The War in Iran

Finally some reality therapy...

2009-04-05T17:49:00.000+10:00

Finally, harsh realism from Israel

If Avigdor Lieberman's first speech as Israel's new foreign minister did nothing else, it certainly vexed the media.

The Associated Press called it a "scathing critique of Mideast peace efforts" that had diplomats "cringing," while other reports said Lieberman had "dropped a political bombshell," "sparked an uproar," "repudiated a key accord," and "reinforced fears." The New York Times pronounced Lieberman's remarks "blunt and belligerent," describing the foreign minister as a "hawkish nationalist" who is "not known for diplomacy" and heads an "ultranationalist" party that is "seen by many as racist." Headlines summed up Lieberman's debut as an attack on peacemaking: "Lieberman dashes peace hopes," "Israeli official hits peace efforts," "Lieberman dumps peace deal."

But the headlines were wrong, as anyone can ascertain by reading Lieberman's short address. Far from disparaging peace, Israel's new foreign minister called for pursuing it with the respect and realism it deserves. And far from "dumping" agreements entered into by his predecessors, he explicitly committed himself to upholding the Roadmap - a step-by-step blueprint to a "two-state solution" adopted by Israel, the Palestinian Authority, and the international Quartet in 2003.

"I voted against the Roadmap," Lieberman acknowledged, but it was "approved by the Cabinet and by the Security Council" and is therefore "a binding resolution." However, he insisted, it must be implemented "in full." The Roadmap imposes specific obligations that the Palestinians must meet prior to achieving statehood - above all, an unequivocal end to violence, terrorism, and incitement against the Jewish state - and Israel will not agree to waive them in order to negotiate a final settlement.

If Lieberman is as good as his word - and if he is backed up by Benjamin Netanyahu, the new prime minister - we may finally see an end to Israel's fruitless attempts to buy peace with ever-more-desperate concessions and retreats. Under Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert, Israel surrendered the entire Gaza Strip, released hundreds of arrested terrorists, and even offered to divide Jerusalem with the Palestinian Authority. "But none of these far-reaching measures have brought peace," said Lieberman. "To the contrary." The steeper the price Israel has been willing to pay for peace, the more it has been repaid with violence: suicide bombings, rocket attacks, kidnapped and murdered soldiers, and wars with Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

It is time, Lieberman is saying, for Israel to stop genuflecting to a feckless and counterproductive "peace process" and to return instead to the pre-Oslo policy of deterrence. "The fact that we say the word 'peace' 20 times a day will not bring peace any closer," he noted. It only makes Israel seem weak and irresolute, encouraging its enemies not to halt their murderous jihad, but to redouble it. Sixteen years of appeasement have left Israel more demonized and isolated than ever, the foreign minister observed. And when was Israel most admired in the world? "After the victory of the Six Day War," when no one doubted the Jewish state's audacity or resolve.

"If you want peace, prepare for war," Lieberman declared.

That idea may offend the smart set and leave diplomats "cringing," but Israel's new foreign minister is hardly the first to express it. "To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace," affirmed President George Washington in his first address to Congress in 1790.

Perhaps the world would more clearly understand the nature of Israel's enemy if the media weren't forever fanning moral outrage at the Mideast's only bulwark of freedom and democracy.

In recent weeks, the Palestinian Authority has warned Arabs that it is "high treason" punishable by death to sell homes or property to Jews in Jerusalem; shut down a Palestinian youth orchestra and arrested its founder because the ensemble played for a group of elderly Holocaust survivors; and celebrated the deadliest terrorist attack in Israel's history with a TV special extolling the massacre. On Thursday, after a Palestinian terrorist used an axe to murder a 13-year-old Jewish boy, the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades - a wing of the "moderate" Fatah party - issued a statement claiming responsibility.

There is no appeasing such hatred, and demonizing those who say so will not change that fact. "If you want peace, prepare for war." How refreshing to hear an Israeli foreign minister say so.

Mr Bagel: Instead of never ending one sided concessions with no progress, now the agreed terms of the agreement have to be abided by. This is how it should have been in the first place.
To read the full article go to this link:
Boston.com: Finally, harsh realism from Israel

References:
Boston.com: Finally, harsh realism from Israel
Article by Jeff Jacoby

Netanyahu warns of Iran

2009-04-04T22:39:00.003+10:00

New Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Iran is a `grave danger.'

JERUSALEM -- Ten years after being ousted as prime minister, conservative Benjamin Netanyahu returned to power Tuesday as the head of a hawkish coalition government that will be a pivotal player in President Barack Obama's push to stabilize the Middle East.

Netanyahu, 59, faces an immediate challenge in assuaging skeptical world leaders who worry that the new prime minister's combative style will undermine America's diplomatic efforts and fuel another spiral of violence in the Middle East.

In an unusually blunt interview with The Atlantic magazine, Netanyahu charged that Iran was a ''messianic apocalyptic cult'' with nuclear ambitions and a ''grave danger'' to the world.

European leaders have been especially critical of Israel because of its recent 22-day military offensive, which ravaged the Hamas-led Gaza Strip and prompted a brewing feud over the threatened demolition of some Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem.

''We are not happy with some of the steps of the Israeli government, namely construction works close to Jerusalem, but also access to Gaza, which is today very limited,'' Czech Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzenberg, whose country holds the presidency of the European Union, told the country's newspaper Lidove Noviny in Tuesday's edition.

read more from The Miami Herald

Mr Bagel: Nice of Czech Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzenberg to deem it is any of his business what gets built in Israel. Then again Schwarzenberg, whose country holds the rotating presidency of the European Union, said, "The EU remains committed to the Durban Review Conference" and is ready to fully participate."

An Israel MK supports Irans Nuclear quest???

2009-04-02T02:27:00.003+10:00

I'm speechless.
Here's what others have got to say:

Samuel Sokol , JPost: New Balad MK praises Iran's nuke quest
Arutz Sheva: Arab MK Welcomes Iranian Nuclear Weapon
Islam in Action: Israel:Arab Politician Support Iran's Nuke Program
Esser Agaroth: New Balad MK Praises Iran's Nuke Quest
Huffington Post: Haneen Zuabi, New Arab-Israeli Knesset Member, Praises Iranian Nuclear Ambitions
Jewlicious: Freedom of Speech or Sedition?
Daniel Pipes: Iran's Representative in the Knesset - Haneen Zuabi

Some of her comments, according to Samuel Sokol in the Jerusalem Post:

The very concept of a Jewish state is "inherently racist." Israel must be turned into a "state of all its citizens," eliminating its Jewish or Zionist nature.
Iran's role in Palestinian affairs is "more useful" than that of regimes like Jordan and Egypt, in that Iran stands more firmly "against occupation than a lot of the Arab countries." Egypt and Jordan, indeed, are scared of a free and democratic Palestinian state.
It's not a good idea for Israel to be the region's sole nuclear power. "It would be more supporting me to have a [nuclear] counter-power to Israel. I need something to balance [its] power."
Is she worrying about Tehran getting close to acquiring a nuclear weapon? "No, I am not." To the contrary, said is "more afraid from the Israeli nuclear [weapons]."
Would the Israel Defense Forces use nuclear weapons? "The Israelis? I think yes. And I am afraid from real risk rather than from potential risk." More broadly, whereas the Iranian bomb is only "a potential" threat, the IDF is an actual danger. "Every day the Israeli [army] uses its violence, army violence."
Israel is an aggressor state, so only something along the lines of Mutually Assured Destruction would restrain it.
Would an Iranian bomb make Washington nervous, lead to more U.S. pressure on Israel, and that would be good thing? "Exactly."

Nuclear merry go round...

2009-04-02T01:51:00.002+10:00

I came across this Cox and Forkum Cartoon drawn way back in May 2005
Why do I feel we're still being taken for a ride?

Noticed they posted a cartoon a few weeks ago, wish they would post more!
I miss seeing their razor wit.

Shaking hands or just drowning?

2009-04-01T22:57:00.007+10:00

Much is being made about Richard Holbrooke shaking the hand of the deputy foreign minister of Iran.
Joe Klein's article writing for 'Swampland' blog: 'Meeting the Iranians' on the Time website certainly has.

"The handshake is a big deal. In 2000, Madeleine Albright had choreographed a casual handshake between Bill Clinton and Iranian president Khatami at the United Nations--and Khatami pulled out, under orders, one presumes, at the last minute. It was only a deputy foreign minister this time, but he showed."

The unfortunate thing is the handshake and what Joe Klein has made of it is more revealing of Klein's changing 'colors' and his penchant for exaggeration than offering any real substantive diplomatic sign.

Observing the Iranians strategy of late, its easy to see this as simply a continuation of Iran's attempt at drawing out and extending the timetable of diplomatic wrangling over their 'rumoured' nuclear agenda.

Jonathon Tobin from Contentions blog part of the commentarymagazine.com stable is a lot more sceptical of the real gains to be made with friendly gestures towards 'the mullahs'
he writes:

"Communication with Iran about the conflict in Afghanistan, as well as the fate of two Americans who are currently missing in Iran, is understandable. What appears to be missing from the administration’s agenda with Iran is conveying to Tehran just how seriously Washington takes their ongoing push for nuclear weapons. There are a lot of things on Obama’s plate right now including economic disaster and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But as much as he seems to want to pretend Iranian nukes are not a pressing problem, they are now potentially even more dangerous and destabilizing."

If the Israeli intelligence timetable is to be believed rather than the US timetable then days, weeks, months could count in Iran's on going march towards nuclear weaponry.

I actually believe that the Iranians are running ahead of what even the Israeli's intelligence services will publicly acknowledge.

Strategically Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's announcement the previous year of having 3,000 cascades online must indicate just how serious the Iranians are in regards to enrichment of nuclear fuel, how much enrichment of uranium they have actually achieved is the real question, how much of their enrichment processes are 'transparent' and how much of it is clandestine. Iran has a history of lying about is nuclear progress.

The US is stuck between a very hard place, trying to keep the Russians on side, maintaining diplomatic gestures towards Iran in an attempt to shore up their need for a more compliant Iran in regards to Iraq, and even more importantly to neutralise their influence in Afghanistan at this critical juncture.

The sad fact is Obama thinks his diplomatic overtures towards Iran are helping match the US's 'global agenda', the real truth is Iran is quickly finding just how easily they can adopt their adroit 'puppet mastery' skills towards the US's foreign policy.

Seems the Russians might just be taking advantage of Obama's new diplomacy learning curve as well, Obama is slated to meet the Russians with regards nuclear disarmament and proliferation.

Cold War Flashback: The U.S. Talks Nukes With Russia
Lets hope that the US's foreign policy back flip in that "it would not recognize South Ossetia as an independent country" doesn't set the scene for another 'expendable ally' in the middle east.

If Obama is under estimating the Iranians progress in Nuclear technology then we will soon be seeing a lot more Iranian hand shaking, and they will not be in gestures of friendship.

Top House Dems back Iran engagement

2009-03-31T18:12:00.003+10:00

March 29, 2009

WASHINGTON (JTA) -- A group of seven leading House Democrats called on President Obama to take "urgent action" to stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

In a letter to the president, members of the U.S. Congress including the majority leader of the House of Representatives and chairmen of some of its top committees backed Obama's effort to engage Iran but stressed that it "cannot be open-ended" and that talks must begin "as soon as possible."

"We cannot allow Iran to use diplomatic discussions as a cover for continuing to work on its nuclear program," said the letter, dated March 26. "Iran must verifiably suspend its uranium enrichment program within at most a few months of the initiation of discussions."

The missive suggests examples of sanctions that could be used if talks fail, including on the Central Bank of Iran and energy companies investing in Iran's oil and gas sector, as well as measures that U.S. allies could take against the Iranian regime.

The signatories includes Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland; California Reps. Howard Berman and Henry Waxman, the Foreign Affairs Committee and Energy and Commerce Committee chairmen, respectively; Texas Rep. Silvestre Reyes, the Intelligence Committee chairman; Missouri Rep. Ike Skelton, the Armed Service Committee chairman; New York Rep. Gary Ackerman, the Foreign Affairs Middle East and South Asia subcommittee; and Florida Rep. Robert Wexler, a close Obama ally and chairman of the Foreign Affairs subcommittee on Europe.

"We must use the time available to us to begin engagement and to convince the Iranians of our seriousness of purpose," the letter said. "Otherwise, we will face far more difficult decisions in the future."

Thanks to JTA

Gates sees sanctions as best bet on Iran

2009-03-31T17:05:00.003+10:00

March 30, 2009

WASHINGTON (JTA) -- The U.S. defense secretary said economic sanctions would be more successful than diplomacy in dealing with Iran.

"I think frankly from my perspective, the opportunity for success is probably more in economic sanctions in both places than it is in diplomacy," said Robert Gates on the television program "Fox News Sunday," referring to both Iran and North Korea. "Diplomacy -- perhaps if there is enough economic pressure placed on Iran -- diplomacy can provide them an open door through which they can walk if they choose to change their policies, and so I think the two go hand in hand. But I think what gets them to the table is economic sanctions."

Gates' remarks came a little more than a week after President Obama launched an effort to diplomatically engage Iran, sending a videotaped message to the Iranian people.

The defense secretary also said on the program that Iran has "enough low-enriched uranium" to give it the capacity to make a weapon "should they enrich it more highly." But he said the United States does not believe that Iran has the capability yet.

Article from and thanks to JTA
Cartoon: Thanks to Cox and Forkam

Iran increases the pressure of confirmity on its bloggers

2009-03-30T19:35:00.004+10:00

After the recent events of Iran Blocks Facebook, Youtube and 5 Million Other Websites and the recent death of the Iranian blogger Omidreza Mirsayafi whilst in custody.
Recently I read about the fact that Iran had 'allowed' some losening of its barrier against the internet, re: Why Did Iran Unblock Facebook?.
There was a fair bit of discourse about this action, call me cynical but I simply saw it as a prudent move in allowing the population of Iran to actively 'blog' for Iran and 'advocate' for Iranian interests,(Read attack Israel). I think we've all seen just how effective the islamic backlash has been in '(mis)reporting' events concerning Israel.
Well now that Iran has 'freed' access to the internet, whats next? Simple threaten the death penalty to any blogger not towing the party line..(yay human rights in Iran..)

Hat tip to: Islam in action

US tries to defuse a ticking timebomb

2009-03-30T18:27:00.002+10:00

Martin Livens writing for the Times discusses the G20 meeting summit this week and the pressing issue of a possible Israeli response to the rumoured Iranian pursuit of a Nuclear weapon.
In "Us tries to defuse a ticking timebomb" Martin Livens puts forward just how complex the issue is, read his analysis here.

"All eyes will be on Barack Obama at the G20 summit this week. Among the great and good, the dull and dreary, in London’s Docklands he will be the only superstar. But the young president knows that what is decided inside a gleaming tower block in Tel Aviv will have more bearing on whether his presidency is accounted a success or failure than this talking shop.

High in the defence ministry building Major-General Amos Gilad points to a photograph on his wall of three Israeli F-15 jets flying over the site of Auschwitz. “I put it here to remind us of what happened and what may happen,” says the old fire-eater. The press claims he has been the real leader of the state for the past six months while the politicians have been out wooing the voters."

Will Israel attack Iran's nuclear facilites?

2009-03-30T15:35:00.002+10:00

This video was produced for the BBC, for a synopsis and further information go to 'This World' page from the BBC: here

Iran, Syrian leaders say Israel on skids

2009-03-28T19:29:00.003+10:00

TEHRAN, Mar 27, 2009 (UPI via comtex) - The presidents of Iran and Syria say the world is tilting in favor of Muslim nations and that Israel will soon be on the losing side of the balance of power.

Both leaders maintained Israel was on the decline, as were its allies, while Iran and Syria remained bastions of strength in the Middle East.
Kuwait's KUNA news service reported Friday that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Bashar al-Assad of Syria spoke by phone Thursday and agreed that current world events were strengthening regional alliances and that nations should take advantage of new opportunities.

The Iranian Islamic Republic News Agency quoted Ahmadinejad saying, "The strong camp of the friendly countries like Iran and Syria is going to be triumphant."

Iran's New 'Spy Drones' Take To The Skies

2009-03-28T02:13:00.000+10:00

From Radio Free Europe - Radio Liberty:

The Pentagon confirmed on March 16 that the U.S. military shot down one of Iran's unarmed drone planes in Iraqi airspace in February. There were no casualties.

Drones are being used for an increasing number of missile and surveillance missions. In December, Iran launched a new generation of "spy drones," which can take real-time surveillance over enemy terrain. Some have a range of 2,000 kilometers, an Iranian air force officer told the press last month.

"The Washington Times" noted in an editorial that Iranian planes can now "soar over every U.S. military installation, diplomatic mission, or country of interest in the Middle East,"

Continue reading:
Iran's New 'Spy Drones' Take To The Skies

Take Your Poison, Israel

2009-03-27T23:40:00.000+10:00

Ted Belman from Israpundit writing for Global Politician puts forward the idea that Israel doesnt have a 'good choice' when it comes to finding a solution to the looming nuclear proliferation of Iran. In his article Take Your Poison, Israel Israel is confronted with some not so desirable alternatives.

Hitting Iran Where It Hurts

2009-03-27T22:10:00.000+10:00

Greg Reeson'a article Hitting Iran Where It Hurts which appears at the blog GOPUSA puts forward this observation

"The United States has two primary worries when it comes to Iran: its aggressive support for terrorism and its relentless pursuit of a suspected nuclear weapons program. Given these concerns, the United States has for years tried to persuade Iran, through both diplomatic and semi-punitive measures, to abandon both and to comply with a multitude of United Nations Security Council resolutions relating to Iran’s behaviour. Thus far, nothing has worked. "

Continue to the full article
Hitting Iran Where It Hurts

Israeli attack on Arms convoy in Sudan sends direct message to Iran

2009-03-27T20:38:00.000+10:00

The Israeli attack on the arms convoy travelling through Sudan, destined for Hamas in Gaza, is reported to have been motivated by its potential to send a message to Iran
ANALYSIS / In bombing Sudan, Israel sends message to Iran

Ballistic Missiles?

2009-03-27T20:29:00.000+10:00

Is Israel likely to employ ballistic missiles in an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities?
According to this report in Haaretz, it is an Israeli option.
Study: Israel may attack Iran nuclear sites with ballistic missiles

Iran likely to define Israel - U.S. relations

2009-03-27T19:02:00.000+10:00

The National Post's Mathew Fisher writes on the impact Iran's nuclear policies will have on the relationship between Benjamin Netanyahu and Barack Obama.
Fisher: Iran likely to define Israel - U.S.relations

Obama Hones Iran Strategy

2009-03-22T00:39:00.000+10:00

Obama Hones Iran Strategy

Leonard Spector from Yale Global writes about a new policy direction in regards to Iran.
The US puts out “bigger sticks and bigger carrots” to halt nuclear program

Janes Intelligence: Iran lobbies Moscow for missiles to arm new air defence unit

2009-03-20T13:46:00.000+10:00

Iran lobbies Moscow for missiles to arm new air defence unit
By Lauren Gelfand and Vladimir Petrov

"Iran's defence minister made a day-long official visit to Moscow on 16 February to press again for the sale of the S-300 surface-to-air missile system to Tehran to go forward, amid a restructuring of the Iranian military aimed at strengthening air defence capabilities..."

Arms Experts Correct the Record on Iran Uranium Claims

2009-03-03T16:50:00.000+10:00

"Experts at the nonpartisan Arms Control Association (ACA) urged senior U.S. officials and the media to exhibit greater care to accurately state what is known about Iran's nuclear capabilities. The experts highlighted the confusion created over the weekend by inaccurate portrayals of the type of nuclear material Iran has produced which suggested that Tehran was closer to a nuclear weapon than public U.S. intelligence and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reports indicate."

Iran has enough nuclear fuel to make bomb: U.S.

2009-03-03T16:14:00.000+10:00

Iran has enough nuclear fuel to make bomb: U.S.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States believes Iran has stockpiled enough nuclear fuel to make a bomb, U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen said on Sunday.

"We think they do, quite frankly," Mullen said on CNN's "State of the Union" program when asked whether Iran has enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon.

"And Iran having nuclear weapons, I've believed for a long time, is a very very bad outcome -- for the region and for the world," Mullen said.
read the full article:

Iran has enough nuclear fuel to make bomb: U.S.

Report: U.S. Rejected Israeli Plea To Attack Iran Nuclear Facilities

2009-01-13T10:37:00.000+10:00

Report: U.S. Rejected Israeli Plea To Attack Iran Nuclear Facilities
President Bush rejected several Israeli requests last year for weapons and permission for a potential airstrike inside Iran, according to the author of an investigative report.

Israel approached the White House in early 2008 with three requests for an attack on Iran’s main nuclear complex, said New York Times reporter David Sanger. His article appears in the newspaper on Sunday.

According to Sanger, Israel wanted specialized bunker-busting bombs, equipment to help refuel planes making flights into Iran and permission to fly over Iraq to reach the major nuclear complex at Natanz, the site of Iran’s only known uranium enrichment plant.

The White House “deflected” the first two requests and denied the last, Sanger said.

“They feared that if it appeared that the United States had helped Israel strike Iran, using Iraqi airspace, that the result in Iraq could be the expulsion of the American troops (from Iraq),” he said.
read more..
From : CNN Report: U.S. rejected Israeli plea to attack Iran

Israel asked US for green light to bomb nuclear sites in Iran

2008-09-28T05:59:00.000+10:00

A view of the nuclear enrichment plant of Natanz in central Iran

US president told Israeli prime minister he would not back attack on Iran, senior European diplomatic sources tell Guardian
by Jonathan Steele

Israel gave serious thought this spring to launching a military strike on Iran's nuclear sites but was told by President George W Bush that he would not support it and did not expect to revise that view for the rest of his presidency, senior European diplomatic sources have told the Guardian.

The then prime minister, Ehud Olmert, used the occasion of Bush's trip to Israel for the 60th anniversary of the state's founding to raise the issue in a one-on-one meeting on May 14, the sources said. "He took it [the refusal of a US green light] as where they were at the moment, and that the US position was unlikely to change as long as Bush was in office", they added.

Map showing nuclear activity in Iran

Read more...
Source: The Guardian Israel asked US for green light to bomb nuclear sites in Iran

Israel now fears Iran could have nuclear bomb by mid 2009

2008-05-08T21:36:00.000+10:00

Israel now fears Iran could have nuclear bomb by mid 2009
by Yaakov and Herb Keinon

With Iran racing forward with its nuclear program, Israel now believes the Islamic Republic will master centrifuge technology and be able to begin enriching uranium on a military scale this year, The Jerusalem Post has learned.

The new assessment moves up Israel’s forecasts on Teheran’s nuclear program by almost a full year — from 2009 to the end of 2008.

According to the new timeline, Iran could have a nuclear weapon by the middle of next year.

Iran, a senior defense official said on Tuesday, had encountered numerous technical obstacles on its way to enriching uranium but was now on track to master the technology needed to enrich uranium within six months.

read more from the San Francisco Sentinel...
Israel now fears Iran could have nuclear bomb by mid 2009

The Iranian-Israeli War

2008-03-14T04:50:00.000+10:00

Yossi Halevi writing in The New Republic writes that the war most people might be expecting has in fact already began via Iran's proxies.
When will Israel and Iran go to war?
They already have. The Iranian-Israeli War

Iranian Deception: What the IAEA Did Not Address

2007-11-20T14:03:00.001+10:00

"On November 15, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) issued its report about the latest status of Iran's nuclear program. Since the publication of the report, both Tehran and its critics are claiming victory. Tehran is using the report to claim that its nuclear program is a peaceful one, and critics have relied on the report saying that it is further indication that Tehran has not complied with the United Nations Security Council resolutions, has continued its uranium enrichment and deserves further punishment.
What is missing from the report, among other issues, is the role of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corp which has been running a secret nuclear weapons program in parallel to the nuclear energy program run by the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI).

According to paragraph 10 of the IAEA report, "In response to the Agency’s enquiry as to whether there was any military involvement in the program; Iran has stated that no institution other than the AEOI was involved in the decision making process or in the implementation of the centrifuge enrichment program."

This is an absolute lie. The centrifuge program has been and continues to be under the control of the IRGC since the beginning. As I elaborated in my previous column, "Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps: Chief Proliferators of Weapons of Mass Destruction," in 1983, the IRGC initiated Tehran's nuclear research and development program at the height of the Iran-Iraq war.

In 1987, the notorious Pakistani nuclear scientist AQ Khan, in his secret trip to Iran, met with senior commanders of the IRGC to assist Tehran in the development of its nuclear bomb.

IRGC Brig. Gen. Ali Hossein-Tash oversaw the nuclear weapons program of Iran. He was until 2005, the deputy Defense Minister and is now a member of the Supreme National Security Council. Former chief nuclear negotiator, Hassan Rowhani, in his little-publicized farewell letter thanked Brig. Gen. Hossein-Tash, among others, for his role in the nuclear program."

read more of this story on Fox News:
Iranian Deception: What the IAEA Did Not Address

The war in Iran

2007-09-21T18:29:00.000+10:00

Is it just a matter of time?

Nuclear: New revelations on the Iranian regime front companies

2007-02-24T13:26:00.003+10:00

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF RESISTANCE OF IRAN

February 22, 2007

NCRI - This morning in a press conference in Paris, Afchin Alavi, member of the NCRI Foreign Affairs Committee made new revelations about the nuclear program of the Iranian regime:

By changing the names and addresses of companies, the clerical regime attempts to conceal its activities from the eyes of the IAEA and neutralizing the UN Security Council sanctions.

Ladies and gentlemen,

As you are fully aware, on December 23, 2006, according to Resolution 1737, the UN Security Council imposed sanctions on 10 companies and entities that played a direct role in the clerical regime's nuclear and missile programs. Among these companies, four of them were companies that played a direct role in the Iranian regime's nuclear program. (The rest were entities)

According to information that we have received from inside of Iran, I would like to reveal that in a clear violation and in defiance of the UN Security Council resolution, by changing the names and relocating of at least two of these four companies, the mullahs' regime continues to use these companies in its nuclear program.

On the other hand we have found out that in order to expedite its secret nuclear project and in order to deceive and circumvent the UN and relevant international bodies and in order to continue its activities outside of control and inspection of the IAEA, the mullahs' regime has set up dozens of front companies. I will share with you details of five of these companies that have been established recently.

Some of the companies that I will expose today are part of a major company called "Energy Novin" (new energy) that acts as the mother company. The head of Energy Novin that is comprised of about 15 companies is Reza Aghazadeh (Head of Atomic energy Organization of Iran, AEOI and a Vice -President).

Relocation and changing the names of two companies under UN sanctions

1- Farayand Technique Company ( Technology of Centrifuge of Iran company)

In the list of companies and entities that were placed under UN sanctions, Farayand Technique is number five. Subsequent to its inspection by the IAEA, the name of this company was changed to Technology of Centrifuge of Iran Company (TCI). Farayand Technique Company is one of the main companies involved in manufacturing centrifuges. That is the reason for this company was placed under sanctions. The clerical regime changed the address of this company as well and relocated it to a new location in northern Tehran.

The head of this company is Jafar Mohammadi who has taken over Morteza Behdad recently. Jafar Mohammadi is one of the most senior experts in the Iranian regime in the field of manufacturing centrifuges. He was sent on loan from the Ministry of Defense, from the Mechanical Industries section, to Kala-electric Company to supervise the manufacturing of centrifuges. He is the number five of the UN Security Council list of persons involved in the nuclear programme.

In order to conceal its activities, this company has changed its address. Its new address is: Tehran, Saadat Abad, Kaj Square, Sarv Gharbi, Sina Mediacal Building, first floor, unit 8.
As a reminder, the former address of this company that was exposed by the Iranian resistance on August 2006 was: Tehran, Yousef-abad, 37th Street, number 1, third floor.

The factory of this company is located in Isfahan, Zobe-Ahan Highway, after highway police station, Siman Road, Ashtarjan industrial city, Sixth Avenue, building of the board of trustees of the industrial city, number 59.
The sign of the factory reads Farayand Technique.

I have to point out that since the factory has been inspected by the IAEA, the name of the factory and the sign outside of the factory has not been changed, but the name of the company and also its address have changed.

The head of factory in Isfahan is engineer Hassani.
The other members of the Board of Directors of the company are: Morteza Behzad, the Director General, and Seyed Amir Moaeyed Molaie, a member of the Board of Directors.

2- Pars Trash Company ( Rah Avard Kalaey Iran Company)

Pars Trash Company is number four in the UN Security Council list. The existence of this company was revealed by the Iranian Resistance for the first time. Subsequent to inspection of the company and its factory by the IAEA and since the clerical regime expected that the UN Security Council might impose sanctions, it changed the name of this company to Rah Avard Kalaey Iran Company, recently.

Pars Trash was place under the UN sanctions as a company involved in manufacturing parts of centrifuges.

It is very telling that the registration number of Rah Avard Kalaey Iran Company is 67977. This is exactly the registration number of Pars Trash Company.

According to the investigation of the Iranian resistance, the board of directors of the new company are exactly the same individuals of the board of directors of Pars Trash and there has not been any modification or changes in the board of directors.

According to reliable information, in addition to manufacturing parts of P-1 centrifuges, this company manufactures parts of advanced P-2 centrifuges as well.

The head of this company is Agha Zadeh and the head of its Board of Directors is Mohammad Hasssn Allah Dad.

The members of the Board of Directors are: Mohammad Hassan Allah DaD, Abdollah Joudat, and Hossein Akhgari. Mostafa Rouhi-pour is the Chief Inspector and Ali-Akbar Amini Parizi is the Alternate Inspector.

One of the plants of this company is located in Damavand road.

Information on five front companies

The clerical regime has established a vast set of front companies in order to pursue its nuclear goal and objective. Here, I would provide you with specifics of five of these companies that have been obtained by the Iranian Resistance.

3- Tamin Tajhizat Sanayeh Hasteieh ( Providing Equipment of Nuclear Industries- LTD) ( New Company)

This company is engaged in providing equipments needed for the fuel cycle and manufacturing of centrifuges. The registration number of this company is 267335. The head of Board of Directors is Reza Aghazadeh. The first deputy and managing director is Haleh Bakhtiyar.

Members of the Board of Directors are: Jaffar Mohammadi ( the number five in the list of persons put under sanctions according to UN Security Council resolution 1737), Morteza Behzad, Mohsen Sarkho, Amir Moayed Alai, Mehdi Keyvan, Ms. Haleh Bakhtiar. This company is located in Tehran.

4- Shakhes Behbood Sanaat ( indicator of improvement of industry) Company ( New company)

This company is involved in manufacturing equipments and parts that are needed in the fuel cycle. The Head of this company is Reza Aghazadeh and its Executive Director is engineer Samani. Samani is a mechanical engineer and is the head of the UCF plant in Isfahan. The factory of this company is located in Isfahan, Roshan dasht road, kilometer 20.

5- Mohandesi Toseh Sokht Atomi ( Engineering of Expansion of Nuclear Fuel) Company, LTD ( new company).

This company is engaged in the engineering matters of Arak heavy water site and manufacturing parts for heavy water site in Arak. The registration number of the company is 283278. This company with a company called Pishgam that follows the affairs of the Isfahan site, pursue technical matters collectively.
The Head of this company is Reza Aghazadeh. The First Deputy and Head of the Board of Directors is an engineer by the name of Ali Khatami. The other members of the Board of Directors are Mansour Movahed Raad, Javad Karimi, and Ahmad Fayaz-Bakhsh. This company is located in Tehran. The address of this company is: Tehran, Alvand Ave, 37th Street, number 27. The factory of this company is located in the Arak site.

6- Sookht Atomi Reactorhaye Iran (nuclear fuel of Iran's reactors). New Company

This comaony is engaged in management and supervision of construction, utilization, starting up facilities and factories that manufacture nuclear fuel facilities. This company is also involved in training adequate human force. This company's registration number is 225874.The Head of this company is Reza Aghazedeh. His deputy is Mohammad Ghanadi Marageh and the head of Board of Directors is Qassem Tarzi.
The rest of the Board of Directors is: Solat Sanna, and Manouchehr Rooshan. The Chief inspector is Ali Amani and the Alternate Inspector is Mansour Movahed Raad. The address of this company: Tehran, end of Kargar Shomali Ave, 20th Street, Gharghavol alley, number 3.

7- Modieriat Saakht Niroogahaye Atomi Iran (Managemetn of Building of Iran's Nuclear Reactors) (new company)

This company was established in July 2006 and its mandate is the management and implementation of plans for nuclear reactors. This company's registration number is 274811. The Head of this company is Reza Aghazadeh and its Head of Board of Directors is Seyed Hossein Hossein. The other members of the Board of Directors are: Massoud Feyz, Mehdi Farokhi, Ahmad Fayaz Bakhsh, Mahmoud Janatian, Javad Karimi Saabet, Siroos Shirazian, Matin Mohaseb is the Chief Inspector and Siroos Shirazain Khosravi is the Alternate Inspector. The main office of this company is located in Tehran, Argentina Square, Zagros Ave, number 23, third floor.

I have to reiterate that this is only a part of the clerical regime's network of front companies in its secret nuclear program. A major part of mullahs' nuclear programme has been pursued and carried out by the front companies.

reprinted from Iranwatch

War on Iran Has Begun

2006-07-14T12:41:00.002+10:00

TEL AVIV, Israel — The war with Iran has begun.
By DAVID TWERSKY | July 13, 2006

Just last Friday, Iranian President Ahmadinejad warned that Israel's return to Gaza could lead to an "explosion" in the Islamic world that would target Israel and its supporters in the West. "They should not let things reach a point where an explosion occurs in the Islamic world," he said.

"If an explosion occurs, then it won't be limited to geographical boundaries. It will also burn all those who created [Israel] over the past 60 years," he said, implicitly referring to America and other Western nations who support Israel.

Years from now, the kidnapping of Corporal Gilad Shalit will be regarded like the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand. Against the backdrop of Kassam rocket fire on Israelis living within range of the Gaza Strip, it was the fate of Corporal Shalit that triggered the Israeli return to Gaza, which in turn brought the Hezbollah forces into the game.

Israel is fighting two Iranian proxies on two fronts. It may, or may not, open a third front against a third Iranian proxy, Syria. It is from the Syrian capital that Khaled Meshaal, the exiled leader of Hamas, has been laying down Palestinian Arab negotiating conditions. Why listen to Mr. Meshaal? Because the Hamas troops are loyal to him, rather than to their erstwhile leader, Prime Minister Ismail Haniyah, let alone the increasingly (as if that were possible) hapless Palestinian Arab leader, Mahmoud Abbas.

As one senior Palestinian Arab close to Mr. Abbas told me Mr. Meshaal believes that any resolution of this crisis, and of the wider crisis brought on by the surprising Hamas election win last January and the ensuing isolation of the Palestinian Authority from its European and American funding sources, must await the outcome of the discussions between Iran and the West over its nuclear enrichment program.

Perhaps a grand bargain is in the works, in which Tehran will forgo its nuclear weapons ambitions in exchange for Washington's recognition of its emergence as the new regional power. Every day, Iran grows more powerful; any deal should reflect Iran's growing importance. For example: forcing Israel to bargain for prisoner swaps, cutting the Israeli military advantage down to size, and scuttling both the possibility of unilateral disengagement in the West Bank (the preferred Israeli option) and renewed negotiations with weakened Palestinian Arab moderates (the option preferred by the Europeans).

Even more loyal to Tehran is the Hezbollah leader, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, whose forces yesterday kidnapped two more Israeli soldiers, opening up the second front. Sheik Nasrallah is warning Israelis that they must not think Lebanon is unprotected as it was in 1981 and 1982 when Israeli forces came pouring across the border to silence Palestinian Arab guns. Sheik Nasrallah's men are the recipients of tens of thousands of rockets — longer range and presumably more deadly than their roughly engineered younger Kassam cousins — that put central Israel in their range.

Each one of these players — Hamas inside Gaza and in Damascus, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and the Assad dictatorship in Syria — are chess pieces on the Iranian board. The pawn moves, drawing in the Israeli bishop; the Lebanese rook challenges; the Syrian queen is in reserve.

Just listen: A few weeks ago, the Swedish government announced that it would label Golan Heights wine as a product from "Israeli Occupied Syria."

The Swedes were oblivious to the little dance played out around a request by the United Nations that Syria demarcate its view of the 1967 border. Turtle Bay was aiming to push Syria to claim the Sheeba farms, a small tract held by Israel and claimed by Hezbollah for Lebanon. The United Nations recognizes Sheeba Farms as belonging to Syria; should Israel and Syria ever negotiate a peace treaty, it is clear the Security Council would expect Sheeba Farms to be returned to Syrian control.

The United Nations wanted Syria to assert its claim, in order to deny Hezbollah its basic raison d'etre — "liberating" all Lebanese soil from "the Israeli occupation forces."

Passed in 2004, Security Council resolution 1559 requires the dismantling of all Lebanese militias and their replacement by a Lebanese state army. Thus far, this has been as successful as the requirement by the Quartet (America, the European Union, Russia, and the United Nations) that all independent Palestinian Arab terrorist groups and militias be disarmed.

Guess what? The Syrians refused. Just turned the United Nations down flat. Apparently Sweden is more passionate about asserting Syrian territorial rights than Syria itself.

The reason is simple: Iran does not want to deny Hezbollah the justification for maintaining its armed presence in southern Lebanon, along northern Israel, and Syria does Iran's bidding.

Ephraim Sneh, a former general and Labor Party leader who is the Israeli longest drawing attention to the approaching conflict with Iran, is saying that the current moment reminds him of the Spanish Civil War. The broader global forces are aligned; local actors are committed. It is a bloody test, a macabre dress rehearsal, for what lies over the horizon.

The war with Iran has begun.

From the New York Sun republished here for historical reasons.

Iran's nuclear program: FAQs

2006-03-17T05:38:00.000+10:00

If Iran insists its nuclear program is purely peaceful, why are there concerns?

Well, there shouldn't be any - if Iran can be believed.

Iran insists all it wants to do is provide a stable supply of electricity to a country of 70 million. Iran's goal is to generate 7,000 megawatts of electricity through nuclear power plants by 2020.

Sounds good, so far. But it's the second part of Iran's goal that has some worried. Tehran also wants to be self-sufficient in making fuel for its reactors. The process that makes nuclear power fuel, though, is also used to make material that can be used in nuclear weapons.

Still, under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, a country has the right to make its own nuclear fuel - as long as the process is closely monitored. Most countries that generate nuclear power import the fuel they need.

The International Atomic Energy Agency - the UN body responsible for monitoring the treaty - hasn't been convinced that Iran has been completely forthcoming about its nuclear intentions.

Some western countries also argue that Iran does not need to generate power from nuclear plants because it is rich in oil and natural gas deposits.

Hasn't Iran opened its program to inspections?

Yes, according to Iran. Not totally, according to the IAEA.

In 2002, Washington became very concerned after intelligence reports pointed to the existence of two secret nuclear facilities. According to an Iranian opposition group, the plants had been funded by front companies. The IAEA said the construction of the plants may have violated Iran's obligations to the agency - especially if Iran introduced nuclear material into the facility to test it, without informing the IAEA.

Through much of 2003, Iran allowed inspectors into the country.

On June 19, 2003, the IAEA called on Tehran to stop plans to begin enriching uranium and to allow inspectors the access they would need to clarify questions over Iran's nuclear program. The agency did not declare Iran in violation of its treaty obligations, nor did it refer the matter to the UN Security Council, as some U.S. officials had urged. The IAEA's director general - Mohamed ElBaradei - said the country had failed to report certain nuclear materials and activities.

In August 2003, UN inspectors reported they had found traces of weapons-grade, enriched uranium in an Iranian nuclear facility - but that it could take months to fully analyse the material.

On Sept. 12, 2003, the IAEA board of governors expressed "grave concern that, more than one year after initial IAEA inquiries to Iran about undeclared activities, Iran has still not enabled the IAEA to provide the assurances that all nuclear material in Iran is declared and submitted to Agency safeguards and that there are no undeclared nuclear activities in Iran." The board called on Iran to fully co-operate with the IAEA and ensure there are no more failures to own up to its nuclear capabilities - or risk being declared in contravention of the non-proliferation treaty.

A toughly worded United Nations resolution, which strongly deplored "Iran's 18-year cover-up of a nuclear program including uranium enrichment and plutonium reprocessing," prompted Iran to freeze nuclear inspections.

In March 2006, the IAEA sent a dossier to the UN Security Council that accused Iran of withholding information. After looking into the "Iran file" for three years, the agency said it had serious doubts about the nature and direction of Iran's nuclear program.

Is Iran working on its own?

In September 2003, the United States chastised Russia for helping Iran in its nuclear program. Russia said it was helping only with the technology to generate nuclear power.

In February 2004, the man who developed Pakistan's nuclear program admitted he transferred nuclear technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea. Abdul Qadeer Khan reportedly sold centrifuge parts to Iran for about $3 million. Centrifuges are used in the process of making fuel for nuclear power plants - and material for nuclear weapons.

Pakistan's president pardoned Khan.

What has been the European Union's involvement?

The EU, fronted by Britain, France and Germany, has been quite active in trying to avert a crisis. Two of those three countries - France and Germany - have been at odds with the United States over its involvement in Iraq.

There have been concerns that Washington has contemplated acting against Iran since President Bush's "axis of evil" speech identified Iran as a problem country, mainly because of its alleged nuclear aspirations.

The EU wants Iran to get out of uranium enrichment and promise to co-operate fully with the IAEA. In exchange, Iran would get a light-water nuclear reactor, nuclear fuel and trade benefits. Spent nuclear fuel would be removed from the country.

The U.S. has stayed away from the European initiative, neither endorsing nor condemning it.

Where do things stand now?

In November 2004, the EU and Iran made an agreement that Iran would suspend its program to produce enriched uranium while the IAEA continues its investigation. The EU would not refer the issue to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions. The U.S. reserved its right to press for sanctions.

In August 2005, after the inauguration of a new president, Iran rejected the EU package of proposals aimed at curbing its nuclear activity. A few days later, Iran resumed its nuclear program, reopening its uranium conversion plant in Isfahan in the presence of IAEA inspectors.

European diplomats had expressed concern that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would be less co-operative than the previous government.

The IAEA adopted a resolution presenting Tehran with a Sept. 3 deadline to stop its uranium enrichment activities or face possible referral to the Security Council.

Tehran reacted with defiance, with the Iranian Foreign Ministry calling the resolution an "unacceptable" result of American pressure.

So far, the IAEA has hesitated to refer the matter to the Security Council because of the risk that it will not approve sanctions. China has indicated in the past that it could use its veto power to block a resolution against Iran.

In October 2005, the United States and France urged Iran to return to the negotiating table in an effort to curb its nuclear arms program. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she wants the talks to restore faith in the international community. She wants reassurances Iran is not trying to build a nuclear weapon. Rice met with British, French and Russian leaders, trying to gain support to report Iran to the UN Security Council.

In January 2006, Iran escalated the confrontation by removing the UN seals at one its uranium-enrichment plants and resuming nuclear research. Iran denied it's producing nuclear fuel by enriching uranium. But the U.S. and its EU allies again warned Iran that it risks referral to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions. In March 2006, the IAEA sent its report on Iran to the UN Security Council. That report, which was highly critical of Iran's non-compliance with the IAEA's nuclear inspection efforts, would be the basis for possible Security Council sanctions against Iran. But diplomats said it was unlikely that the U.S. would press for sanctions as a first step. They said it was more likely that the 15 members of the Security Council would issue a presidential statement that would demand that Iran comply with IAEA resolutions.

From: Iran's nuclear program: FAQs CBC News Online | March 13, 2006

US warning after Iran breaks seals at nuclear plant

2006-01-12T13:48:00.001+10:00

Western governments issued stern warnings to Iran to desist from resuming its nuclear research after United Nations monitors in Vienna formally confirmed that the country's scientists had removed seals from materials at its Natanz uranium enrichment plant.

The White House said that unless Iran stepped back quickly, the issue would be referred to the UN Security Council with the possibility of sanctions or other kinds of punishment by the international community.

"If the regime in Iran continues on the current course and fails to abide by its international obligations there is no other choice but to refer the matter to the Security Council," said Scott McClellan, the White House spokesman. In London, Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, said the confirmation that the seals had been removed was of "profound concern", adding that the gathering crisis over Iran's intentions in the nuclear sphere was posing a growing threat to peace in the region. "This is enrichment," he said.

The removal of the seals could be the death knell to two-year-old talks between the Iranian regime and the governments of Britain, France and Germany, designed to limit Iran's activities to the production of energy and prevent it from weaponising its capacity. Those talks were interrupted in August last year when Iran began returning to its nuclear facilities.

"The reason it would be extremely serious if Iran was to continue in the way in which it has done - raising question after question about whether it is intent on developing a nuclear weapons facility - is that it would destabilise the whole of the region and, in doing so, threaten international peace and security as a whole," Mr Straw said...