EDITOR: The Clouds Gather Around Israeli Intransigence
It seems not all is going well for Israel’s newish, even more extreme government than the usual one. While they keep expanding the settlements, building the apartheid wall, and killing more and more Palestinians as if there is no tomorrow, some storm clouds have gathered around them, and others are continuously added. It seems clear that the Gaza murderous offensive has clearly changed the stakes for this brutal regime, and that its days of supremacy are numbered.
This should give us no false hopes, though. It is exactly when the failing empires are cornered, that they become totally inscrutable, wild and gung-ho, and dangerous in the extreme to anyone around them, or under their control. The following months are ones of the gravest danger in the Middle East.
Robert Fisk: Hizbollah’s silence over Scuds speaks volumes to Israel: The Independent
Fears of conflict escalate as group refuses to discuss its arsenal with Jerusalem – or the Lebanese government
Friday, 16 April 2010
If Lebanon had a US-style colour-coded “war-fear” alert ranging from white to purple, we are now – courtesy of Israeli president Shimon Peres, the White House spokesman and the head of the Lebanese Hizbollah militia, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah – hovering somewhere between pink and red.
Has Syria given the Hizbollah a set of Scud ground-to-ground missiles to fire at Israel? Can Israeli aircraft attack them if the Hizbollah also possess anti-aircraft missiles? Can the Lebanese army take these weapons from the Hizbollah before the balloon goes up?
It is a long-standing saga, of course, and Israel has been itching to get its own back on the world’s most disciplined guerrilla movement. You can forget al-Qa’ida when it comes to Hizbollah’s effectiveness – after the Israeli army’s lamentable performance in 2006, when it promised to destroy the Hizbollah and ended up, after the usual 1000-plus civilian dead, pleading for a ceasefire. Over the past few months, Mr Nasrallah has been taunting the Israelis to have another go, promising that an Israeli missile attack on Beirut airport will be followed by a Hizbollah rocket attack on Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion airport.
But over the past week, a warning by Mr Peres that the Hizbollah has received Scud missiles from Damascus – or via Syria from Iran – and a refusal by the Hizbollah to even discuss its own disarmament within a Lebanese “national dialogue” chaired by the Lebanese President, Michel Suleiman, has darkened the spring skies over both Lebanon and Israel. The White House press secretary, Robert Gibbs, said this week that the United States has expressed its concern to both the Syrian and Lebanese governments over “the sophisticated weaponry that … is allegedly being transferred”. Mr Peres started the whole thing off a day earlier when he declared that “Syria claims it wants peace while at the same time it delivers Scuds to Hizbollah, whose only goal is to threaten the state of Israel.”
These hootings and trumpetings have always had a strong element of hypocrisy about them. The Scuds – even if Hizbollah has them – are as out-of-date as they are notoriously inaccurate. In the 1991 Gulf war, Saddam Hussein’s Scuds caused fewer than a hundred deaths. The more Peres thunders about the danger they represent, the more Hizbollah’s allies in Iran – supposedly trying to build a nuclear weapon – take pride of place in public imagination over the continued and illegal Israeli colonisation of Palestinian land.
As for Mr Nasrallah, he promised only a year ago that Hizbollah’s disarmament could not be discussed by the Lebanese government – only during the so-called “national dialogue”. And now the “national dialogue” has begun, the organisation has made it clear that it has no intention of discussing disarmament with other Lebanese political parties.
The problems are legion. Hizbollah is itself represented in the Lebanese parliament, and under the Doha agreement which followed Hizbollah’s one-day military takeover of west Beirut in May of 2008, it also has an effective veto over majority decisions taken by the Lebanese cabinet. And even if the Shia Muslim Hizbollah’s opponents in the Cabinet – they are largely Sunni Muslim with a prominent Christian contingent – ordered the Lebanese army to take weapons from the militia, they would be unable to do so for one simple reason. At least half the army – possibly two-thirds – are themselves Shia Muslims, and would obviously object to attacking the homes of brothers, sons and fathers in the Hizbollah.
A clue to the seriousness with which everyone now takes the possibility of war is contained in a remark made by an anonymous US spokesman who warned that the transfer of Scud missiles to Hizbollah would represent a “serious risk” to Lebanon. Not to Israel, mark you – but to Lebanon. There is no doubt that this is an allusion to frequent threats from the Israelis themselves that in another war with Hizbollah, the Lebanese government would be held responsible and as a result Lebanon’s infrastructure would be destroyed.
This does not sound so bad in Lebanon as it does elsewhere. For in its last Lebanese war – the fifth since 1978 – the Israelis blamed the Lebanese government for Hizbollah’s existence and smashed up the country’s roads, bridges, viaducts, electricity grid and civilian factories, as well as killing well over 1,000 civilians. Israel’s casualties were in the hundreds, most of them soldiers. What worse can Israel do now against the ruthlessness of the Hizbollah, even after the accusations of war crimes levelled against its equally ruthless rabble of an army?
Iran: Bridgeable differences: The Guardian Editorial
Friday 16 April 2010
From every conceivable viewpoint except Tehran’s, the International Atomic Energy Agency is no closer to defusing the crisis over Iran’s continued enrichment of uranium. President Obama’s deadline has come and gone. The offer to process the majority of Iran’s enriched uranium in Russia and France is still on the table, but as Iran does not trust a US-backed process to deliver the reactor fuel it says it needs, it has begun its own production of 20% enriched uranium. This takes it closer to becoming a nuclear break-out state, capable of producing a bomb. The Senate Armed Services Committee heard on Wednesday that Iran could produce enough fuel for one bomb in a year, but would need from two to five years to manufacture a workable warhead.
The US is lumbering towards a new round of sanctions, but with China’s concerns about its future supplies of oil and Shanghai-based companies fulfilling Pakistan’s former role as a supplier of dual-use equipment, it is doubtful how effective sanctions will be. President Hu Jintao said this week he would join negotiations over sanctions, but he did not say he would back them. There is only one sign of progress. Each time US generals talk about the military option, which Israel has pushed for, they are more dismissive of it. And if Centcom really believes that enduring hostilities between Israel and its neighbours represent “distinct challenges” to the US ability to advance its interests in the Middle East, how much truer would that proposition be if you are a US soldier in southern Iraq or Afghanistan, in the aftermath of a strike by Israeli jets on Iran’s nuclear facilities? The crack that has begun to open between Israel and Washington on the stalled peace process would overnight become a canyon.
Two analysts at the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) have argued that the international community should accept Iran’s current counter-offer, which is to have the fuel swap (low-enriched uranium for fuel elements) but keep it on Iranian soil. Ivanka Barzashka and Ivan Oelrich say that in haggling over details we are losing sight of the goal, which would be to make it more difficult, not easier, for Iran to build a nuclear weapon. The breakthrough was Iran’s agreement to a fuel swap, not where it should happen. Agreeing to a fuel swap on Iranian soil would be a way of stopping the Iranian nuclear countdown, provided it stopped production of 20% uranium. And if it didn’t, it would be more evidence both of Mr Obama’s commitment, and of Iran’s real intentions. Both would be useful in persuading China and Russia.
There are both political and technical problems with this approach. It would be another concession, another “final” offer, which might well induce Iran to think it could extract more – such as allowing its fuel to be handed over in batches rather than in one go. There would be contingent problems over timing and transparency. However, the longer the current impasse continues, the more it plays into the hands of those who push for extreme solutions. The US and Iran are currently engaged in an international beauty contest. After Mr Obama’s attempts to close down the channels of nuclear proliferation, Iran is to host its own conference on nuclear disarmament, entitled “Nuclear energy for everyone, nuclear arms for no one”. China, Russia, Syria, Cuba, Venezuela, Oman and Turkmenistan have already confirmed their participation, but it should be interesting to see at what level. The proof of US attempts to isolate Iran should come at the review conference of the non-proliferation treaty next month.
We are back to a familiar game of diplomatic brinkmanship, but one cannot help thinking that if sanity were to break out it would be in a form not too far away from the FAS’s version. The gaps are bridgeable. There is, unfortunately, much that could happen in the Middle East to derail that outcome.
Ahmadinejad: Israel has nukes while Iran banned from nuclear energy: Haaretz
Israel’s nuclear arsenal is safeguarded by the United States, while Iran is prevented from establishing its peaceful nuclear energy program, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said at the opening of the First International Conference on Disarmament and Non-Proliferation in Tehran, Iran’s state news agency IRNA reported on Saturday.
The conference, meeting under the slogan “Nuclear Energy for All, Nuclear Weapons for No One,” was kicked off early Saturday, and included 10 foreign ministers, 14 deputy foreign ministers as well as nuclear experts from 60 countries.
China is to be represented at the conference by a low-ranking Foreign Ministry official and Russia by a deputy minister.
The conference is focused on disarmament, but analysts said a main aim would be another effort by Iran to persuade the international community that its nuclear projects are solely for peaceful and civilian purposes.
Referring to Israel’s alleged nuclear program, Ahmadinejad said that “the Zionist regime which has over 200 nuclear warheads and has waged several wars in the region is fully supported by Washington and its allies.”
“This is while other states are prevented from making peaceful use of nuclear energy,” the Iranian president added.
Addressing the conference’s aims, Ahmadinejad said that “wars, aggressions, occupation, threats, nuclear weapons, weapons of mass destruction and expansionist policies of certain countries have made the prospect of regional and international security as unclear and ambiguous.
The Iranian president also criticized the performance of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), saying that the UN nuclear watchdog has been turned to a tool for exerting pressure on those countries which have no nuclear weapons.
“Expecting those countries which have the veto right and are big sellers of weapons in the world to establish security and to disarm other states is illogical,” Ahmadinejad said according to IRNA, suggesting the formation of a new group that would supervise global nuclear disarmament.
“[That] group should suspend membership of those countries possessing, using and threatening use of nuclear weapons at the IAEA and its Board of Governors,” the Iranian President said.
Also Saturday, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said that Islam forbade the use of nuclear weapons, saying that while the United States urged the reduction of the worldwide nuclear arsenal, it had taken no real steps toward achieving that aim.
In a statement read by aides at the opening of the nuclear disarmament conference headed by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Khamenei said that United States was still the only nation to commit what he called “atomic crimes.”
Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator, Saeid Jalili, also criticized the United States for its double-standard approach to nuclear disarmament.
“The U.S. is itself guilty of having used atomic weapons in Japan and can, therefore, not be a supervisor of countries using peaceful nuclear technology,” said Jalili, who is also secretary of Iran’s National Security Council. “The world should not allow nuclear criminals to have a supervising role.”
Jalili blamed the U.S. and its allies for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and insisted that all nuclear projects by Iran were in line with the treaty and IAEA regulations.
On Friday, Iranian IRNA news agency quoted Lebanon’s Foreign Minister Ali Shami International sa sayig that the pressure exerted by the international community on Iran’s “peaceful nuclear program” could have “drastic impacts on the Middle East peace.”
According to the IRNA report, Shami added that “contrary to Israel which has many nuclear arsenals, Iran seeks a peaceful nuclear program.”
Syria FM: Israel’s nukes are Mideast’s gravest threat
Israel’s nuclear warheads are the Middle East’s biggest threat, IRNA quoted Syria’s Foreign Minister Walid Al-Muallem as saying at the onset the nuclear disarmament conference in Tehran on Saturday.
Speaking to reporters, Al-Muallem said that Israel was the biggest nuclear threat in the Middle East, alleging that the “Zionist regime” had “been stockpiling nuclear warheads.”
The Syria FM called the Terhan conference a “very good opportunity for countries to try to bring to life the mottos on the disarmament issue,” adding he hoped “the meeting will create a firm will in the world on nuclear disarmament.”
Also commenting on the subject of Israel’s supposed nuclear program Saturday, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari called for inspecting Israeli nuclear installations by international bodies.
“Iraq is the victim of the past policies and ignoring international commitments,” Zebari told IRNA, adding that “Baghdad condemns making use of weapons of mass destruction and believes in combating nuclear weapons.”
The Iraqi FM reiterated that the “Iraqi government is interested in a Mideast free from nuclear weapons and calls for annihilation of weapons of mass destruction.”
On Friday, IRNA quoted Lebanon’s Foreign Minister Ali Shami International sa sayig that the pressure exerted by the international community on Iran’s “peaceful nuclear program” could have “drastic impacts on the Middle East peace.”
According to the IRNA report, Shami added that “contrary to Israel which has many nuclear arsenals, Iran seeks a peaceful nuclear program.”
The Lebanon FM urged the international community to force the United Nations Security Council to pressure Israel to sign the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, adding that Lebanon accepted “Tehran’s invitation and will attend the highly important conference which will focus on nuclear disarmament worldwide.”