Tehran's ayatollahs have effectively managed to hoodwink most of the world - http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Editorials/Irans-plans-351598
Grudgingly, we must admit that Iran is doing quite well. Tehran's ayatollahs have effectively managed to hoodwink the US, Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia, whose representatives are now trying to reach a final deal in New York on Iran's nuclear ambitions before the July 20 deadline.
But in actual fact, more than Iran has managed to pull the wool over the eyes of the international coterie, the nations of the world desperately wish to be fooled.
Iran's interlocutors prefer to believe that by a miraculous happenstance the country has transformed itself overnight from a ruthless theocracy - whose agenda inter alia includes wiping Israel off the map - to an agreeable member of the international community.
Had self-bamboozlement not played a key role in the international attitude vis-à-vis Iran, there would be no difficulty seeing through the ruse and sweet talk.
Thus, while International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors visited a uranium mine and a uranium- thickening facility in the central Iranian towns of Ardakan and Yazd, Iran banned access to the WhatsApp messaging site. It explained - without embarrassment or hesitation - that the move arose from the fact that WhatsApp is owned by a "Jewish American Zionist."
This was a reference to the acquisition of WhatsApp two months ago by Facebook, whose founder is Mark Zuckerberg. According to Abdolsamad Khorramabadi, head of the regime's Committee on Internet Crimes, the fact that Zuckerberg is Jewish legitimizes cracking down on a particularly popular social media site.
The astounding fact isn't so much that Tehran's Shi'ite rulers fear social networks and incite against Jews, but that the world's democracies are so silent on any hate propaganda so long as its targets are Jews.
Were Zuckerberg a passionately committed Zionist, it should not be held against him. Supporting Zionism, the national liberation movement of the Jewish people, ought to be a source of pride and not treated as a crime. But the fact is that while Zuckerberg is Jewish by birth, he is hardly a committed Jew. If anything, this goes to the heart of contemporary Judeophobia.
A Jew is hated not for what he does or what he espouses, but for his parentage. A Jew can be totally assimilated and fail to significantly identify with fellow Jews and Jewish causes, but to the eyes of the enemies of the Jewish people - even these days - he remains anathema for no other reason than his lineage.
We can only express dismay that the world's most liberal governments, among them the Obama administration, have chosen to not so much as notice the non-stop stifling of elementary freedoms in Iran and the vehement anti-Jewish pretext to which Ayatollah Khamenei's cohorts resort for outlawing applications the regime intends to repress.
Behrouz Kamalvandi, spokesman of Iran's Atomic Department, maintains that by allowing the visit to the uranium extraction and refinement sites, "Iran will be able to say that the seven-agreed measures between Iran and the Agency [IAEA] have been fulfilled. Already six steps have been taken."
This is the pose. Iran postures as an accommodating partner, oozing goodwill, and the international powers, seeking to strike a bargain, are only too happy to pretend right along that all is well on the Iranian front and that danger to the world can be avoided by easing the sanctions on Tehran.
It's easier to make believe that Iran is now ruled by a moderate regime, that it will indeed - as per its promises - redesign its Arak heavy-water reactor (to greatly limit the amount of plutonium it can produce) and that it will dilute half of its 20-percent-enriched uranium.
Yet all these seeming Iranian concessions, if indeed made, are eminently reversible and will only delay the manufacture of an Iranian nuclear bomb.
The true test for Iranian intentions shouldn't be sought in the self-serving promises of its nuclear negotiators but in other spheres - including the denial of rudimentary liberties to the Iranian population and the ongoing unmitigated expressions of hate toward all Jews, no matter where and who they are.
Can a nuclear Iran and war be stopped? - By Jennifer Rubin - http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2014/05/07/can-a-nuclear-iran-and-war-be-stopped/
The world's attention is focused on Russia, but a critical deadline in the nuclear talks with Iran is fast approaching. On July 20, time will be up - or will it? - for a final deal on Iran's illicit nuclear program.
There is no chance that Iran will agree to dismantle its program, send out its nuclear materials and come into full compliance with United Nations resolutions. For one thing, the Obama administration is no longer demanding it do so. Instead of dismantling the heavy-water Arak plant, now there's talk about "re-purposing" it. Instead of eliminating the potential for a bomb, Secretary of State John F. Kerry speaks about allowing a break-out period of six to 12 months.
Observing President Obama's aversion to strong action (e.g. tolerating Syria's chemical weapons, failing to stop Russia's takeover of Crimea), the mullahs no doubt are confident that there is little downside for them if they don't make a deal that would impair their nuclear weapons capability. With President Obama, Sen. Harry Reid (R-Nev.) and others ready to run interference on sanctions and the Iranian economy on the rebound, Iran is in the catbird seat. Iran, by being allowed to retain its centrifuges, advance its ballistic weapons program and continue with advanced research, has given up nothing while securing relief from sanctions and certainty that the United States will take no military action.
There is little chance the talks will break off for good in July, for that would constitute yet another Obama failure and increase calls for heightened sanctions. More likely will be either a plea for more negotiating time or a transparently awful deal that legitimizes Iran's program, an imitation of the North Korea deal that allowed that dictatorship to go nuclear.
It is not for trivial reasons then that Israel and pro-Israel American groups and lawmakers are sounding the alarm. The Jerusalem Post reports:
Speaking in Washington on Thursday, [Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Ron] Dermer said negotiations in Vienna between Iran and the P5+1 - the US, Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany - risked leaving Iran "a threshold nuclear power" that would move them back from "two months, where they are today, to maybe two or three months further" from a nuclear weapon. . . . Also addressing the forum at the Mandarin Oriental hotel, Representative Ed Royce (R-CA), chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee, spoke of what successful policy on Iran might look like. "Failure is anything short of having a verifiable way to dismantle the nuclear weapons program," he said. "Failure would be allowing Iran to proceed with an [intercontinental ballistic missile] program."
Israeli officials certainly are doing everything to anticipate how events may play out in July. As former deputy national security adviser Elliott Abrams relates, retired Gen. Amos Yadlin, the former head of Israeli Military Intelligence and now director of the Institute for National Security Studies, recently gave a speech in which he cautioned: "Iran is trying to portray itself as a country prepared to make fundamental concessions, but at the same time it is preserving the core abilities in both routes it is developing for a nuclear weapon." Likewise, Gen. Yaakov Amidror, the former Israeli national security adviser and before that head of research for Israeli Military Intelligence, warned, as Abrams notes, that a "flimsy deal" would confirm Israeli suspicions that the West lacks the will to prevent Iran from becoming a threshold state. ("Anyone who thinks that a U.S. administration would respond immediately to an Iranian agreement violation, without negotiations, is deluding himself. . . . Israel cannot.") In other words, a phony deal will make Israeli action necessary, for it will be the only thing standing in the way of an Iranian nuclear bomb.
Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), who spoke at the same event as Dermer, has the same worries. According to the host group's president, Cliff May, Menendez said at the Washington Forum of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, "No one wants a diplomatic solution more than I do. But it cannot be a deal for a deal's sake. And I am worried they [Obama and his advisers] want a deal more than they want the right deal."
The danger of a bad deal is that it destroys any consensus on sanctions and puts the international stamp of approval on Iran's nuclear operation that multiple U.S. presidents, the European Union and the United Nations have insisted was illegitimate and a threat to the West. May explains:
If a deal is struck with the Iranians over the coming months, expect it to feature technical formulas comprehensible only to experts: complex rules on how many centrifuges the Iranians may spin, how much uranium may be enriched to what levels, the size of stockpiles, and what international weapons inspectors may see. Such a deal would let Iran's rulers continue to move toward the nuclear finish line, while lifting most of the remaining economic pressure. Both sides would claim diplomacy had succeeded. About that, one side would be telling the truth. The other side, however, would be pretending.
The way to prevent this from occurring is simple. Congress should pass sanctions conditioned on completion of a deal that does what the administration said it would demand (e.g. dismantle Iran's nuclear program). It was a gross error not to have passed conditional sanctions months ago; indeed it was an open invitation to stall, make a bad deal or both. The error can be corrected now, however. With new legislation, the message to Obama and Iran would be that there will be no more stalling and no phony deals. Economic pressure will intensify beginning July 21, unless, by some miracle, the Iranians capitulate. But why would they? Everything is going their way.
An Iranian stealth submarine sinks before targeting a mock US carrier in an a naval exercise - http://www.debka.com/article/23894/An-Iranian-stealth-submarine-sinks-before-targeting-a-mock-US-carrier-in-an-a-naval-exercise
A new Iranian Ghadir-class stealth mini-submarine, home-built with Chinese technology, recently sank near the Strait of Hormuz, while preparing for a Revolutionary Guards naval exercise to practice sinking or disabling a mock-up US aircraft carrier, debkafile's military and intelligence sources report exclusively.
The sub was launched just a year ago.
The Iranians drew a tight veil of secrecy over the accident, curtailing the search for the estimated 10 crewmen to avoid drawing the notice of US or other intelligence agencies in the region.
Chinese and Russian teams secretly enlisted to help search for the sunken mini-submarine, quickly abandoned it saying that none of the crew could have survived. It was up to Iran to decide, they said, whether to continue the search at the risk of exposing its plans for sinking US carriers in a war contingency. So long as the sub stayed on the bottom, its stealth technology would make it hard for Western intelligence to locate it.
The ill-fated submarine was to have shown its paces by striking a replica of the USS Nimitz aircraft carrier Iran had built at the Bandar Abbas naval base.
The replica was spotted by US satellites. Challenged for an explanation, the Iranians first tried claiming it was to be used in a film documenting the naval forces present in the Persian Gulf.
But then on April 27, the Navy Commander Rear Adm. Ali Fadavi gave the game a way by saying: "Iranian forces should target the carrier in the trainings. We should learn about the weaknesses and strengths of our enemy."
On May 6, Adm. Fadavi made a more warlike statement that clearly defined "the enemy" when he said: "They [Americans] know nothing. We have been making and sinking replicas of US destroyers, frigates and warships for long years, and we have sunk the replica of their vessels in 50 seconds through a series of operational measures."
The semi-official Fars agency quoted him as saying also: "Destroying the US navy remains one of the top operational goals of the Tehran forces. If war with the United States breaks out, the Iranians will attack American aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf, their size making them easy to target."
Tehran assumed its aggressive face the day before US National Security Adviser Susan Rice and senior US nuclear negotiator Wendy Sherman were due in Israel to persuade Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to live with the comprehensive nuclear accord shortly to be signed with Iran by the six world powers. They will also demand an Israel guarantee not to attack Iran's nuclear facilities, although the prime minister made this threat on Holocaust Day on April 27.
The Iranian navy chief's words were a message to Washington that if Netanyahu does engage in military action against Iran, the American fleet will be at risk.
Iran's military planners had assigned the new Ghadir-class mini-submarines the task of an attack to bring the US navy fleet, especially the carriers, to a halt - easy prey for a thousand IRGC torpedo boats armed with sea-to-sea missiles to strike the stationary vessels from all directions.
Iranian naval experts count on sinking a carrier or leaving it too crippled to move to safety and forced to call on US bases in Qatar, Kuwait, Oman and Yemen for air cover.
Adm. Fadavi's words, placing "destroying the US navy" among the operational goals of the Tehran forces" were meant to deter the US and Israel against military action.
debkafile's military sources reveal that IRGC chiefs are also looking at ways of disabling US warships in the Mediterranean, to put them out of action for a second-strike attack on the Lebanese Hezbollah by missiles or for sending bombers over Iran.
Not all Western naval experts agree on Tehran's objectives or capabilities. Some discount the Iran's speedboats' ability to carry more than one sea-to-sea rocket - or two at most. And the US helicopters taking off from the targeted warship or ground bases would soon be able to sink them.
Iranian forces recently tested the option of arming the explosive speedboat's crews with shoulder-carried anti-helicopter rockets, but gave up after 10 boats tipped over during the test.
The Revolutionary Guards Corps has a fleet of 10,000 small boats which are capable of great speed but easily overbalance.
If the US or Israel do decide to strike Iran's nuclear facilities, the anchorages of these boats would be among their first targets. Each of these anchorages, which are strung along the Iranian Persian Gulf coast, houses around 100 boats.
West fears Iran is supplying chlorine bombs to Syria - Con Coughlin - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/10809186/West-fears-Iran-is-supplying-chlorine-bombs-to-Syria.html
Allegations that Iran ordered 10,000 chlorine canisters from China and loaded them on to flights to Syria investigated by Western officials
Western security officials are investigating allegations that Iran supplied Chinese-made bombs filled with chlorine gas to the Syrian regime after satellite images emerged of a Syrian supply flight at Tehran's main airport.
Iran is understood to have ordered 10,000 chlorine canisters from China that, according to reports, have been loaded on to flights to Syria.
Western security officials say the Assad regime has established a regular air freight route with Iran using Russian-built Ilyushin 76 Syrian military cargo aircraft.
Each flight between Damascus and Mehrabad International Airport in Tehran can carry up to 40 tons of equipment, and the weapons are believed to include short-range missiles, automatic rifles and ammunition.
Security officials are now trying to establish whether these flights have been used by Iran to provide the Assad regime with the chlorine bombs used against Syrian opposition fighters in incidents revealed exclusively by The Telegraph last week.
The Israeli military website Debkafile, which has close ties to Israel's defense ministry, reported earlier this month that Iran was supplying Syria with the new Chinese-made chlorine bombs that are being used against the rebels. In one attack at Kafr Zita, on the outskirts of Hama, regime loyalists were said to have used Chinese-manufactured chlorine gas canisters rigged with explosive detonators.
Western security officials monitoring military activity between Iran and the Assad regime say the new series of arms shipments began on January 28 and have continued on a regular basis ever since, with Syrian heavy lift aircraft flying between Tehran and Damascus several times a week.
Photographs provided by intelligence satellites clearly show a Syrian Ilyushin 76 at Mehrabad airport, which is used as a supply base by the Iranian air force.
Many of the flights, which are in breach of UN sanctions imposed against Iran, took place while Iranian negotiators were taking part in talks in Geneva over Iran's nuclear program.
"The clear advantage of using this type of cargo plane is the large quantity of weapons that can be transferred in a single flight," said a Western security official. "The provision of large amounts of Iranian arms to the Assad regime has undoubtedly helped it to gain the upper hand on the battlefield."
In particular, Western leaders have become increasingly concerned by the regime's use of chlorine bombs against opposition fighters. Claims that the regime regularly uses the weapons are now being investigated by a specialist team from the U.N.'s Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.
Iranian general accidentally reveals troops in Syria - F. Michael Maloof - http://www.wnd.com/2014/05/iranian-general-accidentally-reveals-troops-in-syria/?cat_orig=world
News site scrubbed after candid comments published
An Iranian general made a major mistake by conceding Shiite Iran has military forces in Syria fighting to preserve the embattled government of Shiite Alawite President Bashar al-Assad.
Gen. Hossein Hamedani, a commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, or IRGC, commented in a speech that the Islamic republic is militarily involved in Syria.
The problem is Tehran has repeatedly denied that Iranian combat forces are fighting alongside Syrian troops in a three-year civil war in which more than 140,000 Syrians have been killed.
Until now, Iranian officials claimed that Tehran was providing only humanitarian, economic and technical help to Syria.
At a news conference in 2012, however, Gen. Mohammad Ali Jafari, commander of the IRGC, had acknowledged Iran had a military presence in Syria but was only providing non-military assistance.
"A number of members of the Quds Force (IRGC) are present in Syria, but this does not constitute a military presence," Jafari said at the time.
No longer at risk of collapse
Iran's Fars News Agency originally had published Hamedani's comments but soon removed them.
Revolutionary Guard commander Hossein Hamedani was quoted as saying that the Syrian regime was no longer "at the risk of collapse."
"Today we fight in Syria for interests such as the Islamic Revolution," Hamedani was quoted as saying. "Our defense is to the extent of the Sacred Defense."
"Sacred Defense" is a term Iranian officials use to refer to the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war.
Hamedani reportedly had made his comments at a recent administrative council meeting in the province of Hamedan. The province's capital, Hamadan, is believed to be one of the oldest cities in the world, dating back to the Assyrians in 1100 B.C.
In referring to their shared war experiences, Hamedani said that "in this conflict, without any expectations, the experiences were transferred and training was provided to the Syrians.
"We provided training that included the separation of armed forces from the people and reduced the number of casualties," the IRGC commander said.
Pilgrims?
His comments are supported by reports to WND from sources inside Damascus who said that young fighters in civilian clothes would quietly come to hotels but would then disperse to accompany Syrian military personnel.
They officially referred to themselves as "pilgrims," but these sources remarked that none carried the Quran. They were bearded, spoke Farsi and were physically fit.
Their numbers also have been reinforced by the influx of Iranian-backed Hezbollah from neighboring Lebanon, which has prompted increasing attacks by the Sunni foreign fighters inside the country.
Hamedani pointed out that in addition to the Hezbollah from Lebanon, Iran had established a "second Hezbollah" in Syria.
"The prime minister of Israel had said, at the time when the U.S. was ready to attack Syria, come, weaken Hezbollah and cut the hand of Iran," Hamedani said. "But Iran has formed a second Hezbollah in Syria."
Before Fars pulled Hamedani's comments, the IRGC general said that the Syrian regime is no longer "at risk of collapse."
The assessment is generally shared by U.S. intelligence officials and regional analysts who believe that Assad's military forces have the battlefield advantage. However, his forces control critical chokepoints throughout the country although al-Nusra and other Islamist foreign fighters control sections, including outside the Syrian capital of Damascus.
In underscoring Assad's ability to survive, Hamedani pointed to a combination of Iran's alliance with Syria and the creation of Hezbollah inside Syria as constituting the "axis of resistance."
"Without these," he said, "the region would be easy for the U.S. (to influence)."
PLEASE VISIT MY OTHER WEBSITES:
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.