When last I wrote, I said I would be watching for the US response to the
Israeli capture of the ship – operated under Iranian direction - that was
carrying rockets intended for Gaza. As it turns out, besides the boiler plate
response we might have expected, there was something else:
A State Department spokesperson put out a statement suggesting that the US
was prepared to act to take this ship before Israel made its move. “The White House directed the Department of Defense to
monitor the vessel," Jen Psaki said. In fact, the US was prepared to take
"unilateral steps" to stop the ship, but then Israel “volunteered” to handle the
situation and the US stepped back.
A logical analysis renders this description of the situation
ludicrous. First, the US does not track Iranian weapons ships as Israel
does: this particular operation required months of exceedingly sensitive covert
action and special intelligence. We are the masters at this.
And then, why would Obama want to have the US intercept such a
ship, thereby angering the Iranians – a report described the Revolutionary Guard
as furious - when he is in difficult negotiations with them? The
president’s MO is appeasement, not confrontation. You may remember that it was
revealed after the fact that the reason Obama halted a planned missile hit on
Syria was because Iran requested he not do it.
Lastly, if, for reasons that are not immediately clear, Obama had wanted to
stop that ship, what are the chances that he would have opted to then step back
and let Israel do it?
~~~~~~~~~~
And so, as you can readily see, I was exceedingly dubious about this story
from the moment I read it.
And then – surprise! - I found this (emphasis added):
“Asked about US involvement in the commando
attack, the [senior IDF] officer said that the US was informed of the
relevant details ahead of the raid, but did not take an active part in
collecting information that led up to it.”
So the US hadn’t even taken part in collecting information about the ship,
never mind having set in place plans to stop it. This means, of course,
that at some high level (presumably the very highest) in the State Department, a
decision was made to misrepresent US involvement in the situation.
Shocking? Not at all..just part of the State Department MO.
Remember Benghazi and the claim that a US ambassador was murdered because of a
video making fun of Mohammad.
~~~~~~~~~~
I will not belabor the question of why this was done, other than to
speculate that they didn’t want to appear as if they were not part of what was
going on – that they were, so to speak, one-upped by Israel. This claim,
if believed, would have served to diminish Israel, which in point of fact acted
superbly.
As to a boiler plate response on this, White House press secretary Jay
Carney made it clear that from the US perspective it was entirely “appropriate”
to continue negotiations in spite of what went on with the ship. There is
no rethinking of the parameters of the negotiations taking place.
~~~~~~~~~~
The weapons cargo ship, the Klos C (on left in
picture below), escorted by two the Israeli Navy ships INS Hanit and INS
Hetz, was brought into the port at Eilat on Saturday.
Credit: Times of Israel
Its contents, when unloaded by Yahalom, an engineering unit for special operations, were found to consist of:
-
40 Syrian-made M-302 missiles with a 90-to-160 kilometer (60-to-100 mile) range
-
181 mortar shells, 120 mm caliber
-
About 400,000 bullets, 7.62 mm caliber
The full import of these weapons was explained by an IDF
official (emphasis added):
"There are rockets in this shipment
with a 160 kilometer range. If you do the math, they could reach Haifa.
These are new rockets that threaten the majority of Israeli
citizens. It is not right to simply say, 'There are so many rockets in
Gaza, what would a few more matter?' These are a lot of rockets, with
longer ranges and with bigger warheads. A missile like this in the hands of
Hamas or Islamic Jihad gives them strategic capability."
~~~~~~~~~~
The 17 crew members of the Kos C are being questioned on board the
ship and then will be free to leave with the ship.
~~~~~~~~~~
A major press conference was held today in Eilat, attended by international
press and foreign dignitaries who will have an opportunity to see the
weaponry. One of Netanyahu’s goals was showing the world “the true face of
Iran”: today Tehran hides
shipments of long range missiles, tomorrow it will hide "nuclear
suitcases."
Unfortunately, there is no evidence that the world is interested in seeing
it.
Netanyahu challenged Catherine Ashton, EU foreign policy chief - as she was
preparing to go to Iran on Sunday - to directly confront the Iranians on the
matter of the Kos C. He might have saved his breath. Ashton, who made the
trip at the invitation of Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Jarad Zarif,
delivered the following statement (emphasis added):
“I have come to Iran
with the message of goodwill of 28 European countries...this is a start
for the development of cooperation between Iran and the EU.
“The EU fully
acknowledges the Islamic Republic of Iran’s importance and role in the
region; accordingly, talks have taken place during this trip for
cooperation between the two sides on different issues.”
Assuming that this report from the Fars News Agency about
Ashton’s statement is true, then I would say she has surpassed herself.
Talk about inexcusable pandering! That she entered Iran on the heels of
the capture of weaponry intended by Iran for use against Israel by terrorists
and then spoke about the goodwill of 28 EU countries is vile.
So confident is Iran that it has the upper hand now, that
after meeting with Ashton, Iranian politician Ali
Akbar Velayati criticized the US policy towards Iran:
“The measures adopted by
American officials under the pretext of pressure from the Zionists [Israel] are
not acceptable, Such actions by the Americans serve as an obstacle in the
way of an international agreement between the P5+1 and the Islamic
Republic.”
~~~~~~~~~~
I have written extensively about the horrendous
negotiating situation between P5+1 and Iran. Iran has been cut all sorts
of slack with regard to the “right” to enrich, while sanctions have been cut
back so that it is no longer hurting economically as it had been.
This is for an “interim” period, during which a final
agreement is supposed to be hammered out. The chances that the end result will
be an arrangement that deprives Iran of the capacity to produce a nuclear weapon
is close to nil. Even Ashton, who is kissing up to the Iranians, has
admitted that there are no guarantees that a successful deal will be
reached. And this is “successful” in EU terms. A final agreement,
she said, will be “difficult, challenging and there
is no guarantee that we will succeed.”
The claim that the sanctions can be reinstated if things
don’t work out is fallacious. The entire sanctions network against Iran is
falling apart, with nations and companies running to do business with the
Iranians.
~~~~~~~~~~
Behrouz Kamalvandi, spokesman
for the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, recently gave an interview on
Iranian TV in which he said that in the Joint Plan of Action, signed in
November. Iran "got more than it gave," and that Iran’s nuclear
commitments were "temporary and non-obligatory." He emphasized that,
“The commitments made by Iran can be retracted." (Emphasis
added)
See Kamalvandi in this MEMRI clip:
~~~~~~~~~~
With regard to negotiations with the Palestinian Arabs,
Prime Minister Netanyahu is conducting himself in a manner that is increasingly
maddening and bewildering. Precisely what is the man talking about? I frequently
want to ask (and I will come back to that in my next post).
Yet at one and the same time, he is on the mark with
regard to his warnings about Iran. His statements and policies in this
respect demonstrate a good measure of clear thinking and readiness to confront
hard truths.
I believe that anyone who does confront those hard truths,
and takes a serious and painful look at the situation, will ineluctably arrive
at the conclusion that Iran must be hit. Nothing else will prevent its rush to
achieve nuclear capability.
What I fervently pray, then, is that at some point soon,
our prime minister stops sounding those warning that are not heeded by the
world, and gives the word for the only action that can made a difference.
~~~~~~~~~~
No comments:
Post a Comment