Partners against Iran
By JPOST EDITORIAL
16/02/2010 23:03

Mullen’s visit underlined Washington’s intensifying effort to keep closely coordinated with Israel.
Talkbacks (1)

The visit to Israel this week by the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Michael Mullen, underlined the growing urgency of the Iranian nuclear challenge, and the Obama administration’s intensifying effort to keep closely coordinated with Israel while grappling with that threat.

Mullen’s visit coincided with the announcement that Vice President Joe Biden will also come to Israel in the near future, again for high-level talks largely focused on the Iranian issue.The visit also came as US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton toured Qatar and Saudi Arabia in order to shore up support for American diplomatic and military efforts in the region, ahead of visits by three of her top deputies and a reported upcoming trip by White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel.

The rhetoric from Washington is firm: Clinton declared to Iran that the US would “not stand idly by while you pursue a nuclear program that can be used to threaten your neighbors and even beyond.” Mullen was more curt still: Iran “cannot have a nuclear weapon, [or] nuclear capability,” he said here.

At the same time, however, there is profound concern in Israel that the fine words, even backed up by a new seriousness in seeking more effective economic sanctions, will prove insufficient to deter the ayatollahs.

Clearly, the flurry of visits by high-level US officials marks a heightened era of dialogue between Washington and Jerusalem, as the US steps up its campaign to resolve the Iranian crisis without a resort to force.

Mullen warned Israel tellingly of the “unintended consequences” of a military strike. Biden, the former head of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, will doubtless also stress the administration’s conviction that there are still effective ways, and sufficient time, to force the Islamic Republic’s hand before we arrive at the stark choice: a nuclear Iran, or military intervention to prevent it.

FOR NOW, President Barack Obama has yet to add Israel to his travel plans. And eight months after his landmark visit to Cairo, and his outreach address to the Muslim world, his absence is keenly felt here. Obama the candidate received the usual rock-star treatment when he visited – and took time to tour Sderot – in 2008. Obama the president is a more suspect commodity – a friend of Israel and guardian of the strategic partnership, to be sure, but also a leader who has been publicly at odds with ours over the dimensions of a building freeze beyond the ’67 lines and over his assessment that progress on the Palestinian front can produce leverage on Iran rather than the other way round.

A presidential visit in the near future would certainly prove reassuring to many Israelis, and would disarm those critics who assert that our well-being is not a sufficiently high priority for hisWhite House.

But whether their face-to-face meetings take place here or in Washington, there can be no doubting that further direct consultations between Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu will be vital in the coming months – as the US president strives to force Iran to change course, and the possibility of this effort failing raises ever-greater concerns in Israel.

Israel has been publicly supportive of the American effort at engagement with Iran, even as it has privately complained about the lack of firm parameters guiding that engagement, the fudging of deadlines, the apparent capacity for Iran to exploit a well-meaning president’s desire for a diplomatic solution in order to buy time and close in on the nuclear weapons goal.

Ultimately, Israel must and will take the decisions it feels necessary to safeguard its basic security interests. Ultimately, Israel will gauge the risks, assess the consequences, and act accordingly.

Today, in mid-February 2010, the US and Israel remain shoulder-to-shoulder in seeking biting sanctions against Teheran, to obviate the recourse to the use of force. It is encouraging to see the succession of candid, straight-talking, high-level visits bolstering that coordination. It is a partnership that needs to be maintained at the very highest level as well.

To read more, click here
Partners against Iran

MOSCOW — Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov on Thursday all but ruled out imposing new sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program, brushing aside growing Western concerns that Iran had made significant progress in recent months in a bid for nuclear weapons.

Mr. Lavrov said he believed that a new set of proposals that Iran gave to European nations on Wednesday offered a viable basis for negotiations to end the dispute. He said he did not believe that the United Nations Security Council would approve new sanctions against Iran, which could ban Iran from exporting oil or importing gasoline.

“Based on a brief review of the Iranian papers, my impression is there is something there to use,” Mr. Lavrov said at a gathering of experts on Russia. “The most important thing is Iran is ready for a comprehensive discussion of the situation, what positive role it can play in Iraq, Afghanistan and the region.”

Mr. Lavrov’s comments underscored the challenge facing the Obama administration as it plans its next move in the United States’ longstanding struggle to prevent Iran from producing nuclear weapons.

Russia is a permanent member of the Security Council, allowing it to veto any sanctions resolution, and it has close economic and diplomatic ties to Iran.

Iran says its program to enrich uranium is aimed at producing electricity, and it has refused to halt the process, which can have civilian and military purposes.

On Thursday, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, Iran’s ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog, said Iran would not negotiate further with the major powers about its nuclear program, Iranian news services reported.

A five-page letter that Iran delivered to the European powers, and sent to Washington via the Swiss on Wednesday, is titled a “Package of Proposals by the Islamic Republic of Iran for Comprehensive and Constructive Negotiations.” But it is devoid of specifics, and never mentions Iran’s nuclear program.

Instead, the letter, which was published Thursday on the Web site of ProPublica.org, an investigative journalism group, refers in the vaguest terms to “creating a world filled with spirituality, friendship, prosperity, wellness and security.”

It hews closely to a proposal issued by Iran last year. Among the topics it proposes to discuss is global disarmament, which has been interpreted in Washington as suggesting that Iran wants to link any discussion of the fate of its nuclear program with talks about the arsenals of the United States and Israel, among others.

On Wednesday the American ambassador to the atomic energy agency, Glyn Davies, declared that Iran had reached “possible breakout capacity” — the ability to acquire enough fuel and expertise to complete building a nuclear weapon relatively quickly — if it decided to enrich its uranium to bomb-grade.

President Obama has sought to take a less adversarial stance toward Iran’s nuclear program than President George W. Bush did. But with seemingly little to show for it, Mr. Obama may now try to move more aggressively.

To read more please click the link below…
Russia Signals Opposition to New Sanctions Against Iran

By BRIAN MURPHY (AP)

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — There is no shortage of warnings that September could be a very bumpy month for Iran.

What is still missing, however, are clear signals from the U.S. and its European allies on what specific new sanctions they could seek if Iran snubs their deadline to begin talks over its nuclear program.

Iran’s top nuclear negotiator on Tuesday offered some room for possible compromise. Saeed Jalili told reporters the Islamic regime was open to international dialogue, but gave no further details.

The comments were noted Wednesday during a six-nation meeting in Germany with envoys from the permanent U.N. Security Council nations — the U.S., France, Britain, Russia and China — to discuss Iran’s nuclear ambitions and possible strategies to make Tehran commit into talks.

But there will likely be no serious back peddling from sanction threats until it is clearer whether Iran is genuinely open for talks or just stalling as it struggles with deep internal upheaval after the disputed presidential elections in June.

German Foreign Ministry spokesman Jens Ploetner said Iran had not made any formal gestures to back up the nuclear negotiator’s openings for dialogue.

“Consequently … from our point of view nothing has changed,” Ploetner said.

He added that the meeting near Frankfurt was not expected to produce concrete strategies, but offered a chance to review “possible negotiating options in the coming months.”

Experts say there are several points where the West could particularly sting Tehran, including expanding the travel bans on officials, cutting off exports of gas station-ready fuel and targeting more of the overseas links to Iran’s Revolutionary Guard.

It is still too early for any clear plans to emerge.

President Barack Obama and key European allies have given Iran until this month to open negotiations on its uranium enrichment program and other aspects of the nuclear program. Western nations and others worry Iran could move toward development of nuclear arms. Iran’s leaders, however, insist they seek only energy-producing reactors.

Germany and France — both important trade partners with Iran — have recently become far more forceful in their threats of possible sanctions.

In Berlin, German Chancellor Angela Merkel stood alongside French President Nicolas Sarkozy on Monday in a show of unity with Washington that was clearly aimed at getting Iran’s attention.

“Germany and France will be united in calling for a strengthening of sanctions” if Iran stonewalls the West, said Sarkozy. Added Merkel: “Iran should know that we mean this very seriously.”

The only hints about the direction of possible new measures has come from Merkel, who spoke of stiffer restrictions in the “energy, financial and other important sectors.”

Sarkozy said Monday there were “many ideas” on potential sanctions, but stressed the “whole international community” should back any further crackdowns on Iran.

This could prove difficult.

China and Russia — members of the U.N. Security Council — are unlikely to back harsh steps against Iran because of deep interests. Russia built Iran’s first nuclear reactor, which is scheduled to begin operations later this year. And China desperately wants Iranian oil and gas to fuel its growth.

Iran has faced a near blanket U.S. economic freeze since shortly after the 1979 Islamic Revolution. U.N.-imposed sanctions also have banned exports of nuclear-related technology and froze assets of top companies and officials, including some linked to the Revolutionary Guard such as foreign branches of Bank Sepah.

Iran has managed to ride out the restrictions without serious hardships, although lack of significant foreign investment has left the economy stuck in low gear for years. Iranian leaders — particularly President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad — have repeated insisted that Iran would never abandon its ability to make its own nuclear fuel.

This crucial point was not addressed in the statement by the nuclear negotiator Jalili.

“Iran has prepared to present its revised package of proposals … and is ready to hold talks with world powers … in order to ease common concerns in the international arena,” the state TV quoted Jalili as saying.

The head of the U.N. nuclear agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, urged for a possible lowering of the rhetoric from the West.

ElBaradei said he believes the immediate threat from a possible Iranian nuclear arsenal has been “hyped” and suggested there was cause for concern — but not panic.

“We have not seen concrete evidence that Tehran has an ongoing nuclear weapons program,” the International Atomic Energy Agency chief was quoted by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists in its September/October issue.

The U.N. Security Council plus Germany offered Iran a host of economic incentives in 2008 in exchange for suspending uranium enrichment. The proposals failed to sway Iranian leaders. But now they face a far more complicated setting — embattled and weakened after massive protests over claims that Ahmadinejad stole re-election through vote fraud.

“The regime is in an uneasy position now,” said Abdulkhaleq Abdulla, a professor of regional politics at Emirates University. “It’s not the time to talk about tougher sanctions. It’s best for the West to let the dust settle in Tehran. Then they can raise the ante if Iran is still resisting.”

One of Iran’s weakest points is its dependence on fuel imports. Despite its vast oil resources, it lacks the refinery capacity to meet its own demand and must buy vast quantities of commerical-ready fuel on the open market.
To read more please click the link below…
Tough talk toward Iran as deadline month begins