli political and security leadership is privately horrified by President Barack Obama’s 11th-hour turnaround on striking Syria — a decision he took alone, after he had sent his Secretary of State John Kerry to speak out passionately and urgently in favor of military action. It is now fearful that, in the end, domestic politics or global diplomacy will ultimately lead the US to hold its fire altogether.
It is worried, furthermore, at the ever-deeper perception of Obama’s America in the Middle East as weak, hesitant and confused — most especially in the view of the region’s most radical forces, notably including Bashar Assad, Hezbollah, and Iran.
And it is profoundly concerned that the president has set a precedent, in seeking an authorization from Congress that he had no legal requirement to seek — and that Congress was not loudly demanding — that may complicate, delay or even rule out credible action to thwart a challenge that dwarfs Assad’s chemical weapons capability: Iran’s drive to nuclear weapons.
Israel’s Channel 2 reported Sunday night that, once Obama had zigzagged to his decision not to strike for now, the White House contacted Israel’s leadership to convey the news. The goal, successfully achieved, was to ensure that there would be no avalanche of publicly aired criticism of the president by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his ministers. Only the hawkish minister of housing, Uri Ariel, defied the prime minister’s restraining order, complaining bitterly in an Army Radio interview Sunday morning that Assad was a cowardly murderer “who needs to be taken care of, already.” Ariel thus earned himself a dressing-down by Netanyahu, who told him at the Cabinet table that personally attacking the president of the United States did not serve Israel’s “security interests.”
But privately, Israel’s silently appalled political and security leaderships have no doubt that Obama’s last-minute change of heart harms Israel’s security interests far more critically than any marginal minister’s inconvenient outburst possibly could.
Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel are reported to have briefed Israel’s leaders to the effect that Obama’s firm intention remains to strike back at Assad for what Kerry said Friday was the carefully planned August 21 use of chemical weapons to kill over 1,400 of his own Syrian people.
The Israeli leadership wants to believe that this is the case. The notion that the US would turn its back on the toxic crimes of a murderous dictator, whom Kerry bracketed Sunday with Adolf Hitler and Saddam Hussein, is too dire to consider in an Israel facing more than one hostile regime relentlessly seeking to exploit any military and moral weakness in order to expedite the Jewish state’s demise.
Though dutifully silent in public, Jerusalem has quickly internalized the damage already done — by the sight of an uncertain president, all too plainly wary of grappling with a regime that has gradually escalated its use of poison gas to mass murder its own people; a regime, moreover, that can do relatively little damage to the United States, and whose threats Israel’s leadership and most of its people were taking in their stride.
At the very least, Obama has given Assad more time to ensure that any eventual strike causes a minimum of damage, and to claim initial victory in facing down the United States. At the very least, too, Obama has led the Iranians to believe that presidential promises to prevent them attaining nuclear weapons need not necessarily be taken at face value.
If a formidable strike does ultimately come, some of that damage can yet be undone, the Israeli leadership believes. American military intervention can yet be significant — in deterring Assad from ongoing use of chemical weapons, and bolstering American influence and credibility in the region.
But if Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, who will be hosting the G20 later this week, inserts himself into the equation, and Obama is distracted by endless machinations ostensibly designed to see Assad stripped of his chemical weapons, machinations that ultimately are sure to lead nowhere, the damage will only deepen. If there is no strike, the United States — hitherto Israel’s only dependable military ally — will be definitively perceived in these parts as a paper tiger, with dire implications for its regional interests. And for Israel.
Jerusalem is worried, too, of a direct line between requesting Congressional approval for military action against Syria — a relatively straightforward target — and feeling compelled to honor the precedent, should the imperative arise, by requesting Congressional approval for military action against Iran — a far more potent enemy, where legislators’ worries about the US being dragged deep into regional conflict would be far more resonant.
Israel remains hopeful that, to put it bluntly, Obama’s America will yet remember that it is, well, America. The alternative, it rather seems, is something the leadership in Jerusalem finds too awful to so much as contemplate just yet.
And this time, it’s hard to see who will be able to stop him.
Netanyahu hasn’t said anything publicly, but the consensus here is that the lesson he’s taking from Obama’s refusal to bomb Syria straight away, and instead to turn to Congress for approval, is that the U.S. president can’t be trusted to keep his word about preventing Iran from going nuclear – so he, Netanyahu, must prepare to carry out the task alone. And the consensus seems to be that this is the correct conclusion, too.
“Netanyahu was right when he sought to act on his own. No others will do the job,” wrote Yedioth Ahronoth columnist Yoaz Hendel, who used to be the PM’s hasbara chief.
Herb Keinon, the Jerusalem Post’s pro-government diplomatic correspondent, wrote:
The lack of a strong international response in the face of rows and rows of gassed bodies wrapped eerily in white shrouds just 220 kilometers from Jerusalem might not compel Israel to take action against Assad, but it surely may compel it to think twice about relying on the world to rid it of the Iranian nuclear menace.”
Even Haaretz’s liberal military affairs reporter Amos Harel seems to see the wisdom in this view:
The theory that the U.S. will come to Israel’s aid at the last minute, and attack Iran to lift the nuclear threat, seems less and less likely. … With the U.S. administration’s year of hesitancy since Assad first deployed chemical weapons, American difficulty in building an international coalition for a strike in Syria, and [U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin] Dempsey’s excuses, it’s no wonder that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is becoming increasingly persuaded that no one will come to his aid if Iran suddenly announces that it is beginning to enrich uranium to 90 percent.”
I think it is pretty obvious that this indeed is Netanyahu’s thinking. He wanted to bomb Iran last year, sometime before the U.S. presidential election in November; what stopped him (and his partner, then-Defense Minister Ehud Barak) was the opposition of Israel’s military-intelligence leadership, headed by IDF Chief Benny Gantz. Afterward Netanyahu went to the UN and drew a cartoon bomb with a red line, saying that Iran would cross it and come within reach of a nuclear bomb “next spring, at most by next summer, at current [uranium] enrichment rates.”
Then, two months ago, Bibi’s red line got effectively erased as the moderate Hassan Rouhani was elected to succeed Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as president of Iran, and the West gained new hope that diplomacy could ensure that Iran didn’t go nuclear. Netanyahu, of course, considered that the usual Western liberal naiveté, but it seemed too outrageous for Israel to go bombing Iran on its own, with all the consequences that could bring, when the US and other world powers not only opposed an attack but were actively trying to persuade Iran, with its new, reformist president, into seeing things their way. The military option against Iran was “off the table” for a year or so, before it appeared. The opposition from Israel’s warrior class remained fully in place. Netanyahu couldn’t have persuaded them otherwise, and may not even have wanted to, given the international mood.
All that may very well have changed last night. As the commentators quoted above and others are saying, Netanyahu’s well-known dictum that “Israel can only depend on itself” has been vindicated by the performance of Obama and the rest of the world in the Syrian crisis. The U.S. president can’t be trusted to bomb Iran’s nukes, and since, according to Netanyahu, his government and even the Israeli military-intelligence establishment, a nuclear-armed Iran “is not an option,” that would seem to knock the legs out from under the argument made by Gantz and the rest of the war council in favor of restraint.
That argument, which was made in leaks to the media by the warriors and publicly by President Shimon Peres, and which backed by a majority of the Israeli public in polls, was that the wisest course by far was to let America bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities because it had the military means to do so much more decisively than could Israel. Another, related argument was that if Israel attacked Iran without U.S. support, it would be politically calamitous. A third, related argument was that at best, an Israeli strike would set back Iran’s nuclear program by a year or so, which was not worth the missiles and political isolation Israel would get in return. The conclusion from all three arguments was: Trust Obama, at least until he gives Israel reason not to trust him.
That reason was just provided last night from the podium on the White House lawn. Even if Congress agrees to an attack on Syria and Obama carries it out, the likely limits on such a strike, and above all Obama’s extremely uncertain route to executing it (if he does), will not redeem his newly dashed reputation among the tough guys who run this country. It appears Netanyahu has won the argument. In a month or so, after the High Holidays, I expect the countdown to resume on an Israeli strike on Iran, and this time I don’t know who will be able to stop it.
Netanyahu hasn’t said anything publicly, but the consensus here is that the lesson he’s taking from Obama’s refusal to bomb Syria straight away, and instead to turn to Congress for approval, is that the U.S. president can’t be trusted to keep his word about preventing Iran from going nuclear – so he, Netanyahu, must prepare to carry out the task alone. And the consensus seems to be that this is the correct conclusion, too.
“Netanyahu was right when he sought to act on his own. No others will do the job,” wrote Yedioth Ahronoth columnist Yoaz Hendel, who used to be the PM’s hasbara chief.
Herb Keinon, the Jerusalem Post’s pro-government diplomatic correspondent, wrote:
The lack of a strong international response in the face of rows and rows of gassed bodies wrapped eerily in white shrouds just 220 kilometers from Jerusalem might not compel Israel to take action against Assad, but it surely may compel it to think twice about relying on the world to rid it of the Iranian nuclear menace.”
Even Haaretz’s liberal military affairs reporter Amos Harel seems to see the wisdom in this view:
The theory that the U.S. will come to Israel’s aid at the last minute, and attack Iran to lift the nuclear threat, seems less and less likely. … With the U.S. administration’s year of hesitancy since Assad first deployed chemical weapons, American difficulty in building an international coalition for a strike in Syria, and [U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin] Dempsey’s excuses, it’s no wonder that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is becoming increasingly persuaded that no one will come to his aid if Iran suddenly announces that it is beginning to enrich uranium to 90 percent.”
I think it is pretty obvious that this indeed is Netanyahu’s thinking. He wanted to bomb Iran last year, sometime before the U.S. presidential election in November; what stopped him (and his partner, then-Defense Minister Ehud Barak) was the opposition of Israel’s military-intelligence leadership, headed by IDF Chief Benny Gantz. Afterward Netanyahu went to the UN and drew a cartoon bomb with a red line, saying that Iran would cross it and come within reach of a nuclear bomb “next spring, at most by next summer, at current [uranium] enrichment rates.”
Then, two months ago, Bibi’s red line got effectively erased as the moderate Hassan Rouhani was elected to succeed Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as president of Iran, and the West gained new hope that diplomacy could ensure that Iran didn’t go nuclear. Netanyahu, of course, considered that the usual Western liberal naiveté, but it seemed too outrageous for Israel to go bombing Iran on its own, with all the consequences that could bring, when the US and other world powers not only opposed an attack but were actively trying to persuade Iran, with its new, reformist president, into seeing things their way. The military option against Iran was “off the table” for a year or so, before it appeared. The opposition from Israel’s warrior class remained fully in place. Netanyahu couldn’t have persuaded them otherwise, and may not even have wanted to, given the international mood.
All that may very well have changed last night. As the commentators quoted above and others are saying, Netanyahu’s well-known dictum that “Israel can only depend on itself” has been vindicated by the performance of Obama and the rest of the world in the Syrian crisis. The U.S. president can’t be trusted to bomb Iran’s nukes, and since, according to Netanyahu, his government and even the Israeli military-intelligence establishment, a nuclear-armed Iran “is not an option,” that would seem to knock the legs out from under the argument made by Gantz and the rest of the war council in favor of restraint.
That argument, which was made in leaks to the media by the warriors and publicly by President Shimon Peres, and which backed by a majority of the Israeli public in polls, was that the wisest course by far was to let America bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities because it had the military means to do so much more decisively than could Israel. Another, related argument was that if Israel attacked Iran without U.S. support, it would be politically calamitous. A third, related argument was that at best, an Israeli strike would set back Iran’s nuclear program by a year or so, which was not worth the missiles and political isolation Israel would get in return. The conclusion from all three arguments was: Trust Obama, at least until he gives Israel reason not to trust him.
That reason was just provided last night from the podium on the White House lawn. Even if Congress agrees to an attack on Syria and Obama carries it out, the likely limits on such a strike, and above all Obama’s extremely uncertain route to executing it (if he does), will not redeem his newly dashed reputation among the tough guys who run this country. It appears Netanyahu has won the argument. In a month or so, after the High Holidays, I expect the countdown to resume on an Israeli strike on Iran, and this time I don’t know who will be able to stop it.
22 aug 2013
Iran's envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, speaks to press in Vienna.
Iran's representative to the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, announced his resignation on Thursday without giving any reason, the Fars news agency reported.
"My mission is finished ... and I return to Iran with satisfaction," said Soltanieh, who has held the post since 2005.
On August 15, new President Hassan Rowhani named Ali Akbar Salehi to head Iran's Atomic Energy Organization as part of his team.
Salehi, who holds a doctorate in nuclear science from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, already headed the organization between 2009 and 2010 before taking up the post of foreign minister under former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Meanwhile, foreign ministry spokesman Abbas Araghchi was quoted by the press Thursday as saying "a new ambassador (to the IAEA) has been chosen and will be announced soon."
Western countries and Israel suspect Iran's nuclear program is cover for a drive for a weapons capability, an ambition Tehran strongly denies.
The IAEA has been probing the program for the past decade, and a number of international sanctions have been slapped on Tehran for its refusal to stop enriching uranium. That process can lead to producing the fissile core of an atomic weapon.
Talks between Tehran and major world powers have so far failed to yield an agreement.
Iran's representative to the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, announced his resignation on Thursday without giving any reason, the Fars news agency reported.
"My mission is finished ... and I return to Iran with satisfaction," said Soltanieh, who has held the post since 2005.
On August 15, new President Hassan Rowhani named Ali Akbar Salehi to head Iran's Atomic Energy Organization as part of his team.
Salehi, who holds a doctorate in nuclear science from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, already headed the organization between 2009 and 2010 before taking up the post of foreign minister under former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Meanwhile, foreign ministry spokesman Abbas Araghchi was quoted by the press Thursday as saying "a new ambassador (to the IAEA) has been chosen and will be announced soon."
Western countries and Israel suspect Iran's nuclear program is cover for a drive for a weapons capability, an ambition Tehran strongly denies.
The IAEA has been probing the program for the past decade, and a number of international sanctions have been slapped on Tehran for its refusal to stop enriching uranium. That process can lead to producing the fissile core of an atomic weapon.
Talks between Tehran and major world powers have so far failed to yield an agreement.
US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel speaks with Israeli Minister of Defense Moshe Yaalon (L) on April 22, 2013 in Tel Aviv
US defense chief Chuck Hagel spoke with his Israeli counterpart Moshe Yaalon on Wednesday about Egypt, Iran and the ongoing violence in Syria, including claims of a chemical weapons attack.
In a brief statement after the morning call, the Pentagon said the two men "agreed to continue to maintain intensive dialogue on the multitude of challenges facing" their two countries.
Washington has demanded "immediate access" for United Nations inspectors to the site of an alleged chemical weapons attack by government forces on civilians in Syria.
Syria's main opposition group earlier accused the government of "massacring" more than 1,300 people in chemical weapons attacks near Damascus on Wednesday, saying many of the victims choked to death.
The UN team is in Syria to probe previous allegations of chemical weapons strikes leveled against both sides during the 29-month conflict.
Washington concluded in June that President Bashar Assad's forces had indeed used chemical arms in the past, including the nerve gas sarin, in attacks that killed up to 150 people.
In response, it promised to significantly toughen its stance on Syria and said it would provide military support to rebels for the first time.
But it has refused to specify exactly what it is doing because the information is classified, and much of the assistance is believed to have yet to reach selected opposition groups.
On Egypt, Washington is under pressure to cut its military aid to Cairo in the wake of a deadly army crackdown on supporters of deposed president Mohamed Morsi.
US assistance to Cairo totals $1.3 billion annually.
Israel has refrained from making public statements but an unnamed official was quoted in a media report earlier this week as saying that Israel and the West must support Egypt's army.
Israel and Egypt, which in 1979 became the first Arab state to sign a peace treaty with the Jewish state, coordinate closely on military activity in the increasingly lawless Sinai Peninsula, which borders both the Jewish state and the Gaza Strip.
Egypt's unrest has heightened Israeli concerns about regional stability.
US defense chief Chuck Hagel spoke with his Israeli counterpart Moshe Yaalon on Wednesday about Egypt, Iran and the ongoing violence in Syria, including claims of a chemical weapons attack.
In a brief statement after the morning call, the Pentagon said the two men "agreed to continue to maintain intensive dialogue on the multitude of challenges facing" their two countries.
Washington has demanded "immediate access" for United Nations inspectors to the site of an alleged chemical weapons attack by government forces on civilians in Syria.
Syria's main opposition group earlier accused the government of "massacring" more than 1,300 people in chemical weapons attacks near Damascus on Wednesday, saying many of the victims choked to death.
The UN team is in Syria to probe previous allegations of chemical weapons strikes leveled against both sides during the 29-month conflict.
Washington concluded in June that President Bashar Assad's forces had indeed used chemical arms in the past, including the nerve gas sarin, in attacks that killed up to 150 people.
In response, it promised to significantly toughen its stance on Syria and said it would provide military support to rebels for the first time.
But it has refused to specify exactly what it is doing because the information is classified, and much of the assistance is believed to have yet to reach selected opposition groups.
On Egypt, Washington is under pressure to cut its military aid to Cairo in the wake of a deadly army crackdown on supporters of deposed president Mohamed Morsi.
US assistance to Cairo totals $1.3 billion annually.
Israel has refrained from making public statements but an unnamed official was quoted in a media report earlier this week as saying that Israel and the West must support Egypt's army.
Israel and Egypt, which in 1979 became the first Arab state to sign a peace treaty with the Jewish state, coordinate closely on military activity in the increasingly lawless Sinai Peninsula, which borders both the Jewish state and the Gaza Strip.
Egypt's unrest has heightened Israeli concerns about regional stability.
8 aug 2013
|
An analyst says Israel’s repeated pleas with the West to step up pressure on the Islamic Republic stem from Tel Aviv’s ambitions to establish a power monopoly in the region, Press TV reports.
In an exclusive interview with Press TV on Thursday, Richard Becker of the Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (ANSWER), said Israel sees Iran as “a challenge to its hegemonic aspirations.” On Tuesday and Wednesday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with US congressional delegations where he repeated Tel Aviv’s nuclear accusations against Tehran and called for more sanctions against the Islamic Republic. |
Israelis call for “more of these really crippling and vicious economic sanctions against Iran and for other forms of pressure to be kept up on Iran really with the aim of maintaining their dominant position in the region,” Becker reiterated.
The expert further noted that Washington and Tel Aviv, as "the main base of US domination, [and] of US imperialism in the Middle East” are following the same path regarding Iran due to their common interests.
He said the US has been spearheading diplomatic, military and economic pressure on Iran to sow divisions with the ultimate aim of effecting a regime change in the Islamic Republic, and establishing a puppet government in Iran that would follow Washington's orders.
The United States, Israel, and some of their allies have repeatedly accused Iran of potentially pursuing non-civilian objectives in its nuclear energy program and have used the unfounded accusation as a pretext to impose illegal sanctions on the Islamic Republic.
Iran rejects the allegations, arguing that as a committed signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), it has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.
In addition, the IAEA has conducted numerous inspections of Iran’s nuclear facilities but has never found any evidence showing that Iran’s civilian nuclear program has been diverted toward military objectives.
Tel Aviv accuses Tehran of military nuclear activities while Israel is widely believed to be the only possessor of nuclear weapons in the Middle East. It reportedly maintains between 200 and 400 atomic warheads, but under its policy of so-called nuclear ambiguity, it has never denied nor confirmed its possession of the weapons of mass destruction.
Furthermore, Tel Aviv has never allowed any inspection of its nuclear facilities and continues to defy international calls to join the NPT.
The expert further noted that Washington and Tel Aviv, as "the main base of US domination, [and] of US imperialism in the Middle East” are following the same path regarding Iran due to their common interests.
He said the US has been spearheading diplomatic, military and economic pressure on Iran to sow divisions with the ultimate aim of effecting a regime change in the Islamic Republic, and establishing a puppet government in Iran that would follow Washington's orders.
The United States, Israel, and some of their allies have repeatedly accused Iran of potentially pursuing non-civilian objectives in its nuclear energy program and have used the unfounded accusation as a pretext to impose illegal sanctions on the Islamic Republic.
Iran rejects the allegations, arguing that as a committed signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), it has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.
In addition, the IAEA has conducted numerous inspections of Iran’s nuclear facilities but has never found any evidence showing that Iran’s civilian nuclear program has been diverted toward military objectives.
Tel Aviv accuses Tehran of military nuclear activities while Israel is widely believed to be the only possessor of nuclear weapons in the Middle East. It reportedly maintains between 200 and 400 atomic warheads, but under its policy of so-called nuclear ambiguity, it has never denied nor confirmed its possession of the weapons of mass destruction.
Furthermore, Tel Aviv has never allowed any inspection of its nuclear facilities and continues to defy international calls to join the NPT.
Several analysis are linking the resumption of the peace talks with Prime Minister Netanyahu’s desire to legitimize a strike on Iranian nuclear facilities. Some even claim that the U.S. administration is in the loop.
There were at least three articles in the Hebrew media this week speculating on the option of an Israeli strike on Iran. All pieces linked those scenarios to the peace process, and to the Wall Street Journal‘s report on reactor in Arak, which is due to become operational in the coming months and could be used for the creation of a plutonium bomb (those reports were already disputed, even in Israel)
Writing for Al-Monitor, Ben Caspit (who opposes the idea of an Israeli attack), speculates:
A week ago [July 30], after the painful decision to release more than 100 Palestinian prisoners, some of whom are “heavyweight” murderers, to resume negotiations with the Palestinians, Israel’s Defense Minister Moshe “Bogie” Ya’alon had something very interesting to say: Underlying the decision to release prisoners — he stated — “were strategic considerations, which might be revealed in the future.” (…) What will we understand in the future? In light of the intimations, the signals and the whispers, we are able to figure out the quiet deal that was cut between Israel and the United States: Israel will do whatever is necessary to start negotiations with the Palestinians, maybe even reach a type of an interim arrangement ahead of the final status arrangement. America will give Israel a green light to bomb Iran after having fully verified that the Iranians are really poised to make the final “charge” toward the bomb.
At Haaretz, Sefi Rachlevsky and Alon Ben David raised the same idea – that the real reason Netanyahu entered the peace process is his desire to legitimize an attack on the Iranian nuclear facilities. Rechlevsky is an author and doesn’t have good sources (his article is not as much of a report as an analysis of Netanyahu’s character) but Alon Ben David is a veteran military correspondent. In previous weeks others have made similar suggestions (see Ynet’s military correspondent Ron Ben-Yishai).
There is also speculation that the nature of the understanding on this issue between the American administration and Israel has changed. Former head of military intelligence Amos Yadlin told Israel’s Army Radio this week that the administration’s position has “moved from a red light to yellow.”
Reports are that the heads of Israel’s security forces remain in opposition to an attack, including Air Force commander Maj.-Gen. Amir Eshel.
There were at least three articles in the Hebrew media this week speculating on the option of an Israeli strike on Iran. All pieces linked those scenarios to the peace process, and to the Wall Street Journal‘s report on reactor in Arak, which is due to become operational in the coming months and could be used for the creation of a plutonium bomb (those reports were already disputed, even in Israel)
Writing for Al-Monitor, Ben Caspit (who opposes the idea of an Israeli attack), speculates:
A week ago [July 30], after the painful decision to release more than 100 Palestinian prisoners, some of whom are “heavyweight” murderers, to resume negotiations with the Palestinians, Israel’s Defense Minister Moshe “Bogie” Ya’alon had something very interesting to say: Underlying the decision to release prisoners — he stated — “were strategic considerations, which might be revealed in the future.” (…) What will we understand in the future? In light of the intimations, the signals and the whispers, we are able to figure out the quiet deal that was cut between Israel and the United States: Israel will do whatever is necessary to start negotiations with the Palestinians, maybe even reach a type of an interim arrangement ahead of the final status arrangement. America will give Israel a green light to bomb Iran after having fully verified that the Iranians are really poised to make the final “charge” toward the bomb.
At Haaretz, Sefi Rachlevsky and Alon Ben David raised the same idea – that the real reason Netanyahu entered the peace process is his desire to legitimize an attack on the Iranian nuclear facilities. Rechlevsky is an author and doesn’t have good sources (his article is not as much of a report as an analysis of Netanyahu’s character) but Alon Ben David is a veteran military correspondent. In previous weeks others have made similar suggestions (see Ynet’s military correspondent Ron Ben-Yishai).
There is also speculation that the nature of the understanding on this issue between the American administration and Israel has changed. Former head of military intelligence Amos Yadlin told Israel’s Army Radio this week that the administration’s position has “moved from a red light to yellow.”
Reports are that the heads of Israel’s security forces remain in opposition to an attack, including Air Force commander Maj.-Gen. Amir Eshel.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Wednesday that Iran had expanded its sensitive enrichment of uranium despite the election as president of moderate cleric Hassan Rowhani.
"Iran has not stopped its nuclear program, even after its presidential election" on June 14, Netanyahu said in comments broadcast by public radio.
"At the moment, they are using 7,000 new centrifuges, including 1,000 which are of a newer type," he said on a visit to southern Israel.
"The Iranian president is trying to present a new image ... but the nuclear program's progress continues."
On Tuesday, Rowhani said Iran was ready to hold "serious" talks with the major powers without delay to allay Western concerns about its nuclear program.
But he underlined that Iran would not abandon uranium enrichment, the sensitive activity at the heart of Western concerns which it suspended when Rowhani was chief nuclear negotiator a decade ago.
Iran said in March that it intends to install around 3,000 new-model centrifuges at a nuclear plant near the central town of Natanz enabling it to speed up the enrichment of uranium.
Around 13,500 older-model centrifuges are already in place at the plant.
The UN Security Council has passed repeated resolutions calling on Iran to suspend all enrichment and has imposed four rounds of sanctions.
The Iranian president warned on Tuesday that negotiations would not work under pressure but the Israeli premier took issue with that position.
Rowhani "tells us that no threat will deter him. This is false," Netanyahu said.
"The only thing in the past 20 years that has forced the Iranians to stop their nuclear program is pressure and explicit threats of military operations," he said.
Netanyahu said on July 14 that Israel may be forced to act before the United States does over what it fears is a covert drive by Iran for a nuclear weapons capability.
Israel, which has the region's sole if undeclared nuclear arsenal, regards a nuclear-armed Iran as a threat to its very existence.
Even before Rowhani took office on Saturday, Netanyahu kept up Israel's tough rhetoric. He has called Rowhani a "wolf in sheep's clothing" who would "smile and build a bomb."
"Iran has not stopped its nuclear program, even after its presidential election" on June 14, Netanyahu said in comments broadcast by public radio.
"At the moment, they are using 7,000 new centrifuges, including 1,000 which are of a newer type," he said on a visit to southern Israel.
"The Iranian president is trying to present a new image ... but the nuclear program's progress continues."
On Tuesday, Rowhani said Iran was ready to hold "serious" talks with the major powers without delay to allay Western concerns about its nuclear program.
But he underlined that Iran would not abandon uranium enrichment, the sensitive activity at the heart of Western concerns which it suspended when Rowhani was chief nuclear negotiator a decade ago.
Iran said in March that it intends to install around 3,000 new-model centrifuges at a nuclear plant near the central town of Natanz enabling it to speed up the enrichment of uranium.
Around 13,500 older-model centrifuges are already in place at the plant.
The UN Security Council has passed repeated resolutions calling on Iran to suspend all enrichment and has imposed four rounds of sanctions.
The Iranian president warned on Tuesday that negotiations would not work under pressure but the Israeli premier took issue with that position.
Rowhani "tells us that no threat will deter him. This is false," Netanyahu said.
"The only thing in the past 20 years that has forced the Iranians to stop their nuclear program is pressure and explicit threats of military operations," he said.
Netanyahu said on July 14 that Israel may be forced to act before the United States does over what it fears is a covert drive by Iran for a nuclear weapons capability.
Israel, which has the region's sole if undeclared nuclear arsenal, regards a nuclear-armed Iran as a threat to its very existence.
Even before Rowhani took office on Saturday, Netanyahu kept up Israel's tough rhetoric. He has called Rowhani a "wolf in sheep's clothing" who would "smile and build a bomb."
7 aug 2013
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has called on the United States and its Western allies to exert more pressure on Iran regarding its nuclear energy program.
Netanyahu’s request is a response to Iranian President Hassan Rohani’s statement earlier that day, rejecting the West’s pressure tactics on Iran.
Numerous inspections of Iran’s nuclear facilities by the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) have not found evidence of Iran’s nuclear program being diverted into nuclear weapons. Despite IAEA’s ruling that Iran has a right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, the United States, Israel, and some of their allies, unfoundedly attempt to impose illegal sanctions on the Islamic Republic.
Meanwhile, Tel Aviv refuses to allow inspections of its nuclear facilities under its policy of nuclear ambiguity. The Israeli regime, which maintains 200-400 atomic warheads, will not deny or confirm its possession of weapons of mass destruction.
Netanyahu’s request is a response to Iranian President Hassan Rohani’s statement earlier that day, rejecting the West’s pressure tactics on Iran.
Numerous inspections of Iran’s nuclear facilities by the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) have not found evidence of Iran’s nuclear program being diverted into nuclear weapons. Despite IAEA’s ruling that Iran has a right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, the United States, Israel, and some of their allies, unfoundedly attempt to impose illegal sanctions on the Islamic Republic.
Meanwhile, Tel Aviv refuses to allow inspections of its nuclear facilities under its policy of nuclear ambiguity. The Israeli regime, which maintains 200-400 atomic warheads, will not deny or confirm its possession of weapons of mass destruction.
Russia says support for new Iranian leader is 'critical
Russia called for support for the new Iranian president's stance on nuclear talks on Tuesday, saying it "absolutely agreed" that the dispute must be solved via dialogue, not ultimatums.
"We absolutely agree with what he (President Hassan Rohani) said. This problem must not be solved with ultimatums," Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov was quoted by Interfax as saying on a visit to Rome. "Now it is critical to support the constructive approach of the Iranian leadership."
Russia called for support for the new Iranian president's stance on nuclear talks on Tuesday, saying it "absolutely agreed" that the dispute must be solved via dialogue, not ultimatums.
"We absolutely agree with what he (President Hassan Rohani) said. This problem must not be solved with ultimatums," Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov was quoted by Interfax as saying on a visit to Rome. "Now it is critical to support the constructive approach of the Iranian leadership."
Rohani: Iran has undeniable right to enrich uranium
Iran's President Hassan Rohani said in a press conference that the Islamic Republic has an "undeniable right" to enrich uranium.
Earlier, Rohani said that the West must understand that the nuclear issue must be solved through dialogue, not by threats.
Iran's President Hassan Rohani said in a press conference that the Islamic Republic has an "undeniable right" to enrich uranium.
Earlier, Rohani said that the West must understand that the nuclear issue must be solved through dialogue, not by threats.
Rohani: Nuclear issue must be solved by talks, not threats
Iran's President Hassan Rohani said the other side in the nuclear talks must realize a solution can be reached "solely through talks, not threats."
Rohani added that he is "seriously determined" to resolve the nuclear issue, preserve Iran's rights and address the other side's concerns.
Iran's President Hassan Rohani said the other side in the nuclear talks must realize a solution can be reached "solely through talks, not threats."
Rohani added that he is "seriously determined" to resolve the nuclear issue, preserve Iran's rights and address the other side's concerns.
Rohani: Iran is prepared for negotiations on nuclear issue
Iranian President Hassan Rohani said Iran is prepared to enter "serious and substantive" negotiations on nuclear issue. He added that confident concerns of both sides regarding the nuclear issue can be removed in a short time.
Iranian President Hassan Rohani said Iran is prepared to enter "serious and substantive" negotiations on nuclear issue. He added that confident concerns of both sides regarding the nuclear issue can be removed in a short time.
5 aug 2013
Foreign Minister Riyad al-Maliki met Monday with Iran’s vice president Issac Jahangiri in Tehran and delivered congratulations on behalf of President Mahmoud Abbas to the newly sworn-in president of Iran Hassan Rohani.
According to the official Palestinian news agency Wafa, al-Maliki told the Iranian official that Abbas was looking forward to developing relations between Palestine and Iran and making relations more open so as to serve interests of both nations.
The foreign minister updated the Iranian official on the ongoing Israeli violations in Palestine, particularly in Jerusalem and its holy al-Aqsa Mosque. He explained that Israeli extremists had set fire to mosques and houses as settlement expansion continued across the West Bank including Jerusalem.
For his part, the Iranian vice president thanked Palestine for joining the inauguration of Iran’s president-elect. He reiterated that Iran would continue to support the Palestinian people and Abbas’ efforts to end rivalry between Fatah and Hamas.
According to the official Palestinian news agency Wafa, al-Maliki told the Iranian official that Abbas was looking forward to developing relations between Palestine and Iran and making relations more open so as to serve interests of both nations.
The foreign minister updated the Iranian official on the ongoing Israeli violations in Palestine, particularly in Jerusalem and its holy al-Aqsa Mosque. He explained that Israeli extremists had set fire to mosques and houses as settlement expansion continued across the West Bank including Jerusalem.
For his part, the Iranian vice president thanked Palestine for joining the inauguration of Iran’s president-elect. He reiterated that Iran would continue to support the Palestinian people and Abbas’ efforts to end rivalry between Fatah and Hamas.
4 aug 2013
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu lashed out at new Iranian President Hassan Rowhani on Sunday, saying that he shared his hardline predecessor's aim of destroying Israel.
"The president of Iran said the day before yesterday (Friday) that Israel is a wound on the body of Islam," Netanyahu's office quoted him as saying at the start of the weekly cabinet meeting.
"The president of Iran may have been changed but the aims of the regime there have not," Netanyahu said.
"Iran's intention is to develop a nuclear capability and nuclear weapons, with the aim of destroying the state of Israel."
Rowhani formally took office on Saturday at a ceremony in which he received the endorsement of supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who retains the final say on all strategic issues, including nuclear talks with the the major powers.
Western governments suspect that Iran's nuclear program is cover for a drive for a weapons capability. Iran insists it is for power generation and medical purposes only.
Both the United States and Israel -- which has the Middle East's sole, if undeclared, nuclear arsenal -- have refused to rule out a resort to military action to prevent Iran developing a weapons capability.
Rowhani succeeds Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whose turbulent two-term presidency was marked by frequent outbursts against Israel.
Rowhani too took a swipe at Israel during Friday rallies marking the annual Quds (Jerusalem) Day.
"In our region, a wound has for many years been sitting on the body of the Islamic world in the shadow of occupation of the holy land of Palestine and the dear Quds," Rowhani said in remarks broadcast on state television.
He pledged allegiance to the Palestinian cause and rejection of Israel as a Jewish state, an unfaltering cornerstone of Iranian foreign policy since the 1979 Islamic revolution toppled the US-backed shah.
"The president of Iran said the day before yesterday (Friday) that Israel is a wound on the body of Islam," Netanyahu's office quoted him as saying at the start of the weekly cabinet meeting.
"The president of Iran may have been changed but the aims of the regime there have not," Netanyahu said.
"Iran's intention is to develop a nuclear capability and nuclear weapons, with the aim of destroying the state of Israel."
Rowhani formally took office on Saturday at a ceremony in which he received the endorsement of supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who retains the final say on all strategic issues, including nuclear talks with the the major powers.
Western governments suspect that Iran's nuclear program is cover for a drive for a weapons capability. Iran insists it is for power generation and medical purposes only.
Both the United States and Israel -- which has the Middle East's sole, if undeclared, nuclear arsenal -- have refused to rule out a resort to military action to prevent Iran developing a weapons capability.
Rowhani succeeds Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whose turbulent two-term presidency was marked by frequent outbursts against Israel.
Rowhani too took a swipe at Israel during Friday rallies marking the annual Quds (Jerusalem) Day.
"In our region, a wound has for many years been sitting on the body of the Islamic world in the shadow of occupation of the holy land of Palestine and the dear Quds," Rowhani said in remarks broadcast on state television.
He pledged allegiance to the Palestinian cause and rejection of Israel as a Jewish state, an unfaltering cornerstone of Iranian foreign policy since the 1979 Islamic revolution toppled the US-backed shah.
Chairman of joint chiefs of staff aims to ease Israel-Iran tensions after PM Netanyahu's combative statements
General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, will arrive in Israel on Sunday as the guest of IDF Chief of Staff Benny Gantz , Yedioth Ahronoth reported. He will meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon. The parties will discuss the tightening of military cooperation in respect to the Syrian civil war including the issue of US reports attributing strikes in Syria to Israel's Air Force.
Dempsey will also address the issue of a possible Israeli strike in Iran in wake of recent statements on the subject made by Netanyahu in an interview with CBS. "Iran is inching "closer and closer to the bomb," Netanyahu said. "I won't wait until it's too late."
"We'll have to address this question of how to stop Iran, perhaps before the United States does," Netanyahu said referring to the difference in urgency for Washington and Jerusalem.
Addressing the cabinet last month, the prime minister said that "A month has passed since elections were held in Iran, and Iran continues to race toward the development of military nuclear capability."
Iran's Foreign Ministry called Israel a war monger in response.
Washington is worried about a possible Israel strike on Iran's nuclear facilities and tensions between the two nations are starting to build up.
Discussing the rationale behind releasing Palestinian prisoners as part of renewed negotiations with the Palestinians last week, Ya'alon alluded to the broader regional context. "There were many strategic considerations which might be revealed in the future," he said.
Dempsey made a previous trip to Israel last year amid calls to strike Iran. The Americans believe that decision makers in Israel are feeling over-confident after reported successful strikes in Syria.
It is also believed that Israeli officials are convinced that Iran's retaliation capabilities have diminished in light of Syria and Hezbollah weakened positions in the civil war.
General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, will arrive in Israel on Sunday as the guest of IDF Chief of Staff Benny Gantz , Yedioth Ahronoth reported. He will meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon. The parties will discuss the tightening of military cooperation in respect to the Syrian civil war including the issue of US reports attributing strikes in Syria to Israel's Air Force.
Dempsey will also address the issue of a possible Israeli strike in Iran in wake of recent statements on the subject made by Netanyahu in an interview with CBS. "Iran is inching "closer and closer to the bomb," Netanyahu said. "I won't wait until it's too late."
"We'll have to address this question of how to stop Iran, perhaps before the United States does," Netanyahu said referring to the difference in urgency for Washington and Jerusalem.
Addressing the cabinet last month, the prime minister said that "A month has passed since elections were held in Iran, and Iran continues to race toward the development of military nuclear capability."
Iran's Foreign Ministry called Israel a war monger in response.
Washington is worried about a possible Israel strike on Iran's nuclear facilities and tensions between the two nations are starting to build up.
Discussing the rationale behind releasing Palestinian prisoners as part of renewed negotiations with the Palestinians last week, Ya'alon alluded to the broader regional context. "There were many strategic considerations which might be revealed in the future," he said.
Dempsey made a previous trip to Israel last year amid calls to strike Iran. The Americans believe that decision makers in Israel are feeling over-confident after reported successful strikes in Syria.
It is also believed that Israeli officials are convinced that Iran's retaliation capabilities have diminished in light of Syria and Hezbollah weakened positions in the civil war.