An Oil Strategy in Case Iran’s Navy Shuts Down the Strait of Hormuz: View




An Oil Strategy in Case Iran’s Navy Shuts Down the Strait of Hormuz: View

By the Editors Jan 12, 2012 3:44 AM GMT+0330

Let’s just say Iran makes good on its recent threats to shut down the Strait of Hormuz. And let’s say that with one-fifth of the world’s oil supply bottled up, the price of a barrel of oil then almost doubles, as some analysts predict, to more than $200.

What can the world do to bring prices down before a still- woozy global economy gets pushed back into recession?

Pipelines that circumvent the strait could carry to market at least 7 million of the 17 million barrels of tanker-borne oil that passes through the strait each day. The U.S. could, for the first time since the Gulf War in 1991, release oil from its 700 million-barrel Strategic Petroleum Reserve; other members of the International Energy Agency (set up after the 1973-74 oil crisis) could also tap the 90-day supply stocks that they are required to maintain.



The IEA has already prepared a plan to release as many as 14 million barrels a day in the event of a Gulf closure. Saudi Arabia, long the self-appointed swing man of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, has a spare production capacity -- on paper, at least -- of about 3 million barrels per day; everyone else is producing almost flat out.

The U.S. now gets only about 9 percent of the oil it consumes from the Persian Gulf. Countries such as China, India, Japan and South Korea, however, rely on Gulf exports, particularly from Iran, to power their economies. In the European Union, debt-ridden Greece gets 14 percent of its oil imports from Iran, Italy 13 percent and Spain almost 10 percent. And because oil is a global commodity, as far as oil prices are concerned, what happens in the Persian Gulf does not stay in the Persian Gulf.

For all Iran’s missile-rattling, however, there is little reason to think it will carry through on its bluster. To block the Gulf would verge on economic suicide: Petroleum products account for 20 percent of Iran’s gross domestic product, 80 percent of exports and 70 percent of its government revenue. Any attempt to close the Gulf could also provoke a war with the U.S. and vaporize what diplomatic support and leverage Iran gets from countries (and clients) such as China.

Iran may not intend ultimately to close the strait, but its threats to do so can still instigate tremendous economic uncertainty with very real consequences, especially in a hyper- connected world wired with complex speculative instruments. The challenge is similar to dealing with terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda, which command our attention and resources through their potential no less than their actions. In either case, the goal is to balance the risks that such threats present with the costs of protecting against them.

More pipelines would be a good start. Unfortunately, the United Arab Emirates just announced that the opening of a 1.8 million barrel-per-day pipeline that circumvents the strait will be put off until May. The use of drag-reduction agents -- an estimated $600 million investment -- could increase the capacity of Saudi Arabia’s existing two pipelines that reach the Red Sea to as many as 11 million barrels per day. And if the Kingdom wants to bolster its reputation as a “stable, reliable” supplier of oil, it could invest the several billion dollars needed to build another pipeline -- a prospect that may be less painful if oil prices remain high. The current turmoil is another reason why Iraq needs to repair its pipeline to Turkey. At home, we support the building of the Keystone XL pipeline that will bring oil from Canada’s tar sands to market.

The IEA’s plan to release oil from emergency stocks will only work if China, India and other non-IEA countries agree not to hoard. That would require an unprecedented degree of policy coordination. One way to reduce future shocks, especially in Asia, may be more positioning of exports in regional storage depots and greater use of floating stocks. Governments may also want to dust off the IEA’s 2005 blueprint for cutting the amount of fuel consumed by cars, trucks and buses. If the crisis continues, the market’s response could also be an important first test of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s soon- to-be-imposed limits on trading by speculators.

Over the last few years, the U.S. has reduced its dependence on oil imports in general and from the Middle East in particular. Yet, almost four decades after the first oil shocks, the economy remains deeply vulnerable to the threat of a cutoff of oil from the Persian Gulf -- a state of affairs that calls into question the commitment of, by some estimates, trillions of dollars to keep the Gulf stable and the Strait of Hormuz open. Factor that “externality” into the price of a barrel of oil, and alternative fuels begin to look like a bargain by comparison -- at least until someone figures out how to take away the sun, wind, rivers and tides.

Read more opinion online from Bloomberg View.

To contact the Bloomberg View editorial board: view@bloomberg.net.

Gold, Silver Gain After Reports That Iran Made First Nuclear Rod

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-01-02/gold-silver-gain-after-reports-that-iran-made-first-nuclear-rod.html

Bloomberg
Gold, Silver Gain After Reports That Iran Made First Nuclear Rod

January 02, 2012, 1:01 PM EST

By Swansy Afonso

Jan. 2 (Bloomberg) - Gold and silver gained after reports that Iran produced its first nuclear fuel rod, spurring investors to buy the precious metal as a haven.

Gold for immediate delivery advanced 0.2 percent to $1,566.37 an ounce at 5:32 p.m. in London. Silver was 0.1 percent higher at $27.8625 an ounce. Gold rose 10 percent last year and silver dropped 9.9 percent.

A domestically made rod was inserted into the core of Tehran’s atomic research reactor after performance tests, the Iranian Students News Agency reported today, citing the country’s atomic energy agency. The Tehran reactor produces radioisotopes for cancer treatment, according to Mehr news agency. Nuclear fuel rods contain pellets of enriched uranium that provide fuel for nuclear power plants.

“Iran’s nuclear plans have raised fears that it is getting desperate and will take some drastic step,” Gnanasekar Thiagarajan, a director at Commtrendz Risk Management Services Pvt., said by phone from Mumbai. “More sanctions are expected from the U.S. and other nations. This will have a positive impact on gold prices as ideally people would try to buy gold.”

The U.S. and allies are increasing pressure on Iran to halt what they say may be a covert nuclear weapons program. Sanctions signed into law by President Barack Obama on Dec. 31 aim to deter dealings with the Iranian central bank, and the European Union is considering a ban on imports of oil from Iran, the world’s third-largest oil exporter. Iran denies seeking to develop atomic weapons.

Reserves Climb

Gold reserves increased in November at Belarus, Turkey, Tajikistan, Macedonia, Mauritius and Morocco, and declined in Mexico, according to data on the International Monetary Fund’s website. Turkey’s holdings increased to 5.758 million ounces from 4.429 million ounces and Mexico’s declined to 3.413 million ounces from 3.417 million ounces in October, the data showed. Morocco’s holdings were 710,000 ounces in November compared with 708,800 ounces in October, according to the data.

--With assistance from Ayesha Daya in Dubai and Madelene Pearson in Melbourne. Editors: Thomas Kutty Abraham, Cherian Thomas

To contact the reporter on this story: Swansy Afonso in Mumbai at safonso2@bloomberg.net

strong

Iran proposes new round of nuclear talks with 6 world powers as sanctions hit hard

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle-east/report-iran-to-propose-new-round-of-nuclear-talks-with-six-world-powers/2011/12/31/gIQANOIxRP_story.html

Iran proposes new round of nuclear talks with 6 world powers as sanctions hit hard

By Associated Press,

TEHRAN, Iran — Iran said Saturday it has proposed a new round of talks on its nuclear program with six world powers that have been trying for years to persuade Tehran to freeze aspects of its atomic work that could provide a possible pathway to weapons production.

The country’s top nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, said he has formally called on the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany to return to negotiations.


The invitation comes after new sanctions recently imposed by the West over Tehran’s enrichment of uranium, a process that produces fuel for reactors but which can also be used in making nuclear weapons. Iran insists it only has peaceful intentions, while the U.S. and many of its European allies suspect Iran of aiming to use a civilian nuclear energy program as a cover for developing a weapons capability.

The last round of negotiations between Iran and the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany was held in January in Istanbul, Turkey, but it ended in failure.

“We formally declared to them (the intent) to return to the path of dialogue for cooperation,” Jalili told Iranian diplomats in Tehran, according to the official IRNA news agency. Jalili did not say when or through what channel he issued the invitation.

Iran’s ambassador to Germany, Ali Reza Sheikh Attar, said earlier Saturday that Jalili was to send a letter soon to EU’s foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton to arrange a new round of talks.

A spokesman for Ashton said she had not yet received any new communication from Iran.

“As she has made clear in her statements on behalf of the (six nations), we continue to pursue our twin-track approach and are open for meaningful discussions on confidence-building measures, without preconditions from the Iranian side,” said the spokesman, Michael Mann.

The Iranian announcement was the latest signal from Tehran that the country is feeling the impact of international sanctions.

The U.N. has imposed four rounds of sanctions. Separately, the U.S. and the European Union have imposed their own tough economic and financial penalties.

Washington’s measures target exports of gasoline and other refined petroleum products to Iran and have banned U.S. banks from doing business with foreign banks that provide services to Iran’s Revolutionary Guard.

Last month, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad acknowledged that the current penalties were impeding Iran’s financial institutions, saying, “our banks cannot make international transactions anymore.”

And earlier in December, Iran reinstated an offer for U.N. nuclear agency officials to visit Tehran, though it did not say whether the International Atomic Energy Agency would be able to focus on suspicions that Iran is secretly working on nuclear arms — a key condition set by the agency.

The U.S. and Israel have not ruled out a military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities if Tehran doesn’t stop its nuclear program.

But Jalili warned Tehran would make any aggressor regret a decision to attack Iran.

“We will give a response that will make the aggressor regret any threat against the Islamic Republic of Iran,” Jalili said.

Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

U.S. in $3.5 billion arms sale to UAE amid Iran tensions


http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/31/us-usa-uae-iran-idUSTRE7BU0BF20111231

U.S. in $3.5 billion arms sale to UAE amid Iran tensions

By Jim Wolf

WASHINGTON | Sat Dec 31, 2011 10:42am EST

(Reuters) - The United States has signed a $3.5 billion sale of an advanced antimissile interception system to the United Arab Emirates, part of an accelerating military buildup of its friends and allies near Iran.

The deal, signed on December 25 and announced on Friday night by the U.S. Defense Department, "is an important step in improving the region's security through a regional missile defense architecture," Pentagon press secretary George Little said in a statement.

The U.S. Congress had been notified of the proposed sale in September 2008 by former President George W. Bush's administration. At that time, the system built by Lockheed Martin Corp had been projected to involve more missiles, more "fire control" units, more radar sets, all at a cost roughly twice as much to UAE.

It marks the first foreign sale of the so-called Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), the only system designed to destroy short- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles both inside and outside the Earth's atmosphere.

The United States, under the government-to-government deal, will deliver two THAAD batteries, 96 missiles, two Raytheon Co AN/TPY-2 radars plus 30 years of spare parts, support and training with contractor logistics support to the UAE, Little said.

"Acquisition of this critical defense system will bolster the UAE's air and missile defense capability and enhance the already robust ballistic missile defense cooperation between the United States and the UAE," he said.

Lockheed Martin did not immediately respond to a request for its delivery timetable for THAAD, part of a layered bulwark being built by the Obama administration in Europe and the Middle East against Iran's growing missile capabilities.

IRAN TENSIONS

UAE lies across the Gulf from Iran. The announcement of its purchase underlined rising tensions since a November 8 report from the U.N. nuclear watchdog that Iran appears to have worked on designing a nuclear bomb and may still be pursuing research to that end.

Iran delayed promised long-range missile tests in the Gulf on Saturday and signaled it was ready for fresh talks on its disputed nuclear program.

Tehran on Tuesday threatened to stop the flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz if it became the target of an oil embargo over its nuclear ambitions.

The THAAD follows a $1.7 billion direct commercial contract this year to upgrade Saudi Arabia's Patriot antimissile missiles, and a sale this year of 209 advanced Patriot missiles to Kuwait, valued at roughly $900 million, the Defense Department said.

On Thursday, the Obama administration announced it had sealed a deal on December 24 to sell $29.4 billion in advanced Boeing Co F-15 fighter jets to Saudi Arabia, the priciest single U.S. arms sale yet.

The Saudi sale involves 84 new F-15SA models to be delivered starting in 2015 plus upgrades to 70 F-15s already in the Saudi fleet and new munitions. Congress had been notified of that deal in October 2010.

The ongoing U.S. buildup of Saudi Arabia as a counterweight to Iran is projected to total as much as $60 billion over 10 to 15 years, including the F-15s, three types of helicopters and advanced missiles, bombs and other hardware and services.

Saudi Arabia was the biggest buyer of U.S. arms from January 1, 2007 through the end of 2010, with signed agreements totaling $13.8 billion, followed by the United Arab Emirates, with $10.4 billion, according to a December 15 report by Congressional Research Service analyst Richard Grimmett.

In another pending arms sale to the region, the Obama administration formally proposed in November to sell 600 "bunker buster" bombs and other munitions to UAE in an estimated $304 million package to counter what the Pentagon called current and future regional threats.

Israel, the closest U.S. regional partner, is also being built up. It is to get Lockheed Martin's new radar-evading F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jet, the first country in the region that will fly it. Israel views Iran's nuclear program as a threat to its existence.

Dennis Cavin, a Lockheed vice president for missile defense programs, told Reuters in August that, in scaling back their planned THAAD purchase, UAE officials had identified some elements "that they think they can do without right now."

Lockheed, the Pentagon's No. 1 supplier by sales, is being awarded an initial U.S. government contract worth up to $1.96 billion for the two THAAD batteries under the government-to-government sale to UAE, the Defense Department said in its contract digest on Friday. It said the work was to be carried out through June 30, 2016.

Raytheon's related deal is valued at up to $582.5 million for radars and services, with details expected to be finalized in June 2012, the digest said. It said Raytheon also was getting a Pentagon deal worth up to $363.9 million to start building two more AN/TPY-2 radar sets.

Lockheed Martin is pleased that the U.S. government and the United Arab Emirates have reached an agreement on the first foreign sale of the THAAD weapon system, Tom McGrath, a company vice president and program manager, said in a release.

"We look forward to working with our customers to deliver this important capability," he said.

(Reporting By Jim Wolf; Editing by Will Dunham)

Ron Paul: Sanctions against Iran are 'acts of war'


http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-ron-paul-sanctions-act-of-war20111229,0,4395532.story?track=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+latimes%2Fmostviewed+%28L.A.+Times+-+Most+Viewed+Stories%29


Ron Paul: Sanctions against Iran are 'acts of war'

By Paul West

December 29, 2011, 11:20 a.m.
Reporting from Perry, Iowa— Defending himself against charges of isolationism, Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul told voters in Iowa on Thursday that western sanctions against Iran are "acts of war" that are likely to lead to an actual war in the Middle East.

Paul, one of the leading contenders to win next week's Iowa caucuses, said Iran would be justified in responding to the sanctions by blocking the flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz. He compared the western sanctions to a hypothetical move by China to block the Gulf of Mexico, which Americans would consider an act of war.

He also said he would not respond militarily to keep the strait open—because he would not consider it an act of war against the U.S. But if he were president, he would report to Congress on the issue, leaving it up to lawmakers to declare war if they wanted.

"I think we're looking for trouble because we put these horrendous sanctions on Iran," Paul told a midday audience at the Hotel Pattee in Perry, Iowa. He said the Iranians are "planning to be bombed" and understandably would like to have a nuclear weapon, even though there is "no evidence whatsoever" that they have "enriched" uranium.

Apparently alluding to Israel and its nuclear-weapons arsenal, Paul said that "if I were an Iranian, I'd like to have a nuclear weapon, too, because you gain respect from them."

To approving applause from a crowd of about 125, the Texas congressman said that "we always seem to have to have a country to bash," linking the current saber-rattling against Iran to previous hawkish rhetoric that led to conflicts in Iraq, Libya and elsewhere.

"If you want to quiet things down," he said, referring to Iran, "don't put sanctions on them" because it's "just going to cause more trouble."

He said an Iranian blockade would be the most likely response to tighter sanctions because Iran has "no weapons of mass destruction" and shutting down the strait is "the most" it could do.

"I think the solution" to current tensions with Iran "is to do a lot less a lot sooner and mind our own business and then we would not have this threat of another war," he said to applause.

Reporting from Perry, Iowa— Defending himself against charges of isolationism, Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul told voters in Iowa on Thursday that western sanctions against Iran are "acts of war" that are likely to lead to an actual war in the Middle East.

Paul, one of the leading contenders to win next week's Iowa caucuses, said Iran would be justified in responding to the sanctions by blocking the flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz. He compared the western sanctions to a hypothetical move by China to block the Gulf of Mexico, which Americans would consider an act of war.

He also said he would not respond militarily to keep the strait open—because he would not consider it an act of war against the U.S. But if he were president, he would report to Congress on the issue, leaving it up to lawmakers to declare war if they wanted.

"I think we're looking for trouble because we put these horrendous sanctions on Iran," Paul told a midday audience at the Hotel Pattee in Perry, Iowa. He said the Iranians are "planning to be bombed" and understandably would like to have a nuclear weapon, even though there is "no evidence whatsoever" that they have "enriched" uranium.

Apparently alluding to Israel and its nuclear-weapons arsenal, Paul said that "if I were an Iranian, I'd like to have a nuclear weapon, too, because you gain respect from them."

To approving applause from a crowd of about 125, the Texas congressman said that "we always seem to have to have a country to bash," linking the current saber-rattling against Iran to previous hawkish rhetoric that led to conflicts in Iraq, Libya and elsewhere.

"If you want to quiet things down," he said, referring to Iran, "don't put sanctions on them" because it's "just going to cause more trouble."

He said an Iranian blockade would be the most likely response to tighter sanctions because Iran has "no weapons of mass destruction" and shutting down the strait is "the most" it could do.

"I think the solution" to current tensions with Iran "is to do a lot less a lot sooner and mind our own business and then we would not have this threat of another war," he said to applause.


Copyright © 2011, Los Angeles Times

U.S. touts Saudi Arabia fighter jet deal as a foreign policy, security and economic boon


http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/massive-us-saudi-arms-deal-seen-as-a-foreign-policy-security-and-economic-boon/2011/12/29/gIQATNWQPP_story.html

U.S. touts Saudi Arabia fighter jet deal as a foreign policy, security and economic boon

By Joby Warrick and Jason Ukman,

The Obama administration on Thursday hailed a new $30 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia as both a hedge against Iranian aggression in the Persian Gulf and an economic windfall that could create thousands of U.S. jobs over the next decade.


The agreement to sell 84 top-of-the line F-15SA fighter jets to the Saudi air force also provided a needed boost to U.S. relations with the oil-rich kingdom after months of strain over the White House’s response to the Arab Spring uprisings, U.S. officials and Middle East analysts said.

The deal, which was finalized after more than a year of negotiations, was announced during a week of increased tensions with Iran, which has renewed its threat to block ship traffic through the Strait of Hormuz in response to international economic sanctions. The administration has pursued a policy of supplying advanced weapons systems to friendly Arab states to keep Iran’s regional ambitions in check.


“This sale will send a strong message to countries in the region that the United States is committed to stability in the gulf and broader Middle East,” Andrew Shapiro, assistant secretary of state for political-military affairs, told reporters.

The deal — outlines of which were disclosed to Congress last year — also calls for refurbishing 70 F-15s currently in Saudi Arabia’s fighter fleet, as well as providing munitions, spare parts and training for Saudi pilots and air crews.

The deal comes at a time when the Pentagon is considering supplying “bunker-buster” bombs and other munitions to another key gulf ally, the United Arab Emirates.

U.S. officials said the timing of the announcement was unrelated to Iran’s recent provocations.

“Clearly, one of the threats that [the Saudis] — that they face, as well as other countries in the region — is Iran,” Shapiro said. “But . . . this is not solely directed toward Iran. This is directed toward meeting our partner Saudi Arabia’s defense needs.”

While not the newest U.S. fighter jet, the model of the F-15 being acquired by Saudi Arabia will be equipped with the latest computers, radars and electronic warfare systems and will be “one of the most capable aircraft in the world,” said James Miller, the Defense Department’s principal deputy undersecretary for policy.

U.S. officials also touted the deal’s impact at home, saying the production of the Boeing-built F-15s would support 50,000 American jobs.

“It will engage 600 suppliers in 44 states and provide $3.5 billion in annual economic impact to the U.S. economy,” Shapiro said. “This will support jobs not only in the aerospace sector but also in our manufacturing base and support chain, which are all crucial for sustaining our national defense.”

Saudi Arabia, which has a predominantly Sunni Muslim population, is the key regional rival to Shiite-dominated Iran, as well as a vital U.S. ally.

The Obama administration has sought to smooth relations with Riyadh after months of strain over U.S. support for democratic uprisings in the Middle East. Saudi leaders were particularly angered when the White House criticized the crackdown on a Shiite-led movement in the neighboring kingdom of Bahrain.

The initial notification of the arms sale to Saudi Arabia, in 2010, prompted concern about security implications for Israel. U.S. officials have sought to allay those concerns and said Thursday that the sale would not degrade Israel’s military advantage.

A libertarian-minded Republican: Not Jump the Gun Soon



http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-ron-paul-iran-iraq-20111215,0,3158409.story?track=rss

Ron Paul:
Strike against Iran would risk a repeat of 'useless' Iraq war

By Michael A. Memoli

December 15, 2011, 7:40 p.m.
Ron Paul did it again. The libertarian-minded Republican separated himself from the pack of candidates at tonight's debate by urging restraint in response to a possible Iranian nuclear threat, saying the U.S. can ill afford a repeat of its now-concluded war in Iraq.

Rep. Ron Paul of Texas speaks during Thursday's Republican presidential debate in Sioux City, Iowa. (Eric Gay / Associated Press / December 15, 2011)


Paul said there was "no U.N. evidence" that Iran is developing a nuclear weapons program, calling claims to the contrary "war propaganda."



"To me the greatest danger is that we will have a president that will overreact, and we will soon bomb Iran," he said. "We ought to really sit back and think, not jump the gun and believe that we are going to be attacked. That's how we got into that useless war in Iraq and lost so much."

Paul said it "makes more sense" to directly engage with Iran diplomatically. And he even praised President Obama for "wisely backing off on sanctions" against Iran, which he called overreaching.

"We have 12,000 diplomats in our services. We ought to use a little bit of diplomacy once in a while."

Rick Santorum and then Michele Bachmann rebutted Paul. Santorum equated the leadership of Iran to Al Qaeda and said that the U.S. should be ready to strike against Iran's nuclear facilities.

"We know without a shadow of a doubt that Iran will take a nuclear weapon, they will use it to wipe our ally, Israel, off the face fo the map," Bachmann said. "And they've stated they will use it against the United States of America. We would be fools and knaves to ignore their purpose and their plan."

On a question about a U.S. drone now in the hands of the Iranians, Mitt Romney had a chance to again focus on a potential general election fight. He said Obama was showing timidity by simply asking Iran to return the drone.

"A foreign policy based on 'pretty please'? You've got to be kidding me," he said.
Ron Paul did it again. The libertarian-minded Republican separated himself from the pack of candidates at tonight's debate by urging restraint in response to a possible Iranian nuclear threat, saying the U.S. can ill afford a repeat of its now-concluded war in Iraq.

Paul said there was "no U.N. evidence" that Iran is developing a nuclear weapons program, calling claims to the contrary "war propaganda."

"To me the greatest danger is that we will have a president that will overreact, and we will soon bomb Iran," he said. "We ought to really sit back and think, not jump the gun and believe that we are going to be attacked. That's how we got into that useless war in Iraq and lost so much."

Paul said it "makes more sense" to directly engage with Iran diplomatically. And he even praised President Obama for "wisely backing off on sanctions" against Iran, which he called overreaching.

"We have 12,000 diplomats in our services. We ought to use a little bit of diplomacy once in a while."

Rick Santorum and then Michele Bachmann rebutted Paul. Santorum equated the leadership of Iran to Al Qaeda and said that the U.S. should be ready to strike against Iran's nuclear facilities.

"We know without a shadow of a doubt that Iran will take a nuclear weapon, they will use it to wipe our ally, Israel, off the face fo the map," Bachmann said. "And they've stated they will use it against the United States of America. We would be fools and knaves to ignore their purpose and their plan."

On a question about a U.S. drone now in the hands of the Iranians, Mitt Romney had a chance to again focus on a potential general election fight. He said Obama was showing timidity by simply asking Iran to return the drone.

"A foreign policy based on 'pretty please'? You've got to be kidding me," he said.

Copyright © 2011, Los Angeles Times

پایان حضور نیروهای آمریکایی در عراق


http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-obama-fort-bragg-iraq-speech-20111214,0,4258660.story

At Ft. Bragg, Obama welcomes troops home from Iraq

By Peter Nicholas

December 14, 2011, 11:10 a.m.

Reporting from Fort Bragg, N.C.— President Obama celebrated the soldiers who fought the Iraq war on Wednesday, marking the fulfillment of a campaign promise to bring home all U.S. forces following a nearly nine-year conflict that killed more than 4,400 U.S. soldiers.


"So as your commander in chief, on behalf of a grateful nation, I'm proud to finally say these two words – and I know your families agree," the president said. "Welcome home. Welcome home. Welcome home. Welcome home."

Obama, standing before a sea of paratroopers wearing maroon berets, thanked the troops returning from Iraq and hailed the country's steps toward creating an independent, democratic state.

"Now Iraq is not a perfect place," said Obama, standing at a lectern set up in an airplane hangar. "It has many challenges ahead. But we are leaving behind a sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq, with a representative government that was elected by its people."

He was introduced by the first lady, a rare joint appearance borne of Michelle Obama's work finding jobs for military veterans.

In his remarks, President Obama largely ignored the furor over the war's origins under the Bush administration.

He made only the briefest mention of the "great controversy here at home …"

Instead, he kept a tight rhetorical focus on the sacrifices and victories of those who fought. He made no mention of the Iraqi dead, estimated to be more than 100,000.


Obama's political identity was shaped by the Iraq war. One way he distinguished himself from Hillary Rodham Clinton during the 2008 Democratic nomination contest was by underscoring his early opposition to the U.S. invasion. Clinton had voted to authorize the war while serving in the U.S. Senate. Obama, as an Illinois state senator, delivered a speech in 2002 calling the imminent invasion "dumb."

Now commander in chief, he reminisced about key milestones in the war and said there is "something profound about the end of a war that has lasted so long."

"We remember the early days," he continued, "the American units that streaked across the sands and skies of Iraq," he said. "In battles from Karbala to Baghdad, American troops breaking the back of a brutal dictator in less than a month."

That was a reference to Saddam Hussein, who was captured and later hanged by the Iraqi government. Obama described Hussein in similar terms his 2002 address. But in that speech, he said Hussein posed no threat to the U.S. or Iraq's neighbors and could be successfully "contained" through international pressure.

He didn't relive that history on Wednesday. The war, he said, achieved America's strategic aims.

Interrupted by frequent chants of "Hooah!" Obama said that "everything that American troops have done in Iraq – all the fighting and all the dying, bleeding and building, training and partnering – all of it has led us to this moment of success."

As a backdrop for the speech, the White House chose a heavily populated base that is rich in political and military symbolism. A total of 202 Ft. Bragg service members were killed in Iraq. The base is also home to Green Berets who were among the first troops to enter Iraq at the start of the war in 2003.

Beyond that, Ft. Bragg sits in North Carolina, one of the major battlegrounds of the 2012 presidential campaign. Obama barely won the state in 2008 and has visited repeatedly since taking office – most recently in a bus tour in October.

In advance of Obama's arrival, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney wrote an op-ed published in the Fayetteville Observer criticizing the president's economic record.

"Every one of the men and women who have just come back from overseas has a future to look forward to," Romney wrote. " Right now, unfortunately, that future is bleak. Those who will be leaving the service will need to find jobs. Yet jobs are extraordinarily hard to find."

One expert estimated Obama's chances of winning North Carolina next year as "certainly less than 50-50."

David Rohde, a political science professor at Duke University, said that Obama's ratings have suffered because of the sour economy, though he added the state remains "competitive."

"By competing here and trying to win, he [Obama] at least compels the Republicans to allocate time and resources here, as well," Rohde said.

Campaign advisors believe that ending the war is a major point in Obama's favor. Polls showed Americans were tired of the conflict and wanted it over.

A new NBC-Wall Street Journal poll rated the end of the Iraq war as Obama's second-biggest accomplishment, next to killing Osama bin Laden.

Anticipating Romney's argument, Obama said he is striving to improve conditions for returning troops.

"We've worked with Congress to pass a tax credit so that companies have an incentive to hire vets," he said. "And Michelle has worked with the private sector to get commitments to create 100,000 jobs for those who've served."

"Hooah!" the paratroopers shouted.
Reporting from Fort Bragg, N.C.— President Obama celebrated the soldiers who fought the Iraq war on Wednesday, marking the fulfillment of a campaign promise to bring home all U.S. forces following a nearly nine-year conflict that killed more than 4,400 U.S. soldiers.

 


تغییر سیایت اوباما از "غیرقابل قبول"بودن ایران هسته‌ای به سد نفوذ


http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obamas-iran-policy-containment_611948.html

Obama's Iran Policy: Containment
9:31 AM, Dec 12, 2011 • By DANIEL HALPER

Michael Makovsky and Blaise Misztal write in the Washington Post that President Obama is now trying only to contain Iran:

As recent events underscore the growing Iranian nuclear threat, the Obama administration appears to be pivoting toward a policy of containment. The emphasis of its rhetoric has shifted from preventing an “unacceptable” nuclear Iran to “isolating” it. When coupled with recent weaker action against Iran, we fear it signals a tacit policy change.

The authors go on to argue that the Obama administration should be using "all elements of American power" to deal with Iran, since containment won't work:

The administration’s alternative to prevention — isolation — implies containment. But a nuclear Iran could not be contained as the Soviet Union was. Containment requires credibility, a resource United States will have drained if, after numerous warnings to the contrary, we permit Tehran to cross the nuclear threshold. And no matter how isolated, a nuclear Iran is likely to spark a destabilizing cascade of proliferation. Despite its own isolation, North Korea shares its nuclear technology. Iran might, too. Tehran’s enemies, led by Saudi Arabia, would seek safety behind their own nuclear deterrent. And Iran and Israel, as former defense undersecretary Eric Edelman has argued, would have incentives to initiate a nuclear first strike, potentially dragging the United States into the conflict. All this would severely diminish U.S. influence and drive up oil prices.

Tom Donnelly, likewise, identifies Obama's containment policy, but says it's "a very mild form of containment, one that imposes few costs on the Islamic Republic." Donnelly concludes:

In the after-midnight hour when the Obama retreat is complete, the United States would find itself with few options at the chiming of the nuclear clock. Containing and deterring a nuclear Iran would be a long, costly, and risky endeavor, and a task made immensely more difficult by the withdrawals from Iraq and Afghanistan and by the large cuts that will cripple the U.S. military. Time is short​—​but there is still time, and not simply to prepare for the extraordinary danger of a nuclear Iran, but to avert it.

وزیر دفاع آمریکا در افغانستان اعلام کرد: به عملیات خود در ادامه خواهیم داد!


http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hx3z-zDqBMQhpIomueMa52Ng7RJg?docId=CNG.d1c14754f585e752b4e73771c6fc1b86.1b1


Afghanistan 'does not want role in US-Iran hostilities'


By Mathieu Rabechault (AFP) 

KABUL — Afghan territory should not be used in a proxy war between the United States and Iran, President Hamid Karzai said Wednesday after the Islamic republic captured a US drone.

Karzai was speaking in Kabul after an hour-long meeting with US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, who nevertheless said the US would continue to pursue "important intelligence operations".

The bat-winged RQ-170 Sentinel, a stealth drone designed to evade radar for surveillance flights, was launched from Afghanistan on a CIA spying mission when it went missing, US officials have said.

"Afghanistan should maintain and has maintained a very friendly relationship with Iran so we don't want to be involved in any adversarial relation between Iran and the US," Karzai said.

"Afghanistan wishes that its sovereignty and territorial integrity is not used one against the other."

But Panetta said such intelligence operations would continue.

"Those are operations that I will not discuss publicly, other than to say that part of our efforts to defend this country and to defend our country involves important intelligence operations which will continue to pursue," he said.


Afghanistan has long been used as a pawn in battles between other nations, including the US and the Soviet Union during the Cold War, and suicide attacks on Shiites on December 6 which killed at least 84 people threatened to open up another divide.

The drone episode has handed Iran a propaganda coup and Iranian state television has shown images of a robotic aircraft that experts say resembles the Sentinel.

Kabul is negotiating a strategic partnership deal with Washington which will define the terms of the US military presence in Afghanistan after the withdrawal of combat troops in 2014.

And Karzai has said a condition of the deal will be that the US does not use its territory against its enemies in the region.

But Iran has voiced its objections to the continued presence of international forces in Afghanistan after NATO combat troops pull out in 2014.

Panetta is in Afghanistan to review the war effort with the United States, which is on track to recall 33,000 troops by the end of the next year and is shifting its focus to an advisory role in training Afghan security forces.

He said the discussions with Karzai included how to work with Pakistan to increase security in Afghanistan and repeated his belief that 2011 has represented a "very important turning point" in Afghanistan.

"As always, we have not won until we have completed the mission, but I do believe we're in the process of making significant progress here," he said.

Earlier Panetta told US troops based in the eastern province of Paktika near the Pakistan border they were winning the 10-year war.

"We're moving in the right direction and we're winning this very tough conflict," he said.

Panetta said it was important to make sure Pakistan could secure its side of the border so that Haqqani militants were not allowed safe havens.

"Bottom line is that it is complicated, it is complex, we have some difficult issues to deal with but at the same time it's important to maintain a relationship with Pakistan because we are confronting a common enemy."

America's alliance with Pakistan is in crisis over NATO strikes that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers near the Afghan border on November 26.

Islamabad has shut the US supply line into landlocked Afghanistan and forced Americans to leave a base widely reported to have been a hub for CIA drones.

As the United States draws the curtain on its eight-year venture in Iraq, Washington is determined to bring an end to the Afghan war as soon as possible.

The United States is withdrawing 10,000 troops this year, leaving 91,000 on the ground into 2012. Another 23,000 are to leave by the end of September 2012.

That will mark the end of the "surge" ordered by President Barack Obama in late 2009 in a bid to reverse the Taliban insurgency, defeat Al-Qaeda and speed up an end to the war, and will leave 68,000 US forces on the ground.

Karzai recently announced a second phase of transition which will see Afghans take charge of six provinces, seven provincial capitals and more than 40 districts, including three in the southern province of Helmand, one of the most deadly in the conflict.

Despite the tight timetable, the military and the United Nations disagree over the extent to which violence is really falling in Afghanistan.

The world body said the number of civilians who were killed increased by 15 percent in the first six months of this year.

Karzai said overall stability had improved. But, speaking of ongoing attacks, he added: "What we have not fully done yet is to provide individual security to the Afghan people."

دیک‌چنی: آمریکا باید با حملة هوایی به ایران،‌ پهپاد تجسسی را نابود می‌کرد!



http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/World/Story/STIStory_744381.html


 US should have destroyed drone downed in Iran: Cheney

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Former vice-president Dick Cheney said on Monday that President Barack Obama should have ordered an air strike to quickly destroy a US drone that was downed in Iran this month.


'The right response to that would have been to go in immediately after it had gone down and destroy it,' Mr Cheney said an interview with CNN, according to excerpts released by the network.

'You can do that from the air. You can do that with a quick air strike. And, in effect, make it impossible for them to benefit from having captured that drone,' Mr Cheney told CNN's Erin Burnett OutFront program.

Mr Cheney, known as a hawk on foreign policy and outspoken critic of the current president, also alleged Mr Obama was presented with three possible courses of action and declined all of them. 'I was told that the president had three options on his desk. He rejected all of them,' Mr Cheney said, without offering more details.

----------------------------------------

http://www.khq.com/story/16314497/cheney-rips-obama-over-iran-drone-capture

Cheney Rips Obama Over Iran Drone Capture

WASHINGTON (AP) - Former Vice President Dick Cheney says Iraqi leaders have progressed toward a stable society, but he's worried about the failure of Washington and Baghdad to negotiate a "stay-behind" U.S. force there.

Cheney says the emerging democracy is "not perfect by any means, but they clearly are much better off than when Saddam Hussein was in charge."

Cheney tells CBS's "The Early Show" the Iraqi government is still working to organize. On Iran, he says the Obama administration hasn't done enough to inhibit Tehran from developing
a nuclear program, and says Iran is trying to become the dominant power in the region. He calls the downed U.S. drone in Iran "a significant intelligence loss" and says he thinks the administration should have considered going in and "taking out the drone."

اوباما خواهان عودت هواپیمای جاسوسی آمریکا شد!!!


http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iPtU83mS28aLN20K9rZV_kRTv1MA?docId=CNG.908b271c4ec03309357a9d96165f22d0.171

Obama demands Iran return downed US drone

(AFP) 

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama on Monday acknowledged a US drone was in Iranian hands for the first time and said the United States has asked Tehran to return the sophisticated spycraft.

"We've asked for it back. We'll see how the Iranians respond," Obama said at a news conference with Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki.


It was the first open confirmation by the Obama administration that Iran was in possession of the drone, which Tehran says it brought down as the plane was flying over the country's territory.

Obama, however, shed no further light on the plane's mission or why it failed to return to a base in Afghanistan.

"With respect to the drone inside of Iran, I'm not going to comment on intelligence matters that are classified," he said.

The bat-winged RQ-170 Sentinel, designed to evade radar for surveillance flights, was on a CIA mission when it went missing, US officials, speaking anonymously, have said previously.

The episode has handed Iran a propaganda coup and Iranian state television has shown images of a robotic aircraft that experts say resembles the Sentinel.

Iran has vowed to reverse engineer the drone but has given contradictory accounts of how the aircraft went down on December 4. Tehran initially said it shot down the drone but later claimed the Iranian military managed to hack into the plane's flight controls.


US officials have expressed skepticism that Iran has the technological capacity to have brought the plane down through hacking and that it was more likely the drone suffered a malfunction.

Other American drones have flown off-course in the past, including the Fire Scout robotic helicopter, which engineers lost contact with during a flight in Maryland in 2010.

Military commanders at one point considered shooting the helicopter down as it was heading towards the US capital but technicians managed to gain back control over the aircraft.

US officials and analysts also have cast doubt over Iran's ability to replicate the drone -- at least without the help of Russia or China.

"US capabilities are remarkably advanced, and it's unclear that the Iranians have the expertise" to exploit the advanced technology -- including sensors -- in the aircraft, a US official speaking to AFP on condition of anonymity said recently.

(AFP)

پیشگویی باراک در مورد اسد

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle-east/israeli-minister-says-end-of-assad-would-be-blessing-calls-for-pressure-on-iran/2011/12/11/gIQAjsmOnO_story.html?wprss=rss_world

Israeli minister says end of Assad would be ‘blessing,’ calls for pressure on Iran

By Associated Press,

VIENNA — Israel’s defense minister urged the world on Sunday to apply “paralyzing” sanctions on Iran’s energy sector and leadership, but didn’t comment about whether his country is ready to strike Tehran to cripple its alleged efforts to make nuclear arms.


Ehud Barak also described the Arab Spring that has swept regional despots from power in the Mideast and Africa as an “extremely moving” manifestation of mass striving for democracy, and he predicted that Syrian President Bashar Assad would be toppled within weeks.

Barak spoke on the final day of the three-day World Policy Conference in Vienna, which also showed that relations between Turkey and Israel remain strained following last year’s Israeli raid on a Gaza-bound flotilla that killed eight Turkish citizens and a Turkish-American.

The annual conference aims to bring together policy makers from different sectors to debate some of the world’s more pressing concerns and attempt to advance solutions.

Regarding Assad’s clique, Barak said during a question-and-answer session at the conference, “The falling down of this family is a blessing for the Middle East.”

He said he expects Syria’s relatively secular society to remain that way in any post-Assad scenario. At the same time, Barak said the Mideast turmoil over the short term could result in more influence for Islamic radicals, which would be “quite disturbing for the region.”

The Arab region’s democratic upheavals and Iran are among Israel’s most pressing security concerns. The Jewish state is particularly keen to preserve an alliance with Egypt that is a cornerstone of Mideast stability, but relations between the two countries have become strained since a popular uprising toppled Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in February.

The storming of Israel’s Cairo embassy in September and a strong showing by Islamist parties in Egypt’s elections have fueled fears in Israel about future ties between the two countries.

Israel and Egypt signed a U.S.-brokered peace treaty in 1979, the first between Israel and an Arab state. The agreement has allowed Israel to divert resources to its volatile fronts with Lebanon, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Egypt has benefited by receiving billions of dollars in U.S. military aid.

Iran’s nuclear progress — and fears that it is secretly working on atomic arms — is perhaps an even greater worry.

Israeli officials have recently toned down increasingly strident warnings that their country may be planning to strike at Iran’s nuclear facilities in an attempt to cripple a program that can be used both for civilian and military purposes. But they say force remains an option, if diplomacy fails to end Tehran’s nuclear defiance.

On Sunday, Barak avoided mentioning the military option, telling the meeting he thinks there still is “time for urgent, coherent, paralyzing sanctions” on Iran’s leadership and its energy sector, effectively throttling exports and imports of oil and related products by Tehran.

Adding to Iran’s burden of already existing U.N. and national sanctions, the U.S. and the European Community have been tightening the net of economic punishments targeting Tehran in recent weeks.

The European Union recently imposed sanctions on nearly 150 Iranian companies and dozens of individuals and is examining the feasibility of additional measures that could include restrictions on oil imports and gasoline exports to and from Iran.

Tehran denies seeking nuclear arms. But reflecting regional concerns, Saudi Prince Turki al-Faisal recently warned that his country could someday consider making its own atomic weapons, if stuck between nuclear arsenals in Iran and Israel.

Israel does not comment on the widely held presumption that it has such weapons, and Barak kept to that practice Sunday.

But he warned that an Iran with nuclear weapons “will start the countdown toward a terrible vision:” other nations in the region — and radicals like Hamas in Palestine or Hezbollah in Lebanon — acquiring their own arsenals.

Barak and Turkish President Abdullah Gul were the most prominent guests at the conference and they appeared to steer clear of each other, reflecting tensions between their nations.

Turkish media reported that Gul stayed away from the group photo session before the conference to avoid Barak.

In response, Barak walked out as Gul prepared to make his speech on Friday. Gul then boycotted the dinner given by Austrian president to avoid Barak again and instead he attended prayers at a mosque in Vienna.

Barak acknowledged the two nations remain unable “to iron out” their differences.

Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Drone that crashed in Iran may give away U.S. secrets


http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-1206-drone-iran-20111206,0,928838.story


Drone that crashed in Iran may give away U.S. secrets

The Sentinel drone has cutting-edge stealth and surveillance technology that other nations could exploit. One of the aircraft crashed in Iran, and a U.S. official says it was on a CIA mission.

By W.J. Hennigan, David S. Cloud and Ken Dilanian, Los Angeles Times

December 6, 2011

Reporting from Los Angeles and Washington— The radar-evading drone that crash-landed over the weekend in Iran was on a mission for the CIA, according to a senior U.S. official, raising fears that the aircraft's sophisticated technology could be exploited by Tehran or shared with other American rivals.

It was unclear whether the drone's mission took it over Iran or whether it strayed there accidentally because of technical malfunctions, the official said.


Though the drone flight was a CIA operation, U.S. military personnel were involved in flying the aircraft, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the secrecy involved.

The jet-powered, bat-winged RQ-170 Sentinel drone is considered one of the most advanced in the U.S. arsenal, with stealth technology and sophisticated computer systems that enable it to penetrate deep into hostile territory without detection.

Its capabilities were demonstrated during the raid on Osama bin Laden's compound in Pakistan, where it provided surveillance of the operation.

The aircraft's full abilities are a closely guarded secret, and the Pentagon has not revealed its price tag, size or top speed. But it has acknowledged this: The Sentinel may now be in Iranian hands.

"I think we're always concerned when there's an aircraft, whether it's manned or unmanned, that we lose, particularly in a place where we're not able to get to it," Navy Capt. John Kirby, a Pentagon spokesman, said to reporters Monday.

Peter W. Singer, author of "Wired for War," a book about robotic warfare, said it's not new to have drones downed in enemy territory, but the RQ-170 represents the next generation of drone aircraft.

"It carries a variety of systems that wouldn't be much of a benefit to Iran, but to its allies such as China and Russia, it's a potential gold mine," Singer said.

Other aviation experts weren't so sure.

"I don't think this is a dagger pointed at the heart of democracy," said Loren Thompson, defense policy analyst for the Lexington Institute in Arlington, Va. "A lot of information about this aircraft was already known by foreign military intelligence officials."

On Sunday, Iran's armed forces said they brought down a Sentinel drone that violated the country's airspace along the eastern border. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization's U.S.-led force in neighboring Afghanistan said Iranian authorities might be referring to an unarmed U.S. reconnaissance plane that went missing during a mission in western Afghanistan late last week, but did not confirm what kind of aircraft was downed.

The NATO force's statement was ambiguous about who was flying the aircraft.

"The operators of the UAV [unmanned aerial vehicle] lost control of the aircraft and had been working to determine its status," the statement said.

Spokesmen for the CIA, White House, Pentagon and congressional intelligence oversight committees declined to comment.

Although the Sentinel's capabilities remain largely classified, it is believed to carry the latest in cutting-edge cameras and sensors that can "listen in" on cellphone conversations as it soars miles above the ground or "smell" the air and sniff out chemical plumes emanating from a potential underground nuclear laboratory.

Ever since it was developed at Lockheed Martin Corp.'s famed Skunk Works facility in Palmdale, the Sentinel drone has been cloaked in tight secrecy by the U.S. government. But now the drone that the Iranian military claims to have brought down for invading its airspace might be made far more public than the Pentagon or Lockheed ever intended.

Another U.S. official with access to intelligence said that losing the Sentinel is a major security breach. The official, who was not authorized to publicly speak about the information, wouldn't say how the drone fell into Iranian hands, but confirmed that the downed drone was largely intact.

"It's bad — they'll have everything" in terms of the secret technology in the aircraft, the official said. "And the Chinese or the Russians will have it too."


Copyright © 2011, Los Angeles Times

Lockheed Martin RQ-170 Sentinel

Lockheed Martin RQ-170 Sentinel

Cyberattack to bring down U.S. surveillance drone


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/checkpoint-washington/post/iranian-cyber-attack-unlikely-to-have-brought-down-us-drone-experts-say/2011/12/05/gIQAuo20WO_blog.html?wprss=checkpoint-washington

Iran unlikely to have used cyberattack to bring down U.S. surveillance drone, experts say
By Ellen Nakashima

There are many mysteries involved in the crash of a U.S. surveillance drone in Iran. Among them: What could have brought it down?


Defense officials said Monday they had no indication that it was shot down. Iran’s semiofficial Fars New Agency, meanwhile, has claimed the drone was “downed with help from the Iranian military’s electronic warfare unit.”

But experts say that explanation strains credulity.

Such an attack would be extremely difficult to execute, especially with an aircraft such as the RQ-170, the model believed to have gone down in eastern Iran. Although the Air Force acknowledged the existence of the drone in 2009, very little is known about its technical attributes. Its operational use has not been described publicly.

“It’s pretty tough to get into them in cyber and even tougher to tell them, ‘Go crash,’ ” said one expert who was not authorized to speak for the record about sensitive systems.

Experts said the primary communications antennas on the RQ-170 are on top of the aircraft, which makes it less susceptible to being hacked. If hackers wanted to intercept or modify the signal, they would have had to have been near the signal’s “footprint.”

That seems unlikely, experts said, given that the RQ-170 has a special coating designed to help it avoid detection by enemy radar.

And even if all of those obstacles could be overcome, experts said, it’s unlikely that they would be overcome by Iran.

The Islamic Republic does have a cyberwar unit. But that unit’s capabilities are believed to lag far behind those of countries including the United States, Russia, Israel and China.

”If this happened, it is a 95 percent chance that it just malfunctioned,” one senior Pentagon official said. “There are a lot of things that can fail.”



Lockheed Martin RQ-170 Sentinel


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_RQ-170_Sentinel

Lockheed Martin RQ-170 Sentinel

The RQ-170 Sentinel is an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) developed by Lockheed Martin and operated by the United States Air Force (USAF). It has been deployed to Afghanistan as part of Operation Enduring Freedom.

Development

The RQ-170 Sentinel was developed by Lockheed Martin's Skunk Works as a stealth Unmanned Aerial Vehicle [UAV]. Journalists have noted design similarities between the RQ-170 and previous stealth and UAV programs such as the RQ-3 DarkStar and Polecat.[1][2] It is a tail-less flying wing aircraft with pods, presumably for sensors or SATCOMs, built into the upper surface of each wing. Few details of the UAV's characteristics have been released, but estimates of its wingspan range from approximately 65 feet (20 m)[3] to between 75 feet (23 m) and 90 feet (27 m).[4]

The "RQ" designation indicates that the RQ-170 Sentinel does not carry weapons.[5] Aviation Week's David A. Fulghum believes that the UAV is probably a "tactical, operations-oriented platform and not a strategic intelligence-gathering design".[3]

The USAF confirmed the "grainy photos of a gray, flying-wing-typed unmanned airplane near Kandahar Airfield"[6] Since then, this has been known as "The Beast of Kandahar." in relation to the discussion of the RQ-170 Sentinel on 4 December 2009.[3][7] A USAF colonel subsequently commented that RQ-170 is separate from the MQ-X program, which has yet to determine stealth or powerplant requirements, and thus the Sentinel will not replace the MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper drones currently in service.[8] As of May 2011, the US Military had not released any statements concerning the Sentinel since December 2009.[9]

Design

The RQ-170 has a flying wing design containing a single (as yet unknown) engine and is estimated by Aviation Week as being approximately 66 feet in wingspan.[10] Its takeoff weight is estimated as being greater than the RQ-3 DarkStar's, which was 8,500 pounds. The design lacks several elements common to stealth engineering, namely notched landing gear doors and sharp leading edges. It has a curved wing planform, and the exhaust is not shielded by the wing.[10] Aviation Week postulates that these elements suggest the designers have avoided 'highly sensitive technologies' due to the near certainty of eventual operational loss inherent with a single engine design and a desire to avoid the risk of compromising leading edge technology.[10] The publication also suggests that the medium-grey color implies a mid-altitude ceiling, unlikely to exceed 50,000 feet since a higher ceiling would normally be painted darker for best concealment.[10] The postulated weight and ceiling parameters suggests the possible use of a General Electric TF34 engine or a variant in the airframe.[10]


On the basis of the few publicly-available photographs of the RQ-170, aviation expert Bill Sweetman has assessed that the UAV is equipped with an electro-optical/infrared sensor and possibly an Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar mounted in its belly fairing. He has also speculated that the two fairings over the UAV's wings may house datalinks and that the belly and above wing fairings could be designed for modular payloads, allowing the UAV to be used for strike missions and electronic warfare.[11]

Operational history

The 30th Reconnaissance Squadron operates RQ-170 Sentinels. This squadron, which is based at Tonopah Test Range Airport in Nevada, was activated on 1 September 2005. RQ-170 Sentinels have been deployed to Afghanistan, where one was sighted at Kandahar International Airport in late 2007.[3] This sighting, and the Sentinel's secret status at the time, led Bill Sweetman to dub it the "Beast of Kandahar".[13] The UAV being deployed to Afghanistan, despite the Taliban having no radar, has led to speculation that the aircraft is being used to spy on Pakistan or Iran.[14][15]

In December 2009, South Korea's JoongAng Daily newspaper reported that the RQ-170 Sentinel had been test-flown in South Korea for the past few months and that it was expected that they would be permanently deployed in 2010 to replace Lockheed U-2 reconnaissance aircraft operating from Osan Air Base.[16] In response to this report, Bill Sweetman argued that the Sentinel's deployments to Afghanistan and South Korea were probably undertaken to monitor Pakistan and North Korea's ballistic missile programs.[17]

In August 2010 it was reported that RQ-170s either had been or were about to be redeployed to Afghanistan and that the UAVs had been fitted with a full motion video capability.[18] The missions performed by these aircraft included flying dozens of high altitude sorties over Pakistan to monitor a compound in the town of Abbottabad where terrorist leader Osama bin Laden was believed to be living. On the night of 1/2 May 2011 at least one RQ-170 monitored the area while elements of the United States Naval Special Warfare Development Group launched an assault on the compound which resulted in bin Laden's death. The aircraft provided footage of the attack which was watched live by President Barack Obama and his senior national security advisors. The RQ-170 also monitored Pakistani military radio transmissions in the area to provide warning of the response to the attack.[19] On 27 May the Los Angeles Times reported that Pakistani officials were "alarmed" by the use of the RQ-170 over their country as the drones are "designed to evade radar and other surveillance systems, and can be used as a spy plane".[20]

There have been a number of reports, which the New York Times describes as "unconfirmed", that RQ-170s have operated over Iran during 2011 to spy on the country's missile and nuclear programs.[21] On 4 December 2011, Iran's semi-official Fars News Agency reported that the country's armed forces had shot down an RQ-170 that violated Iranian airspace along its eastern border and captured the lightly damaged wreckage of the UAV. This and subsequent reports did not include any footage to substantiate this claim. The US military released a statement acknowledging that it had lost control of a UAV during the previous week, claiming that it was "flying a mission over western Afghanistan" when control was lost. The statement did not specify the model of the aircraft. The US military also stated that it was still investigating the cause of the loss.[22] The Iranian Government has claimed to have shot down American UAVs on several occasions, but has not produced any evidence to support these claims.[23]

Mysterious blasts, slayings suggest covert efforts in Iran

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iran-bomb-20111205,0,7550482.story



Mysterious blasts, slayings suggest covert efforts in Iran
Attacks targeting nuclear scientists and sites lead some observers to believe that the U.S. and Israel are trying to derail Iran's programs.

By Ken Dilanian, Los Angeles Times

December 4, 2011, 7:29 p.m.
Reporting from Washington— At an Iranian military base 30 miles west of Tehran, engineers were working on weapons that the armed forces chief of staff had boasted could give Israel a "strong punch in the mouth."

But then a huge explosion ripped through the Revolutionary Guard Corps base on Nov. 12, leveling most of the buildings. Government officials said 17 people were killed, including a founder of Iran's ballistic missile program, Gen. Hassan Tehrani Moghaddam.

Iranian officials called the blast an accident. Perhaps it was.

Decades of international sanctions have left Iran struggling to obtain technology and spare parts for military programs and commercial industries, leading in some cases to dangerous working conditions.

However, many former U.S. intelligence officials and Iran experts believe that the explosion — the most destructive of at least two dozen unexplained blasts in the last two years — was part of a covert effort by the U.S., Israel and others to disable Iran's nuclear and missile programs. The goal, the experts say, is to derail what those nations fear is Iran's quest for nuclear weapons capability and to stave off an Israeli or U.S. airstrike to eliminate or lessen the threat.


"It looks like the 21st century form of war," said Patrick Clawson, who directs the Iran Security Initiative at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a Washington think tank. "It does appear that there is a campaign of assassinations and cyber war, as well as the semi-acknowledged campaign of sabotage."

Or perhaps not. Any such operation would be highly classified, and those who might know aren't talking. The result is Washington's latest national security parlor game — trying to figure out who, if anyone, is responsible for the unusual incidents.

For years, the U.S. and its allies have sought to hinder Iran's weapons programs by secretly supplying faulty parts, plans or software, former intelligence officials say. No proof of sabotage has emerged, but Iran's nuclear program clearly has hit obstacles that thwarted progress in recent years.

"We definitely are doing that," said Art Keller, a former CIA case officer who worked on Iran. "It's pretty much the stated mission of the [CIA's] counter-proliferation division to do what it takes to slow … Iran's weapons of mass destruction program."

Iran insists that its nuclear program is for civilian purposes only.

Many Western experts are convinced that American and Israeli engineers secretly fed the Stuxnet computer worm into Iran's nuclear program in 2010. The virus reportedly caused centrifuges used to enrich uranium to spin out of control and shatter. Neither the U.S. nor Israeli government has acknowledged any role in the apparent cyber-attack.

Nor did anyone claim responsibility after two senior nuclear physicists were killed, and a third wounded, by bombs attached to their cars or nearby motorcycles in January and November last year.

Militants waving pictures of one of the slain scientists stormed the British Embassy in Tehran last week, setting fires and causing extensive damage. Several European countries recalled their envoys from Iran after the British government closed its embassy and expelled Iranian diplomats from London.

Like the deaths, the explosions have drawn special scrutiny in the think tanks of Washington, where Iran watchers have tracked reports of unexplained blasts in Iranian gas pipelines, oil installations and military facilities.

In October, Iranian news services reported three such explosions in a 24-hour period. The blasts killed two people. Another large blast was reported last week in Esfahan, Iran's third-largest city.

Some analysts suspect that the CIA and Israel's intelligence agency, Mossad, are involved, with possible help from the MEK, a fringe Iranian group that the State Department lists as a terrorist organization, although it has many allies in Washington's foreign policy establishment. Based in Iraq, the group is believed to have links to dissident networks inside Iran.

Iran claims to have arrested dozens of CIA informants in recent months, and U.S. officials acknowledge that a handful of informants in Iran have been exposed. What they did, or where, is unknown. In October, U.S. officials announced that they had uncovered an Iranian plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington.

Some analysts caution against assuming the CIA is orchestrating all the attacks in Iran, arguing it gives U.S. intelligence far too much credit. But that doesn't preclude U.S. support for allied spy services in Europe and the Middle East that also target Iran. Still, there is more speculation at this point than hard evidence.

A cyber expert who works closely with U.S. intelligence said he is convinced that Israel, not the U.S., launched the Stuxnet attack because U.S. government lawyers would not approve use of a computer virus that could spread far beyond the intended target, as Stuxnet apparently did. That caution, of course, presumes the lawyers knew the virus would spread, and that's not clear. The expert would not speak publicly about classified matters.

Whether the White House would authorize the targeted killing of Iranian scientists is far from certain. An executive order signed by President Reagan in 1981 prohibits direct or indirect involvement in assassinations, although the term is not defined.

President Obama has authorized the killing of Al Qaeda members and other suspected militants, including at least one U.S. citizen in Yemen.

Some analysts claim that the U.S. would not back a bombing campaign that has killed Iranian workers at oil refineries and other civilian sites. It would amount to sponsoring terrorism, a charge Washington regularly levels at Tehran.

"I do not believe that the U.S. has participated in either attacking scientists or physical attacks against Iranian nuclear facilities," said Greg Thielmann, a former State Department intelligence official who helped expose the faulty intelligence cited by the George W. Bush administration before the 2003 invasion of Iraq. "Selling them bad parts, introducing malware — that does seem to me within the realm of what one might expect from U.S. intelligence activities."

Reuel Marc Gerecht, a former CIA operative who specialized on Iran, said he doesn't believe that the CIA could mount a sophisticated covert campaign of sabotage inside Iran, where the U.S. has not had an embassy since 1979. Gerecht long has urged the CIA to mount more aggressive operations against Iran.

"I just think trying to maintain and run a paramilitary covert action group inside Iran is beyond America's covert capacity," he said.

Whatever the cause, headlines about unsolved killings, unexplained explosions and sinister computer viruses have rattled Iranians, especially those who work in the nuclear program, analysts said.

Perhaps that's the point.

"All these things have a profound effect," Clawson said. "You have to watch your back when you go to work. You're not certain what's going to happen when you turn on your computer. You're not certain whether you can talk to your colleagues."

ken.dilanian@latimes.com


Did Conficker help sabotage Iran program


 http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/02/us-cybersecurity-iran-idUSTRE7B10AP20111202

Insight: Did Conficker help sabotage Iran program

By Jim Finkle

Fri Dec 2, 2011 6:46pm EST

(Reuters) - A cyber warfare expert claims he has linked the Stuxnet computer virus that attacked Iran's nuclear program in 2010 to Conficker, a mysterious "worm" that surfaced in late 2008 and infected millions of PCs.


Conficker was used to open back doors into computers in Iran, then infect them with Stuxnet
, according to research from John Bumgarner, a retired U.S. Army special-operations veteran and former intelligence officer.

"Conficker was a door kicker," said Bumgarner, chief technology officer for the U.S. Cyber Consequences Unit, a non-profit group that studies the impact of cyber threats. "It built out an elaborate smoke screen around the whole world to mask the real operation, which was to deliver Stuxnet."

While it is widely believed that the United States and Israel were behind Stuxnet, Bumgarner wouldn't comment on whether he believes the Americans and Israelis also unleashed Conficker, one of the most virulent pieces of so-called malware ever detected. He wouldn't name the attackers he believes were behind the two programs, saying the matter was too sensitive to discuss.


The White House and the FBI declined to comment.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office, which oversees Israel's intelligence agencies, also declined comment.

If Bumgarner's findings, which couldn't be independently confirmed, are correct then it shows that the United States and Israel may have a far more sophisticated cyber-warfare program than previously thought. It could also be a warning to countries other than Iran that they might be vulnerable to attacks.

His account leaves unresolved several mysteries. These include the severity of the damage that the program inflicted on Iran's uranium enrichment facility, whether other facilities in Iran were targeted and the possibility that there were other as yet unidentified pieces of malware used in the same program.

Bumgarner - who wrote a highly praised analysis of Russia's 2008 cyber assault on Republic of Georgia - says he identified Conficker's link to Stuxnet only after spending more than a year researching the attack on Iran and dissecting hundreds of samples of malicious code.

He is well regarded by some in the security community. "He is a smart man," said Tom Kellermann, an advisor to the Obama Administration on cyber security policy and the chief technology officer of a company called AirPatrol.

His analysis challenges a common belief that Conficker was built by an Eastern European criminal gang to engage in financial fraud.

The worm's latent state had been a mystery for some time. It appears never to have been activated in the computers it infected, and security experts have speculated that the program was abandoned by those who created it because they feared getting caught after Conficker was subjected to intense media scrutiny.

Bumgarner's work could deepen understanding of how Stuxnet's commanders ran the cyber operation that last year sabotaged an underground facility at Natanz, where Iranian scientists are enriching uranium using thousands of gas centrifuges.

He provided Reuters with his timeline of the attack, which indicates it began earlier than previously thought. He said that it was planned using data stolen with early versions of Duqu, a data stealing tool that experts recently discovered and are still trying to understand. The operation ended earlier-than-planned after the attackers got caught because they were moving too quickly and sloppiness led to errors.

WHO DID IT?

The view that Stuxnet was built by the United States and Israel was laid out in a January 2011 New York Times report that said it came from a joint program begun around 2004 to undermine Iran's efforts to build a bomb. That article said the program was originally authorized by U.S. President George W. Bush, and then accelerated by his successor, Barack Obama.

The first reports that the United States and Israel were behind Stuxnet were greeted skeptically. There are still a handful of prominent cyber security experts, including Jeffrey Carr, the author of the book "Inside Cyber Warfare: Mapping the Cyber Underworld," who dispute the U.S.-Israel idea. He says that circumstantial evidence paints a convincing case that China was behind Stuxnet.

Some also question Bumgarner's findings.

"He is making assertions that have no basis in fact. Anything is possible, but the empirical evidence doesn't show any linkage between the two," said Paul "Fergie" Ferguson, senior threat researcher with security software maker Trend Micro.

He was among a group of researchers from dozens of companies who teamed up in 2009 and spent months studying Conficker. That group concluded it was impossible to determine who was behind the worm.

Ferguson said on Friday he believed Conficker was likely the work of criminals in eastern Europe, based on similarities in the coding of Conficker and previously discovered types of malware.

According to Bumgarner's account, Stuxnet's operators started doing reconnaissance in 2007, using Duqu, which spied on makers of components used in Iran's nuclear and critical infrastructure facilities.

In November 2008, Conficker was let loose and it quickly spread, attacking millions of PCs around the world. Its initial task was to infect a machine and "phone home" with its location. If it was at a strategic facility in Iran, the attackers tagged that PC as a target. The release left millions of untagged machines infected with Conficker around the world, but no damage was done to them.

In March 2009, Bumgarner says, the attackers released a new, more powerful version of Conficker that started the next phase of the attack on April 1 by downloading Stuxnet onto the targeted PCs. After it completed that task, Conficker's mission on those machines was complete.

CRACKING THE CASE

It took Bumgarner months to conclude that Conficker was created by the authors of Stuxnet.

First, he noticed that the two pieces of malware were both written with unprecedented sophistication, which caused him to suspect they were related. He also found that infection rates for both were far higher in Iran than the United States and that both spread by exploiting the same vulnerability in Windows.

He did more digging, comparing date and time stamps on different versions of Conficker and Stuxnet, and found a correlation -- key dates related to their development and deployment overlapped. That helped him identify April Fool's Day, April 1, 2009, as the launch date for the attack.

Bumgarner believes the attackers picked that date to send a message to Iran's leaders. It marked the 30th anniversary of the declaration of an Islamic republic by Ayatollah Khomeini after a national referendum.

He also identified two other signals hidden in the Stuxnet code, based on the dates when key modules were compiled, or translated from programming text into a piece of software that could run on a computer.

One coincided with a day when Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said his nation would pursue its nuclear program despite international objections, and another with the day that he made a highly controversial appearance at Columbia University in New York.

FUTBOL FANS

The operators communicated with Stuxnet-infected computers over the Internet through servers using fake soccer websites that they built as a front for their operation: www.mypremierfutbol.com and www.todaysfutbol.com.

If Iranian authorities noticed that traffic, they would be deceived into assuming it was from soccer fans, rather than suspect that something was awry, Bumgarner said.

Once Conficker had pulled Stuxnet into computers in Iran there was still one big hurdle, he said. Those infected computers weren't yet in the target - the underground uranium enrichment facility at Natanz.

Getting the virus in there was one of the trickiest parts of the operation.

Computers controlling the rapidly rotating gas centrifuges were cut off from the Internet. The best way to attack was to put the malware on a device like a USB thumb drive, and then get somebody to connect that drive to the system controlling the centrifuges.

Stuxnet was programmed to automatically jump from an infected PC to a USB drive as soon as it was put into a computer. That was the easy part. Getting somebody to be a human "mule" by bringing that USB drive to Natanz and plugging it into the right machine was a logistical nightmare.

It was impossible to predict when somebody with an infected USB drive would visit the plant. It could take a week or it might be six months.

"It's a painstakingly slow game of chess," said Bumgarner. "They had to keep making moves and countermoves until they reached the centrifuges. Then it was checkmate."

That was probably delivered by somebody who regularly visited the facility and had reason to share information electronically - an academic affiliated with an engineering program at one of Iran's universities or a worker at a company that provided technology to the facility, according to Bumgarner. He or she was almost certainly unaware of what was happening, he said.

Bumgarner is not sure when Stuxnet first hit Natanz, but suspects that early versions only did limited damage. He believes the attackers grew impatient with the pace at which it was damaging the facility and as a result they performed the cyber equivalent of injecting steroids into Stuxnet, adding modules to make it spread faster and inflict more damage. They deployed an enhanced version in January 2010, and two months later an even more powerful one.

Bumgarner believes the juiced-up malware was effective in damaging the centrifuges. But just as steroids have side effects on humans, so the additional modules had a negative impact on the malware: They started causing infected machines to act abnormally.

A then-obscure security firm known as VirusBlokAda in Belarus reported that it discovered Stuxnet after a piece of the souped-up virus made a computer in Iran behave erratically. International investigations followed, which eventually uncovered the attacks on Natanz.

"It blew their operation wide open," says Bumgarner.

Yet its creators may still have other irons in the fire, thanks to Conficker, which lies dormant in millions of PCs around the globe in strategic locations such as Iran, China, Russia, India and Pakistan.

"Conficker represents the largest cyber army in the world," Bumgarner said. "These soldiers are just waiting for their next mission."

Panetta: strike might set back Iran's nuclear programme by one to two years



   

Panetta: Strike  could trigger Iranian retaliation against US forces  

Israel must resume peace talks - US

2011-12-03 09:27


Washington - US defence secretary Leon Panetta on Friday urged Israel to get back to the "damn" negotiating table with Palestinians and take steps to address what he described as the Jewish state's growing isolation in the Middle East.

لئون پانتا / وزیر دفاع آمریکا


Panetta, addressing a forum in Washington, also made one of his most extensive arguments to date against any imminent military action against Iran over its nuclear programme, saying he was convinced that sanctions and diplomatic pressure were working.

"You always have the last resort ... of military action. But it must be the last resort, not the first," Panetta said.

Militarily strong, Israel is battling a diplomatic storm as Arab uprisings upset once-stable relationships in the Middle East. But Panetta warned Israel against viewing uprisings like the one in Egypt that toppled president Hosni Mubarak as an excuse to enter a defensive crouch.

"I understand the view that this is not the time to pursue peace, and that the Arab awakening further imperils the dream of a safe and secure, Jewish and democratic Israel. But I disagree with that view," Panetta said.


Iran

Turning to Iran, Panetta used some of his strongest language yet to explain US concerns about any military strike against Iran over its nuclear programme - which the West believes is aimed at an atomic bomb. Tehran denies this, saying its uranium enrichment is entirely peaceful.

Panetta said a strike could

- disrupt the already fragile economies of Europe and the United States,

- trigger Iranian retaliation against US forces, and

- ultimately spark a popular backlash in Iran that would bolster its rulers.


It also may not be effective. Panetta cited estimates from Israelis that a strike might set back Iran's nuclear programme by one to two years "at best."

He finally warned about engulfing the region in war.

"Lastly I think the consequence could be that we would have an escalation that would take place that would not only involve many lives, but I think could consume the Middle East in confrontation and conflict that we would regret," he said.


Peace talks


He said Israel needed to take risks, including by breathing new life into moribund peace talks with Palestinians. When asked by a moderator what steps Israel needed to take to pursue peace, Panetta said: "Just get to the damn table."

"The problem right now is we can't get 'em to the damn table, to at least sit down and begin to discuss their differences," Panetta said.

Panetta said the United States would safeguard Israel's security, ensure regional stability and prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon - a goal Tehran denies having.

"Israel, too, has a responsibility to pursue these shared goals - to build regional support for Israeli and United States' security objectives," Panetta said.

"I believe security is dependent on a strong military but it is also dependent on strong diplomacy. And unfortunately, over the past year, we've seen Israel's isolation from its traditional security partners in the region grow."

Panetta suggested that Israel reach out and mend fences with countries like Turkey, Egypt and Jordan which "share an interest in regional stability."

Turkey was the first Muslim state to recognise Israel, in 1949, but relations worsened last year when Israeli commandos boarded an aid flotilla challenging a naval blockade of the Palestinian enclave of Gaza and killing nine Turks in ensuing clashes.

"It is in Israel's interest, Turkey's interest, and US interest for Israel to reconcile with Turkey, and both Turkey and Israel need to do more to put their relationship back on track," Panetta said.

Israel is closely watching developments in Egypt, whose new rulers may be more susceptible to widespread anti-Israeli sentiment than under Mubarak.

Egyptians voted on Friday in the opening round of the country's first free election in six decades. The Muslim Brotherhood's party and its ultra-conservative Salafi rivals looked set to top the polls.

But Panetta said the best course for the United States and the international community was to continue to put pressure on Egypt to follow through with transition to democracy and ensure any future government stands by its peace treaty with Israel.

- Reuters

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle-east/israeli-defense-chief-says-israel-not-seeking-to-attack-iran-but-may-have-no-choice/2011/12/01/gIQAk7P9FO_story.html

Israeli defense chief says Israel not seeking to attack Iran, but may have no choice

By Associated Press, Published: December 1

JERUSALEM — Israel does not want to take military action against Iran over its nuclear program, but at some point may have no other option, Israel’s defense minister said Thursday.

At this point, Israel does not intend to launch a strike against Iranian nuclear facilities but it retains the option as a “last resort,” Defense Minister Ehud Barak told Israel Radio.

“We don’t need unnecessary wars. But we definitely might be put to the test,” he said. “The non-diplomatic point is a last resort. The fact that all options are on the table is agreed upon by everybody.”

Barak said he hoped that sanctions and diplomacy would pressure the Iranian leadership to abandon its suspected nuclear weapons program, but said he does not expect that to happen.

Israel, like the West, suspects Iran is developing a nuclear bomb, despite Tehran’s insistence that its nuclear program is designed to produce energy.

Israel says a nuclear-armed Iran would threaten the Jewish state’s survival, citing Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s repeated references to Israel’s destruction, Iran’s arsenal of ballistic missiles and its support for militant groups that fight Israel.

The U.S. — as well as some security experts in Israel — have loudly opposed the prospect of an Israeli military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities, because of its potential for touching off retaliation against Israel and a broader, regional conflagration.

But Barak suggested that Israel might not alert world powers before embarking on a strike.

“Israel is a sovereign state and it is the government of Israel, the Israeli army and security forces who are responsible for Israel’s security, future and survival,” he said.

Mysterious blasts, computer viruses and assassinations have disrupted Iran’s nuclear program, and there has been speculation of Israeli involvement.

Barak would not comment on that possibility, but said, “We are not happy to see the Iranians move ahead on this (program), so any delay, be it divine intervention or otherwise, is welcome.”

In an interview broadcast Thursday on Israeli TV, former Israeli Mossad chief Meir Dagan harshly criticized any plans to attack Iran.

Dagan, who recently retired from the spy agency, estimated that an Israeli attack would likely lead to a regional war in which Syria as well as Lebanese and Palestinian militants would get involved.

“I’m concerned about possible mistakes and I prefer to speak out before there is a catastrophe,” he said. “I think that engaging, with open eyes, in a regional war is warranted only when we are under attack or when the sword is already cutting against our live flesh. It is not an alternative that should be chosen lightly.”

Dagan said he believed the Iranians were not progressing as quickly as is widely believed and there was still plenty of time to stop them from acquiring the bomb.

A recent survey commissioned for the Saban Center at the Brookings Institution found Jewish-Israelis to be split almost evenly on a possible Israeli strike on Iran.

The Dahaf Institute poll found that 43 percent support an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities while 41 percent oppose it. Sixty-five percent of those surveyed also said they would prefer a nuclear-free region over one in which both Israel and Iran possessed nuclear weapons, while 19 percent favored the alternative.

Israel is widely believed to have nuclear capabilities.

The poll surveyed 510 randomly selected Jewish citizens of Israel earlier this month and had margin of error of 4.4 percentage points.

In another reflection of Israeli concerns over Iran, the Israeli military said Thursday that it has launched a project to teach Farsi, the dominant language in Iran, to Israeli high school students in hopes of preparing them for careers in military intelligence.

An intelligence official said a select group of 23 honors students had been carefully chosen to participate in the three-year course. An intelligence commander in uniform comes to their school to teach the course, and soldiers from the intelligence unit help them with homework.

“The need for Persian instruction is obvious,” the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity in line with army protocol.

A few dozen high-school students graduated this year from a similar pilot course in high-level Arabic. Most of them subsequently enlisted into Israel’s military intelligence, the official said.

Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.



#ff0000 By Associated Press, Published: December 1