Biden: US will not stand in Israel's way on Iranian issue

[youngindian]

Russian Defense System Sale to Iran Undermines Military Balance in Middle East

Published: July 07,2009


Western politicians are increasingly worried about a significant change in Russia's position regarding the possible sale of S-300 air defense missiles to Iran. [1] Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin last week and asked him to annul the critical arms deal with Iran. [2]

The S-300, also called SA-20, is one of the world's most advanced air-defense systems. It is an improved version of the American Patriot battery, carried on trucks, and can locate one hundred targets simultaneously as well as intercept aircraft or cruise missiles up to a range of 196 kilometers and an altitude of 27 kilometers. [3] According to longtime Pentagon advisor Dan Goure, the purchase would effectively rule out any strike against Iran, an option Israel keeps on the table as a last resort in case negotiations over Iran's illicit nuclear program are unsuccessful. [4]

The change in Moscow's attitude toward the sale was first noticed during the visit of Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman to Moscow earlier this month. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev told Lieberman that Moscow had signed a contract with Iran and some payments had already been made, [5] although Israel has conditioned the sale to Russia of a dozen unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones, on Moscow not selling Iran the advanced anti-aircraft missile system. [6]

The Russian-Iranian deal was signed over a year ago, and Israel has lobbied Russia to pull away from selling the system, valued at an estimated $800 million. Although the Russian government has delayed the sale, Israel has received only vague assurances. [7]

On June 17, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak met with Russia's chief of staff, General Nicolai Makarov, and asked that he intervene to prevent the arms sale. "Arms that will subvert the military balance in our region and which will threaten stability should not be delivered in our region," Barak said during a meeting in Paris outlining Israel's current security situation. [8]

The global economic crisis seems to define the rules of the game. Speaking of the deal, Medvedev told Lieberman, "It is a lot of money." According to a report in the Israeli daily Maariv, Medvedev has announced that if Israel wishes to prevent the sale of S-300 missiles to Iran, it must either buy them itself or work to have another country purchase them. According to Haaretz, Lieberman's response to the Russian proposal was vague. [9]

Russia's military news agency Interfax-AVN reported on Friday that Egypt already showed interest in Russia's modern S-300 and S-400 air defense systems. However, according to Ruslan Aliyev of the Russian Strategies and Technologies Analysis Center, one should not count on Egypt signing large contracts, given the economic situation. [10]

Russian Defense System Sale to Iran Undermines Military Balance in Middle East

 

[deltacamelately]

Agreed with all you points Major. A lot of discussions have taken place here and elsewhere as well regarding this.
But if tomorrow Iran has a working bomb with its crazy regime, who will guarantee Israel its security from a trigger happy mad man? If the Iranians chose to self destruct then nothing will stop them

Obviously we are talking here in speculation, but im sure Israel would be considering all options.

Yusuf,
Again, its not Israel's nukes that guarantees a glassened Iran. Its the American nukes and Israel knows it. Even if one assumes that Iran has attained critical mass, it will still be decades away from possessing enough numbers (Assuming that it has tweaked the tech enough to miniaturise it to the extent of fitting it on its nascent IRBMs and double assuming that the accuracy is sufficient enough-NOT to miss that thin strip of land called Israel and end up hitting muslim countries all around it) to completely annihilate Israel. And guess what, one recce sattellite confirming a nuclear tipped IRBM heading Tel Aviv and BOOM. This is the American Guarantee and those Ayatollahs know this as clear as their arse skin.

Aside: As much as Ahmedinezad would want me to believe, I still would consider him more bluff and less business than I would believe the Paks.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

so Russians went thru with the sale even after Obama'strip to Russia another Obama failure.

 

[Ratus Ratus]

so Russians went thru with the sale even after Obama'strip to Russia another Obama failure.

Nothing to do with your wonder boy. Business is business.
How about a swap, we lend you kevein747 and you lend us Obamarama. How about a month long swap?
Might just improve some politics for both.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Nothing to do with your wonder boy. Business is business.
How about a swap, we lend you kevein747 and you lend us Obamarama. How about a month long swap?
Might just improve some politics for both.

People were furious at Bush who did his best,and now they are unhappy with the way things are going, i agree Obama just got the job(mess), but he has to get a lot tougher on US foreign policy his loose policies are jeopardizing security for many allies s.korea,japan,Israel etc... Any conflicts will pull USA into a war that it cannot afford. Better than a swap how about a month vacation for both.

 

[Yusuf]

Yusuf,
Again, its not Israel's nukes that guarantees a glassened Iran. Its the American nukes and Israel knows it. Even if one assumes that Iran has attained critical mass, it will still be decades away from possessing enough numbers (Assuming that it has tweaked the tech enough to miniaturise it to the extent of fitting it on its nascent IRBMs and double assuming that the accuracy is sufficient enough-NOT to miss that thin strip of land called Israel and end up hitting muslim countries all around it) to completely annihilate Israel. And guess what, one recce sattellite confirming a nuclear tipped IRBM heading Tel Aviv and BOOM. This is the American Guarantee and those Ayatollahs know this as clear as their arse skin.

Aside: As much as Ahmedinezad would want me to believe, I still would consider him more bluff and less business than I would believe the Paks.

yes Ajad may not be taken seriously. But the one who has the remote control is the worry.


Sir, so far we have not considered the Israeli nukes as a deterrent. It's stopping the Iranians from aqcuiring nukes which is the priority and not deterring it after they acquire them.
I don't think the Iranian missile can be discounted. They have had a long history of testing them.
And if we consider Pakistan to have missile capable nukes, then we should assume that the Iranians can as well as they got the blueprint from the same man who made the Pak bomb.
The true extent will not be known till AQ Khan is in the hands if the west.

 

[youngindian]

'U.S. distancing itself from Israel on Iran issue'

Last update - 21:15 08/07/2009



Comments by U.S. President Barack Obama and U.S. Vice President Joe Biden about a possible Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear facilities were directed at Iran and meant to distinguish the U.S. from Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's top national security adviser said Wednesday.

"Also, American leaders are signaling Iran that the U.S. is still interested in diplomatic engagement," the adviser, Uzi Arad, told The Associated Press.

Speaking to ABC-TV on Sunday, Biden appeared to depart from his previous comment that an Israeli attack on Iran would be ill-advised, saying: "Israel can determine for itself - it's a sovereign nation - what's in their interest and what they decide to do relative to Iran and anyone else."



The following day, Obama in a visit to Moscow was asked by CNN if Biden's comment's represented the U.S. giving Israel a green light to attack.

"Absolutely not," the president replied.

The next day, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, warned that a military strike to thwart Iran's nuclear weapons capability could have grave and unpredictable consequences. Iran has denied trying to build nuclear bombs.

Arad said the back-and-forth was an American message toward Iran, rather than Israel, noting that Biden also said in the interview, "If the Iranians respond to the offer of engagement, we will engage."

"My understanding of what Biden said is that the second part is the interesting part - not that Israel is sovereign to act, but that he said the United States acts differently. Essentially, he distinguished himself from Israel," Arad said. "What was important for him was to transmit to the Iranians that we, the United States, are different."

Israel is uncomfortable with the attempt to open talks with Iran, fearing that this would give the Iranians more time to build their weapons. Israel has called for world action to stop the Iranian nuclear program and has not taken its own military options off the table.

Arad said Obama's quick rebuttal was meant to clarify that the United States was still interested in engagement - despite prospects for dialogue being rattled by Iran's heavy crackdown on protesters in the country's disputed presidential election - and was not suggesting that his administration would not stand in the way of an Israeli strike.

"The president felt the need to correct the impression that Biden's comments made," he added.

Arad, one of Netanyahu's top aides, said Israeli officials have often discussed the Iran issue in Washington.

Israel considers Iran a strategic threat because of its nuclear program and missile development, dismissing Iranian denials that it intends to build nuclear weapons.


'U.S. distancing itself from Israel on Iran issue' - Haaretz - Israel News

 

[youngindian]

Despite splits, U.S. still arms Israel

Published: July 8, 2009 at 2:15 Pm

TEL AVIV, Israel, July 8 (UPI) -- Despite differences between the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama and Israel over Iran and the Middle East peace process, and human-rights groups' allegations of war crimes against the Palestinians, Washington continues to provide the Jewish state with billions of dollars' worth of arms and equipment every year.


And there's no sign that this will change any time soon.

Indeed, Obama has endorsed a military aid package worth up to $30 billion, without conditions, over the next 10 years that was set up by the administration of President George W. Bush in 2007.

That represents a 25 percent increase in the vast U.S. military and security assistance given to Israel during the Bush administration.

With annual military aid of some $2 billion, Israel is the largest recipient of U.S. largesse in the world.

Arms sales have largely been an important instrument of U.S. foreign policy for many years. But these days there are new dynamics to consider.

With the U.S. military transforming itself from a force designed to fight major conventional inter-state wars with armored phalanxes, carrier task forces and the biggest, most powerful air force in the world to one able to counter agile non-state insurgent forces, as in Iraq or Afghanistan, the vast U.S. defense industry needs to find other markets for its tanks, warships and fighter-bombers.

Hence the huge $30 billion package for Israel, which should help keep production lines for the F-35 advanced stealth fighter and other big-ticket items going for a while.

Most of this military aid is simply a credit line to U.S. defense contractors since the money has to be spent on American systems.

As it is, the Israelis were only marked down for a $30 billion package because the Bush administration wanted to provide a weapons package for the Arab states, mainly Saudi Arabia and its partners in the Gulf, amounting to $20 billion over 10 years.

That, it said, was to bolster U.S. regional allies against an expansionist Iran. To do that meant giving Gulf states access to advanced technology that had largely been reserved for the Israelis.

Thus Israel had to be kept sweet so it did not use its considerable clout in the U.S. Congress to block the proposed sales to the Arabs, as the Jewish state has done many times in the past to ensure its qualitative edge.

But when the Israelis invaded the Gaza Strip on Dec. 28, 2008, in considerable force with the declared objective of halting rocket attacks by the fundamentalist Hamas faction that ruled the territory, but ultimately seeking to crush its military capability, human-rights groups appealed to the outgoing Bush administration to halt arms supplies to the Jewish state.

Amnesty International and others argued that the Israeli forces were committing war crimes by killing large numbers of civilians -- men, women and children -- and using U.S.-supplied weapons to do it.

Bush demurred. Obama also refused after he took office in January 2009. That was two days after Israel called off its 22-day war, apparently so as not to offend the incoming U.S. president.

"Obama has thus far failed to realize that the problem in the Middle East is that there are too many deadly weapons in the region, not too few," says Stephen Zunes, who heads the Middle Eastern Studies program at the University of San Francisco and is a longtime regional affairs analyst.

"Instead of simply wanting Israel to have an adequate deterrent against potential military threats, Obama insists the United States should guarantee that Israel maintain a qualitative military edge," Zunes added in an assessment published in Foreign Policy in Focus in March.

"Thanks to this overwhelming advantage over its neighbors, Israeli forces were able to launch devastating wars against Israel's Palestinian and Lebanese neighbors in recent years."

That was a reference to a 34-day war Israel fought with Lebanon's Hezbollah guerrillas, backed by Iran and Syria, in July and August 2006.

Now, the Americans are concerned that while they are trying to open a dialogue with Iran over its nuclear program, the Israelis, who see that as a mortal threat to their existence as a nation, will launch pre-emptive strikes against Iran -- using U.S.-supplied weapons systems.

In fiscal 2008, U.S. foreign military sales totaled $36 billion, 50 percent up on 2007. According to Frida Berrigan of the New America Foundation's Arms and Security Initiative, sales in the first half of 2009 reached $27 billion and could hit $40 billion for the year.

Some experts predict that over the next decade arms will be the single biggest U.S. export, with Israel taking a big chunk, such as up to 75 of the new F-35 stealth fighters.

Despite splits, U.S. still arms Israel - UPI.com

 

[youngindian]

Israel: Iran Will Be Destroyed if It Launches Nuclear Attack

By Robert Berger
Jerusalem
10 July 2009

Israel has warned Iran of catastrophic consequences if it attacks the Jewish state with weapons of mass destruction.

Israel's national security advisor says Iran will be destroyed if it dares to launch a nuclear attack on the Jewish state. In an interview published Friday in the Hebrew daily Ha'aretz, Uzi Arad said Israel must have "tremendously powerful" weapons to deter or retaliate for a nuclear strike. That seemed to be a clear reference to Israel's reported nuclear arsenal, though it has never admitted to having nuclear weapons. Arad described a nuclear Iran as a "nightmare for Israel."In a speech last week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned that a nuclear Iran is not only a threat to Israel, but also to Western civilization.

"The greatest danger facing our world today is if the world's worst regimes acquire the world's most dangerous weapons," he said. "For the sake of peace, for the sake of our common security, for the sake of our common values this must not be allowed to happen."

Iran says its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. But Israel is convinced that Iran is developing nuclear weapons and could use them to carry out its threat to wipe the Jewish state "off the map." Israel has warned that if international diplomacy fails, it might launch a preemptive strike on Iran's nuclear facilities.

VOA News - Israel: Iran Will Be Destroyed if It Launches Nuclear Attack

 

[Daredevil]

yes Ajad may not be taken seriously. But the one who has the remote control is the worry.


Sir, so far we have not considered the Israeli nukes as a deterrent. It's stopping the Iranians from aqcuiring nukes which is the priority and not deterring it after they acquire them.
I don't think the Iranian missile can be discounted. They have had a long history of testing them.
And if we consider Pakistan to have missile capable nukes, then we should assume that the Iranians can as well as they got the blueprint from the same man who made the Pak bomb.
The true extent will not be known till AQ Khan is in the hands if the west.

The bombs made by AQ Khan are duds,which were based on HEU. The main nuclear bombs that Pakistan has are plutonium-based ones and designs were from none other than China.

 

[youngindian]

FM: Iran preparing new package of proposals on world issues

July 12, 2009

Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said on Saturday that Tehran was preparing a new package of proposals on major political, security and international issues.

"We are preparing a new package of proposals which would be considered as the basis for Tehran's negotiations on major regional and international developments," the official IRNA news agency quoted Mottaki as saying.

Speaking at a joint press conference with visiting Omani Minister Responsible for Foreign Affairs Yousuf Bin Alawi Bin Abdullah, Mottaki also said that "Iran has received no new messages from the Group of Eight (G8) summit."

The leaders participating the G8 summit, which ended on Friday in L'Aquila, Italy, issued a joint declaration urging a negotiated resolution to the standoff over Iran's nuclear issue.

U.S. President Barack Obama on Friday told a press conference after the end of the summit that G8 nations will not wait "indefinitely" to allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons.

"World opinion is very clear ... Our premise is that we provide the door, but we also say we're not going to just wait indefinitely and allow for the development of the nuclear weapon, the breach of international treaties," Obama said.

On Wednesday, the G8 leaders urged Iran to cooperate and accept negotiations on its nuclear issue, saying they would "take stock of the situation" at a meeting in September.

In response to a revised packages of incentives by the United States, Russia, China, France and Britain, plus Germany (G5+1) last year to encourage Iran to halt its sensitive nuclear program, Iran later offered its own package, in which Tehran's concern had been directed to the global issues.

In April, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced that Iran would offer a new package of proposals to the world to solve various world issues, including Tehran's nuclear program.

The United States and other Western countries claim that Iran intends to secretly develop nuclear weapons. The UN Security Council also requires Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment activity.

Iran, however, insists that its nuclear plan is only for peaceful purposes, vowing to continue its uranium enrichment activity despite pressure and sanctions from Western countries.

FM: Iran preparing new package of proposals on world issues - People's Daily Online

 

[youngindian]

Defense official: Israel readying for attack on Iran

16/07/2009

Israel's recent deployment of warships across the Red Sea should be seen as serious preparation for an attack on Iran, an Israeli defense official told the Times of London on Thursday.

"This is preparation that should be taken seriously. Israel is investing time in preparing itself for the complexity of an attack on Iran. These maneuvers are a message to Iran that Israel will follow up on its threats," the official was quoted as saying.

Earlier this week, two Israel Navy gunboats openly sailed through the Suez Canal into the Red Sea. Advertisement


The ships that passed through the Suez Canal on Tuesday were two Sa'ar 5 gunboats, the Hanit and the Eilat. This follows a similar incident in late June, when an Israeli Dolphin-class submarine passed through the canal, later returning the same way.

The move, apparently coordinated with Egypt, is seen as a warning message to Middle Eastern radicals, first and foremost Iran.

Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit confirmed the crossings and said that Cairo's agreements with Jerusalem permit Israeli military ships to transit the canal. He declined to speculate on whether the voyage was meant as a warning to Iran or anyone else.

While Israeli naval ships have gone through Suez before, the last such occurrence was at least a year ago.

An Israeli diplomat told the Times that Israel's has been bolstering its ties with certain Arab nations just as wary of the Iranian nuclear threat. In particular, the diplomat cited a "shared mutual distrust of Iran" between Israel and Egypt.

Though neither side says so publicly, there is ongoing security coordination between Israel and Egypt, which could be expanded if necessary in the future.

Israel has an interest in a naval presence in the Red Sea for two reasons: the effort to halt arms smuggling from Iran to the Gaza Strip - which, according to international media reports, mainly takes place by sea from Iran to Sudan, and then overland via Egypt, and the effort to bolster its deterrence against Iran in the event of a direct conflict breaking out.

Defense official: Israel readying for attack on Iran - Haaretz - Israel News

 

[youngindian]

Iran could 'set off a uranium bomb within 6 months' - German media

17:5216/07/2009 MOSCOW, July 16 (RIA Novosti) - Iran has the capacity to build a nuclear bomb and conduct a nuclear test similar to North Korea's by the end of this year, a popular German magazine has said.

Western powers led by the United States, along with Israel, have accused Tehran of attempting to develop nuclear weapons and ballistic missile technology for their delivery. Iran says it needs its nuclear program for electric power generation, and its missile program for space exploration.

"If they wanted to, they could set off a uranium bomb within six months," the Stern magazine quoted a source in the German Foreign Intelligence Service (BND) as saying.

Iran has already acquired the full-cycle uranium enrichment technology, and has enough centrifuges to produce weapons-grade uranium, the source said.

Tehran announced in late February that it had 6,000 operating centrifuges at the Natanz uranium enrichment facility and was planning to install a total of 50,000 over the next five years.

Although Iran still does not have delivery vehicles capable of carrying nuclear warheads, the country is pursuing an extensive ballistic missile program and could develop missiles with a range to reach targets in Europe in the next three years, the BND source said.

Iran successfully launched last year an upgraded Shahab-3 ballistic missile as part of a navy exercise, dubbed Great Prophet 3, in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz.

With a reported range of 2,000 kilometers and armed with a 1-ton conventional warhead, the Shahab-3 puts Israel, Turkey, the Arabian peninsula, Afghanistan and Pakistan within striking distance.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad declared the country a nuclear and space power in March after the country reportedly put a domestic communications satellite into orbit.

The Stern magazine also said Iran was secretly acquiring components and know-how for its ballistic missiles in the West, including in Germany.

The publication said Iranian national Said Mohammad Hosseinian was "operating a massive network of dummy companies," which obtain missile technology in foreign countries in violation of the UN Resolution 1747.

Iran could 'set off a uranium bomb within 6 months' - German media

 

[deltacamelately]

yes Ajad may not be taken seriously. But the one who has the remote control is the worry.


Sir, so far we have not considered the Israeli nukes as a deterrent. It's stopping the Iranians from aqcuiring nukes which is the priority and not deterring it after they acquire them.
I don't think the Iranian missile can be discounted. They have had a long history of testing them.
And if we consider Pakistan to have missile capable nukes, then we should assume that the Iranians can as well as they got the blueprint from the same man who made the Pak bomb.
The true extent will not be known till AQ Khan is in the hands if the west.

Yusuf,
AQK designs are not capable of missile mounting. There's a lot talked about in the nuclear parlance about the design failures of what Dr. Qadir made, err, managed. It is often said, that initially, while Iran wanted a working design, Pakistan wanted to give them a ready maded nuke, albeit the duds as we know were the initial lot. Not too sure whether the same can be miniaturised and mounted on BMs. They may have the BMs numbers on their side, might have practised salvos as well, however the tech to fit a working nuke on a BM is still a triffle too difficult. Some in the west doubt even India's capabilities.

 

[youngindian]

US Envoy Meets Israeli PM in Jerusalem

28 July 2009

U.S. Middle East envoy George Mitchell met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Tuesday to try to resolve a dispute over Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

The two met in Mr. Netanyahu's office in Jerusalem to discuss steps in bringing about Middle East peace. Washington says Israel must freeze settlement construction to promote peace, but Israel says it must continue building to allow for the settlements' "natural growth."

Mitchell's meeting with Mr. Netanyahu is part of a new U.S. diplomatic push to end the Israeli-Arab conflict. His tour of the region has included talks with leaders from Syria, Egypt and the Palestinian territories.

U.S. National Security Adviser James Jones is leading a delegation to Israel and the West Bank as part of a separate diplomatic push for peace. The White House says he arrived in the region late Monday.

Over the last four days, Mitchell said he has asked Arab leaders in the region to take genuine steps toward normalizing ties with Israel.


US Envoy Meets Israeli PM in Jerusalem

 

[youngindian]

U.S., Israel Divide on Iran Nuclear Program

JULY 29, 2009

Defense Secretary Gates Calls for Continued Engagement With Tehran as Israelis Warn a Military Strike Is Possible

JERUSALEM -- A simmering dispute between the U.S. and Israel over Iran's nuclear program burst into the open on Monday, as U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates, on a visit to Israel, called for continued diplomatic engagement with Tehran, while Israeli officials repeatedly warned of a possible military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities.

Iran's apparent pursuit of a nuclear weapon is emerging as a major source of tension between the U.S. and Israel, which are already feuding over President Barack Obama's call for a complete freeze on Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank.

Several senior U.S. officials are visiting Israel this week to push Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government to halt Israeli settlement activity, a step the Israeli leader has so far refused to take. The Obama administration's Mideast envoy, George Mitchell, is already in the region, while National Security Adviser James Jones and White House Mideast adviser Dennis Ross are slated to arrive in coming days.

Israeli officials plan to use the meetings to underscore the country's growing unease about the Obama administration's diplomatic outreach to Iran. Israeli officials believe Iran may be less than a year away from enriching enough uranium to build a nuclear weapon, a move Mr. Netanyahu's government sees as an existential threat to the future of the Jewish state.

In a joint news conference with Mr. Gates, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak emphasized that Israel believed "no option should be removed from the table" when it came to Iran, a clear allusion to a possible military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities.

After a later meeting with Mr. Gates, Mr. Netanyahu said he told the American defense chief of "the seriousness to which Israel views Iran's nuclear ambitions and the need to utilize all available means to prevent Iran from achieving a nuclear-weapons capability."

Mr. Gates, on his first visit to Israel in more than two years, said Washington shared the country's deep concern about the Iranian nuclear program. He said that the Obama administration's diplomatic outreach to Iran was "not an open-ended offer" and that the U.S. wanted a clear response from Tehran by the time the United Nations General Assembly convenes in late September.

"We're very mindful of the possibility that the Iranians would simply try to run out the clock," he said.

During a later stop in the Jordanian capital of Amman, Mr. Gates said Israeli officials told him they were willing to give the administration's diplomatic overtures more time to work before deciding whether to use force against Iran.

"I have the sense that as long as the process isn't completely open-ended that the Israelis are prepared to let it go forward," he said.

Israeli officials made clear they were unhappy with the administration's outreach to Tehran and that they wanted tougher measures. In his appearance with Mr. Gates, Mr. Barak said any negotiations with Iran should be "short in time and well-defined in objectives."

If the talks don't show quick signs of progress, the Israeli defense minister said Israel would push the U.N. to impose binding "Chapter 7" sanctions on Iran, a step the world body has so far refused to take.

Mr. Gates indicated the Obama administration would support stronger measures against Iran if progress isn't made. "If the engagement process is not sufficient the U.S. is prepared to press for significant additional sanctions," he said.

Mr. Gates declined to say whether the administration had begun crafting specific sanctions or canvassing American allies at the U.N. to drum up support for such measures.

U.S., Israel Divide on Iran Nuclear Program - WSJ.com

 

[youngindian]

Analysis: U.S. gives Israel 'big hug'

29/07/2009

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Don't you just love a parade? Apparently the Obama administration does too, as evidenced by the steady stream of top U.S. officials visiting Israel this week. A bevy of heavy hitters are there, the likes of which haven't been seen since the Persian Gulf War.Just as Defense Secretary Robert Gates wrapped up his meetings there, Mideast peace envoy George Mitchell arrived for talks with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Mitchell will be followed later this week by national security adviser James Jones and Dennis Ross, the White House's point man on Iran.

Aaron Miller, a former Mideast peace negotiator under President Clinton and author of "The Much Too Promised Land: America's Elusive Search for Arab-Israeli Peace," calls it "the big hug," a show of reassurance to Israel that the U.S.-Israeli relationship remains strong despite the current squabble over settlements.

To be sure, ties between the countries have been strained over President Obama's insistence that Israel halt all settlements as part of his drive for a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace, including a Palestinian state. And Israel is concerned Obama's engagement policy vis-à-vis Iran will come at the expense of its security.But the flurry of diplomatic activity sends a strong signal that these disagreements are minor in comparison to how central the U.S.-Israel relationship is and how large Israel looms in every piece of the American policy puzzle in the Mideast.

Which is why Gates offered Israel security reassurances with talks on Iran and missile defense.

And why Mitchell emphasized the enduring strength of the friendship between the United States and Israel and has been working on a deal with the Israelis on settlements, which is expected to include a freeze on construction but would allow several hundred buildings already under construction to be exempted.One question remains about this diplomatic A-team though. Where is Secretary of State Hillary Clinton? She hasn't visited the Middle East since March when she held one day of talks with Israeli officials. She has not been to Israel since Netanyahu took office in late March.

To be fair, Clinton just returned from a seven-day trip to Asia and spent the beginning of the week hosting top Chinese officials for two days of strategic talks. She leaves next week for a seven-nation tour of Africa.

Appearing Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press," Clinton missed an opportunity to frame the week's visits to Israel within the context of the Obama administration's plans for Mideast peacemaking.

She spent a fair amount of time insisting she was Obama's chief diplomat and and deflecting criticism that she was "sidelined" by the president's team of foreign policy heavyweights and an elbow injury. "I broke my elbow, not my larynx," she told host David Gregory.

Yet the administration's chief diplomat didn't mention the Mideast peace process, one of Obama's stated top foreign policy priorities, even once. Clinton already enjoys a healthy dose of Israeli respect from her days as a pro-Israel senator from New York. Now the secretary must also define herself, both in word and in deed, as a key player on the president's Mideast peace team.


Obama has to work at his relationship with Israel, too. His aides can only do so much to ease Israeli fears about his intentions. Candidate Obama got high marks for a visit to Israel during the campaign. But if he wants to be seen as the kind of honest broker who can achieve true Mideast peace, he needs to make his own trip to Israel.
His June speech in Cairo, Egypt, established his credentials with the Arab world. Now it's Israel's turn.


Analysis: U.S. gives Israel 'big hug' - CNN.com

 

[youngindian]

Raytheon eyes new anti-missile system for Israel

Tue Aug 18, 2009

* System could be ready as soon as 2013

* Could bring more than $1 billion in sales worldwide

* Raytheon says also being looked at for Europe

By Jim Wolf

HUNTSVILLE, Alabama, Aug. 18 (Reuters) - Raytheon Co (RTN.N), the world's biggest missile maker, said it was developing a new system that, if deployed, could boost Israel's defenses against Iran as soon as 2013 and beef up anti-missile bulwarks worldwide.

The system could also help resolve a U.S.-Russian deadlock over Bush-era plans to extend into Europe the U.S. shield against ballistic missiles.

The plan is to create a land-based version of Raytheon's existing Standard Missile-3, a mainstay of U.S. missile defense from the sea. It also would use a long-range Raytheon radar already deployed in Israel and Japan as part of yet another U.S. defense system.

"Coming soon to a theater near you," the company said in a slide presentation on its would-be new SM-3 "ashore" interceptor missile.

Raytheon executives talked up the concept on Tuesday at an annual U.S. Army-organized missile-defense conference in Huntsville, Alabama.

The proposed land-based SM-3 system "could provide Israel a near-term solution to counter ballistic missiles from Iran," Raytheon said in its slide presentation.

"If the program goes through to production and is deployed globally with international allies, the potential value ... will be more than $1 billion," Michael Booen, a Raytheon vice president for advanced missile defense, told Reuters.

Company executives said the land-based SM-3 could be operational as soon as 2013 if funded adequately by the Pentagon. The Pentagon has requested $50 million for its development in fiscal 2010, which starts Oct. 1. Raytheon has already made a significant investment of its own, Booen said.

The SM-3 is a defense against short- to intermediate-range missiles. It was developed for ships equipped with Lockheed Martin Corp's (LMT.N) Aegis ballistic missile defense and has already notched up 15 "hit-to-kill" test intercepts.

Development costs would be very low, and the system would take advantage of billions of dollars of other U.S. investments to beef up the emerging, layered anti-missile shield, said Peter Franklin, a vice president of Raytheon's Integrated Defense Systems business unit.

Raytheon executives said land-based SM-3 systems were also being looked at by the Pentagon as an option for European missile defense. It could play a role there with or without the 10 interceptor missiles that former president George W. Bush proposed to put in Poland, along with tracking radar in the Czech Republic, as a hedge against Iran, Booen said.

Moscow has strongly opposed the plans for Poland and the Czech Republic as a threat to Russia's security.
Riki Ellison, a prominent U.S. missile-defense advocate, said land-based SM-3 missiles may be easier for the United States to "sell" to Russia as a European missile-defense solution aimed at defending against Iran.

Moscow would be more receptive, he said, partly because land-based SM-3's would be incapable of shooting down strategic, long-range Russian missiles. Also, the availability of such a system could lead to a face-saving deal that could substitute for a Polish and Czech installation.

"It's one of the primary solutions" that the Obama administration is mulling, said Ellison, who heads the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance, a private group close to the Pentagon and industry.

Gen. Kevin Chilton, who oversees missile defense as commander of the U.S. Strategic Command, told the conference the United States was mindful of maintaining "strategic stability" with Russia and China as it builds its shield.

The U.S. plan to put interceptors in Poland "is akin to having missiles in Cuba to them," he said of Russia's concerns, referring to the 1962 showdown between the Soviet Union and the United States generally regarded as the closest the Cold War came to nuclear war.

Chilton declined to comment on whether the land-based SM-3 was one of the alternatives under review by the Obama administration. "I think there's all kind of potential solutions on the table, being discussed," he said. (Reporting by Jim Wolf; editing by Tim Dobbyn)

Raytheon eyes new anti-missile system for Israel | Industries | Industrials, Materials & Utilities | Reuters

 

[youngindian]

Peres: Russia to reconsider missile sale to Iran

MOSCOW — (19aug) Israeli President Shimon Peres said Wednesday that the Kremlin has promised to reconsider the planned delivery of powerful air defense missiles to Iran.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev made the pledge during their talks Tuesday in the Black Sea resort of Sochi, Peres said.

"President Medvedev gave a promise he will reconsider the sales of S-300s because it affects the delicate balance which exists in the Middle East," Peres told reporters via video link from Sochi.

A Kremlin spokesman wouldn't immediately comment on Peres' statement.

Russia has signed a contract to supply the powerful S-300 missiles to Iran, but has dragged its feet on delivering them.

Israel and the United States fear that Iran could use the missiles to protect its nuclear facilities — including the uranium enrichment plant at Natanz or the country's first atomic power plant, which is being completed by Russian workers in Bushehr. That would make a military strike on the Iranian facilities much more difficult.

Israeli and U.S. officials have strongly urged Moscow not to supply the weapons, and the issue has been the subject of intense diplomatic wrangling for years.

Russian officials confirmed in March that a contract for the missiles had been signed with Iran two years ago, but a top Russian defense official said in April that no deliveries had been made yet.

Analysts said that Moscow could be using the S-300 contract as a bargaining chip in its relations with the U.S. and Israel.

Israel wants Russia, which has close ties with Iran, to increase pressure on Tehran over its nuclear program. Iran, whose president has expressed hatred of Israel, maintains its nuclear program is only designed to provide more electricity. Israel, the U.S. and other nations fear that Iran is secretly developing nuclear weapons.

The Associated Press: Peres: Russia to reconsider missile sale to Iran

 

[youngindian]

Iran ready for unconditional nuclear talks

2009-08-19

A top Iranian nuclear official said Tehran was ready to hold talks with the West on its atomic drive "without preconditions," state television reported yesterday, amid U.S. threats of more sanctions.
"Negotiations without preconditions is Iran's main stance on the nuclear issue," Iran's envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, was quoted as saying.

Six major powers involved in the talks - the five veto-wielding permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany - called in April for a resumption of the negotiations, which had stalled in September.

U.S. President Barack Obama has given Iran until September to take up the six-power offer of talks on trade benefits if it freezes uranium enrichment, or face harsher sanctions. But prospects of a breakthrough have been clouded by the deep political turmoil in Iran over President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's disputed re-election in June.

Iran has said it is drafting a new package for the world powers in a bid to solve global issues, including the nuclear dossier.

Soltanieh's comments come a day before Ahmadinejad - who set Iran on a collision course with the West during his first four-year term - is due to submit his new cabinet to parliament for approval.

The United States warned earlier this month that it may seek tough new sanctions on Iran if it misses the September deadline.

"We're not prepared to talk about any specific steps," Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Aug. 3. "But I have said repeatedly that, in the absence of some positive response from the Iranian government, the international community will consult about next steps, and certainly next steps can include certain sanctions," she said.

The West and Israel suspect Iran of secretly trying to build nuclear weapons, charges denied by Tehran which inists its atomic program is for energy generation. However, Iran has defied repeated U.N. Security Council calls to halt uranium enrichment, the process which makes nuclear fuel but also the core of an atomic bomb.

Iran 'ready for unconditional nuclear talks' - Taiwan News Online