Rooyesh

It’s the event that everyone here – and no one – is talking about. Israeli officials have neither confirmed nor denied the target of its Sept. 6 airstrike in Syria. Was it, as some media outlets reported, an attack on the run-of-the-mill munitions being transferred through Syria on their way to Hizbullah, or was it a strike on nuclear components supplied by North Korea?

Either way, Israel’s chief of military intelligence announced that Israel’s deterrence had “been restored.” But unusually quiet, regional analysts note, are moderate Arab states and international players who would, in the past, have been quick to condemn any act of Israeli aggression against a neighbor. Amid the state-imposed silence from officialdom here on what exactly Israeli bombs struck and why (Israelis are discussing it only on the basis of leaks in Washington), observers see several key messages. First, Israel was able to strike at Syria without suffering any consequences, military or diplomatic.

Second, Israel might take steps to fulfill one of its ultimate security objectives, which is to prevent other countries in the Middle East from obtaining nuclear capability, especially those overtly hostile to Israel. Third, if a Syrian nuclear installation can be targeted by Israel without any international outcry – and with the tacit backing of allies in the US and Turkey – Iran’s nuclear facilities are looking more likely than ever to be next. “Some analysts think that it’s a message to the Iranian regime that Israel can strike anywhere in the region. And it shows us the extent of cooperation between Israel and Turkey, because Turkey didn’t condemn the attacks until now,” says Emad Gad, an expert in Israeli affairs at the Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies in Cairo. Israel dropped fuel tanks in Turkey near their border with Syria as part of the operation.

“I think some Arab countries like Saudi Arabia and some other circles felt happy about the Israeli strike. Still, the main message is to the Syrian side,” Dr. Gad says, pointing to Israel’s frustration over Syria’s assistance to Hizbullah, Hamas, and other Palestinian militant factions operating in Syria. Many in Egypt and elsewhere in the region see Israel’s strike, when put in the context of the international community’s standoff with Iran, as a step toward a bigger confrontation. “We are heading toward what will probably be a European-US strike targeting the Iranian project, and people here are afraid of what the Iranian reaction will be,” he adds. “It will be hard for them to hit America, and so anything that’s seen as an American installation in the region could be a target.” Meir Javedanfar, an Iranian-born, Tel Aviv-based analyst and author of “The Nuclear Sphinx of Tehran,” says the muted reaction to Israel’s strike has Iran quite concerned What worries Iran most is that the international community hasn’t condemned Israel,” says Mr. Javedanfar. “If they’re not saying anything about Syria, and Syria’s not as much on the outs, what does it say for Iran?” He says the operation had several goals in mind.

“One, get Iran to come back and start negotiating seriously and put better offers on the table. Two, restore Israel’s deterrence to what it was before last year’s war with Lebanon. I think it has done that, in a big way, because Syria has not responded.” Not so fast, others say. Deterrence, one of the most important concepts in Israeli defense, is also one of its most amorphous. The Haaretz newspaper Tuesday criticized Israel’s Director of Military Intelligence, Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin, for having declared Israel’s deterrent capability restored in one fell swoop. “A successful strike – if it did occur – could serve as a statement: anyone who places nuclear weapons near Israel’s borders or within striking distances will have to pay a price,” the paper’s editorial read. But, it continued, “Israel’s deterrence is measured day in and day out in the western Negev as well. Hundreds of Qassam rockets from Gaza strike the region every month, with Israel unable to come up with a deterrent response.”

All of this comes at a time when there seemed to be increased signs of hope for an Israeli-Syrian rapprochement. The possibility of the two countries revisiting the negotiating table, abandoned more than seven years ago, has been in the offing in recent months, though the Bush administration has been encouraging Israel to focus on the Palestinian peace track instead. Hebrew University professor Moshe Maoz, a supporter of the potential for Israeli-Syrian peace, worries that a strike could further radicalize Syria. “This could restore deterrence, sure, but it might further undermine the chances of peace with Syria, and push them closer to the Shiite axis,” he says. “Israel is pushing Syria, along with Bush, into the hands of Iran, by refusing to talk to them.” In fact, some other Iran analysts say Israel’s strike was a kind of victory for Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinajad, who has been able to turn to Syria sanctimoniously and say that his ” ‘advice’ about Israel not wanting peace was true all along,” Javedanfar explains. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told reporters this week that he was ready to make peace with Syria if the conditions ripen, and that there was no reason to rule out dialogue.

“The Israeli deterrent track has always been kind of divorced from the political track, and they’re always willing to put one ahead of the other if they think it’s something urgent,” says Kenneth Pollack at the Brookings Institution in Washington. “They obviously knew about this site for a long time; they didn’t discover it last week. It underlines a point that everyone knew: Israel doesn’t want other countries to acquire nuclear weapons and it will do whatever it thinks is necessary to stop it,” he adds. “But no one knows what the Syrians were up to,” he says. “People are wondering if it was a very nascent nuclear program and no one wants to see that.”

Source: The Christian Science Monitor

The deputy commander of Iran’s air force said Wednesday that plans have been drawn up to bomb Israel if the Jewish state attacks Iran, according to the semiofficial Fars news agency. The announcement came amid rising tensions in the region with the United States calling for a new round of U.N. sanctions against Iran over its disputed nuclear program and Israeli planes having recently overflown, and perhaps even attacked, Iranian ally Syria.

On Sunday, Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said the international community should prepare for the possibility of war in the event that Iran obtains atomic weapons, although he later appeared to soften that statement. “We have drawn up a plan to strike back at Israel with our bombers if this regime (Israel) makes a silly mistake,” Gen. Mohammad Alavi was quoted as telling Fars in an interview. Fars confirmed the quotes when contacted by The Associated Press, but would not provide a tape of the interview. The Iranian air force had no immediate comment. Defense Minister Mostafa Mohammed Najjar told the official IRNA news agency Wednesday that “we keep various options open to respond to threats. … We will make use of them if required.” Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guards released a statement that the nation was ready for a military confrontation. “Iran, having passed through crises … has prepared its people for a possible confrontation against any aggression,” IRNA quoted the statement as saying. White House press secretary Dana Perino called Alavi’s comment “unhelpful.” “It is not constructive and it almost seems provocative,” she said. “Israel doesn’t seek a war with its neighbors.

And we all are seeking, under the U.N. Security Council resolutions, for Iran to comply with its obligations.” Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev said, “Unfortunately we are all too accustomed to this kind of bellicose, extremist and hateful language coming from Iran.” “We take the threat very seriously and so does the international community,” he added. Iran has said in the past that Israel would be Iran’s first retaliatory target if attacked by the United States, but Alavi’s comments were the first word of specific contingency plans for striking back on Israel. Many in the region fear Israel could launch airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities to prevent it from building a nuclear weapon. Alavi also warned that Israel was within Iran’s medium-range missiles and its fighter bombers, while maintaining that Israel was not strong enough to launch an aerial attack against Iran. “The whole territory of this regime is within the range of our missiles. Moreover, we can attack their territory with our fighter bombers as a response to any attack,” the general said. An upgraded version of Iran’s Shahab-3 missile has a range of 1,250 miles, capable of reaching Israel and carrying a nuclear warhead. Alavi said Iran’s radar bases were monitoring activities at the country’s borders around the clock and boasted that it had the capability to confront U.S. cruise missiles.

“One of the issues the enemies make publicity about is their cruise missiles. Now, we possess the necessary systems to confront them,” Alavi was quoted as saying. Iran’s ambassador to Kuwait said in an interview with the Kuwaiti Al-Rai newspaper that U.S. bases in the Gulf would be targeted if the country was attacked. “Iran won’t immediately strike U.S. bases in the region if it comes under a military strike. It will hit the base from which the strike against it came,” Ali Jannati told the newspaper. “But I don’t think the Gulf nations would allow that a strike be launched from their territory.” Kuwait has a major U.S. base, which helps supply troops in Iraq. The U.S. 5th Fleet, which patrols the Gulf, is based in Bahrain, and the U.S. forces’ Central Command is based in Qatar. A top Revolutionary Guards commander said earlier this week that Americans could be found all around Iran and that they were legitimate Iranian targets if the U.S. takes military action. “Today, the United States is within Iran’s sight and all around our country, but it doesn’t mean we have been encircled. They are encircled themselves and are within our range,” Gen. Mohammed Hasan Kousehchi told IRNA, referring to U.S. units in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In Ankara, Turkey, on Wednesday, Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns called for U.N. Security Council members and U.S. allies to help push for a third round of sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program. Burns said Washington was “pursuing peaceful diplomacy,” and urged Iran to cooperate. However, he said the “responsibility lies with Iran to choose negotiations.” “We are going ahead to try to sanction Iran again, and we hope very much to have the support of Russia and China and the other countries in the council for that,” Burns said. “We have very strong support of France and Britain in this respect.” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov on Tuesday signaled Moscow’s opposition to a third round of sanctions, and praised a recent agreement between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency aimed at resolving outstanding issues. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged Iran to cooperate fully with the IAEA, the U.N.’s nuclear watchdog agency, and the Security Council to settle the dispute, saying the United Nations wants a peaceful solution. Two U.N. resolutions imposing sanctions on Iran have failed to persuade the country to suspend uranium enrichment. Tehran insists the program is aimed at producing energy for civilian use but the U.S., its European allies and many others fear the program’s real aim is to produce nuclear weapons. Burns said he would host a meeting Friday with the participation of permanent members of the U.N. Security Council “to look at the elements of a third resolution.” Talks on a third U.N. resolution that would impose new sanctions on Iran were expected next week in New York, when world leaders will attend the annual ministerial session of the U.N. General Assembly. “All countries should do their best … to sanction Iran on their own according to their laws,” Burns said.

“I think all of us believe that a diplomatic solution is preferable and the sanctions are a very important instrument.” On Sunday, Kouchner said France had appealed to major companies such as oil giant Total and gas giant Gaz de France not to bid for projects in Iran. He also said France and Germany were preparing possible European Union economic sanctions against Tehran beyond existing U.N. measures. “The whole trend is away from commercial engagement and toward sanctions whether that’s Security Council sanctions or individual sanctions,” Burns said. Burns said U.S. allies and friends Turkey, Germany, Japan, South Korea and India should consider similar actions.

Source: The Associated Press