Doc's Talk: The Iranian Strategy is Working

Sunday, December 23, 2012

The Iranian Strategy is Working

Israel is busy with its elections, the US is busy with the financial crisis, but for Iran, it’s business as usual, as the centrifuges keep spinning

Amir Rapaport

Photo: AP

It is possible that the most significant defense event of the week took place at a farm in the town of Tir Herfa in southern Lebanon, where Lebanese media reported of a mysterious explosion in a Hezbollah weapon warehouse on Monday morning. Naturally, Hezbollah, on its part, closed the area and did not volunteer any details.

Such an event has the potential to intensify the situation considerably. If Hezbollah decides to openly blame Israel, its response could be to direct fire towards northern Israeli towns, which would result in a serious escalation. This did not happen, this time. Does this mean that Israel was not involved in the explosion? Certainly not. Many Western elements (as well as Arab states) estimated that Israel is behind the explosion, as well as behind a series of explosions from Tehran and all the way to Sudan. It is difficult not to agree with their assessments, especially when the commander of the Israeli Air Force, Major General Amir Eshel, said this week on camera that those who sleep with weapon storehouses should be surprised that they explode.

Whether if Israel is responsible for the explosion or not, the event makes it possible to take another glance to the fascinating web of events, transpiring throughout the Middle East. Even if Hassan Nasrallah is convinced that Israel is responsible for the blast, he has a good reason not to announce it and not to initiate another round of combat against Israel. This is not just due to the deterrence Israel achieved in the wake of the Second Lebanon War: Nasrallah is primarily concerned of the response of his Iranian patrons.

With regards to Iran, the weapon storehouse is a trivial thing compared to the truly bigger picture – Iran built up Hezbollah’s strength after 2006 as a tremendous threat to Israel, which it would operate only in the event of an Israeli or US attack on Iranian soil (in addition to the fire of missiles towards Israel, which would be carried out in Iran). Any other objective is trivial compared to this issue. It is not worth giving Israel a reason to harm the long-range launchers before the “real thing" (such as the damage caused to the long-ranged missiles in the Gaza Strip during operation Pillar of Defense, for example).
Nasrallah was harshly reprimanded for his adventure in the summer of 2006, with the abduction that led to war. Since then, Nasrallah cannot initiate any sort of military measure against Israel without the explicit approval of the bosses from Tehran. There are also internal considerations as to why he shouldn't mess with Israel at this point in time, yet all of his considerations pale in comparison to the orders he gets from the real bosses.
Iran Marches Towards a Bomb
While on the subject of Iran, it is possible to assess that Israel is controlling the height of the flames of the global publications regarding the Iranian nuclear bomb that’s on its way. If the political echelon is interested in it, the issue rises instantaneously to the top headlines around the world. A childish drawing of a bomb in the hands of Prime Minister Netanyahu or a leak by anonymous ‘western’ military sources is enough to make headlines in one of the important US newspapers, which would then be quoted by the rest of the global media.
In recent weeks, in which the continuous tie in the Syrian civil war has broken (in favor of the rebels), the Iranian issue has stayed away from the public agenda. This does not mean that the war over the Iranian bomb is over. It should be assumed that Israel is continuing in efforts to foil the bomb, but the bottom line is worrying: as of now, the Iranian strategy is working. There is a possibility that it will reach the bomb.
Here is a scenario that has chances of materializing: while Israel is busy with its elections, and the US is primarily dealing with the risk of the fiscal cliff at the start of 2013, Iran is currently accelerating its nuclear program. The centrifuges are working at top speeds to enrich uranium. This might not necessarily remain the case - no one in the West would be surprised if next spring, just as the US tries consolidating a coalition to intensify the economic sanctions imposed on Iran (again), Iran would unilaterally announce that it is halting the enrichment process. If this happens, it would not constitute a surrender on Iran’s part, but rather progression according to a pre-prepared plan.
By the spring of 2013, Iran will already possess more than 200 kilograms of enriched uranium, which could be suitable for use in a nuclear bomb (a base of 20% enrichment), a fine quantity. Iran will be able to complete the rest of the planned enrichment process at its own rate, in secret, far from the eyes of the UN inspectors. At the same time, it will be able to conclude the development of the detonator for the nuclear bomb, as well as the adaptation of the future bomb to a launch measure. This includes the conclusion of the Iranian program for developing cruise missiles, based on former Soviet missile technology acquired in the past decade in Ukraine. From this point onwards, Iran will also be able to choose the time at which it will announce the nuclear weapon in its possession.
In recent years, when Israel has spoken of how Iran must be stopped from becoming a ‘threshold state’, this situation is exactly what was being referred to. However, talks did not help, and Iran is on its way there. It's reasonable to assume that Meir Dagan, who is recovering from surgery he underwent in Belarus, had good reasons for his staunch objections against the possibility that Israel will attack the Iranian nuclear facilities on its own. As head of the Mossad, he had access to information that only he and the prime minister knew. What was this information? Either way, Dagan was not alone in opposing an attack.
Former IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi and head of Shabak Yuval Diskin also sided with him. One of Ashkenazi’s closest aids, who also opposed an Israeli assault in Iran without US coordination was the late Amnon Lipkin-Shahak, former IDF chief of staff, who was laid to rest on Thursday.
Mishaps of Pillar of Defense
Another issue that is deeply troubling the IDF are the faults that were revealed in the examinations into operation Pillar of Defense. Nearly a month after the end of the operation, the examinations at the brigade and battalion levels have been completed, and a general staff examination is about to be conducted in several days. As with any operation or exercise, an in-depth investigation reveals countless mishaps. In the case of Pillar of Defense, one of the grave mishaps stood out in a noticeable manner during the days of the operation – the gathering of thousands of reserve soldiers in areas that were exposed to the fire launched from the Gaza Strip.
This was not the only failure, and there were, of course, positive lessons (such as the supplies that the reservists received). However, it is doubtful if the general staff examination will point explicitly to the main problem of Pillar of Defense: one month later, it seems that the operation contributed towards weakening the Israeli deterrence against Hamas and the Palestinians more than towards strengthening it.
There has been total silence in the Gaza Strip since the end of the operation, yet there remains turmoil in the Judea and Samaria area, even if the number of violent events this week was relatively low.

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk