Obama U-Turn on Un Penalties on Iran

President Barack Obama has done away with two key elements of US-Israeli strategic

relations: His administration has given up on stiff UN Security Council sanctions on

Iran over its nuclear drive, and gone back on the longstanding American commitment

assuring Israel of recognized and defensible borders in any future accommodation

with its Arab neighbors.
In the administration's message of congratulations to Israel on its 62nd Day of

Independence, US Secretary of state Hillary Clinton mentions "recognized

borders" while omitting the traditional "defensible."

Washington sources report that following the talks held by Presidents Obama and

Hu Jintao in Washington last week, the Administration is apparently engaged in a

debate about whether to push for tough sanctions against Iran at the Security Council

and run into opposition from China and other countries - or go for a quick UN General

Assembly resolution, which would be non-binding.The view William Burns, Under

Secretary of State for Political Affairs, offered the House foreign affairs committee

last week was that a UN resolution would clear the way for the European Union and other countries to "amplify the impact" of whatever sanctions are agreed on.

Burns avoided mentioning the Security Council and indicated that the administration

had little hope of any effective action on Iran by the world body.

It will be recalled that President Obama twice asked Israel to ignore Iran's missed

deadlines and promised to promote effective UN Security Council sanctions if Iran

continued to spurn his diplomatic efforts for curbing its nuclear program.The last

deadline was in December, 2009.
Yet on Monday, April 19, clearly lagging behind events in Washington, Israel's

defense minister Ehud Barak said: "Now is the time for sanctions (against Iran)."

He was answering questions in a radio interview on Israel's annual day of

mourning for its fallen servicemen.

Neither he nor any other Israeli leader commented on an equally serious setback

for Israel in Washington, which emerge from a conspicuous omission in Clinton's

message of congratulations for Israel's Independence Day, which is celebrated

Monday night and Tuesday:
"I have a deep personal commitment to Israel," she said. "And so does President

Obama. Our nation will not waver in protecting Israel’s security and promoting

Israel’s future. That is why pursuing peace and recognized borders for Israel

is one of our top priorities."

By omitting "defensible borders" from her message, she spoke for the first US

administration to abdicate its guarantee of defensible borders as a fundamental

component of Israel's security, thereby nullifying her and the US president's

pledge not to "waver in protecting Israel's security." This key omission led to

another worrying question about Israel's future borders: By whom must they

be recognized in the view of the Obama administration?

Israel Could use Ballistic Missile against Iran

Ballistic missiles could be Israel's weapon of choice against Iranian nuclear facilities if it decides on a pre-emptive attack and deems air strikes too risky, according to a report by a Washington think-tank. Israel is widely assumed to have Jericho missiles capable of hitting Iran with an
accuracy of a few dozen metres (yards) from target. Such a capability would be free of warplanes' main drawbacks -- limits on fuel and ordnance, and perils to pilots.
Extrapolating from analyst assessments that the most advanced Jerichos carry 750 kg
(1,650 lb) conventional warheads, Abdullah Toukan of the Center for Strategic and International Studies said 42 missiles would be enough to "severely damage or demolish"
Iran's core nuclear sites at Natanz, Esfahan and Arak.
"If the Jericho III is fully developed and its accuracy is quite high then this scenario
could look much more feasible than using combat aircraft," he said in the March 14 report,
titled "Study on a Possible Israeli Strike on Iran's Nuclear Development Facilities".Israel,
whose jets bombed Iraq's nuclear reactor in 1981 and mounted a similar sortie over Syria in 2007, has hinted that it could forcibly deny Iran the means to make an atomic bomb.
But many experts believe the Iranian sites are too distant, dispersed and protected
for Israel's warplanes to take on alone.Israel neither confirms nor denies having Jerichos, as part of an "ambiguity" policy veiling its own assumed atomic arsenal.
Sam Gardiner, a retired U.S. air force colonel who runs war games for various government agencies in Washington, cast doubt on the usefulness of ballistic missiles against Iran,
noting, for example, the robust fortification at Natanz.This, he said, would required that attackers "burrow" into the targets using multiple, precision-guided bombs
dropped by plane: "The American conclusion is that the only way to get deep enough
is to put a second warhead into the hole of the first."
Loath to see further destabilisation of a combustible region, the Obama administration
has championed engaging Iran diplomatically. Some U.S. officials have signalled
unhappiness at the idea of Israel going it alone against its arch-foe.
Reprisals.
Tukan said a Jericho salvo could draw an Iranian counter-attack with Shehab missiles.
Other reprisal scenarios include Iran choking off oil exports, hitting U.S. Gulf assets,
or ordering proxy attacks on Jewish targets abroad.
Some Israeli experts have been dismissive of the Shehab threat, citing intelligence
assessments that Iran has deployed fewer than 100 of the missiles and that, if fired,
most would be destroyed in mid-flight by Israel's Arrow II interceptor. "Under such circumstances, we would expect little more than a repeat of the Gulf war," said one
-general, referring to Iraq's firing of 40 Scud missiles at Israel during
the 1991 conflict. Those attacks inflicted damage but few casualties.
The Arrow II also provides some protection for Jordan, an Arab neighbour of
and which Toukan saw becoming "Ground Zero if a ballistic missile
exchange takes place".
He noted that any Jericho strikes on Iran -- which has denied seeking nuclear
weapons but vowed to retaliate if attacked -- would be complicated should
Tehran obtain the most sophisticated version of Russia's S-300 air-defence system,
which can tackle ballistic missiles as well as invading planes. Israel could face a
further difficulty in mounting a sneak Jericho attack because its strategic air bases
are located near population centres. The unannounced test launch of what was
believed to be a Jericho III outside Tel Aviv last year became public knowledge
within minutes.
But that may be the extent of Iran's forewarning. According to an Israeli defence
consultant, only the United States and Russia have put up satellites capable of
spotting ballistic missile launches in real time, "and it's highly unlikely that the
Iranians would get access to that information".The consultant, who spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity, played down the notion of ballistic missiles being used for
conventional attacks: "You look at any major Western military, and you'll see that
such strikes are the purview of manned warplanes, while ballistic missiles are
reserved for nuclear-strike scenarios."
But despite of all these facts and figure it is not going to be easy for them to do so alone.

sanctions Tradeoff Against Iran

Chinese president Hu indicated a willingness to consider abstaining on a UN security council vote imposing sanctions against Iran - if the United States reciprocated by withholding its

vote on sanctions against Israel over its construction in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. sources report that US president Barack Obama did not reject the idea out of hand when it

was raised in his hour-long telephone conversation with President Hu Thursday, April 1.
They decided to talk again about a coordinated, tit-for-tat US-Chinese sanctions deal with regard to Israel and Iran when they meet at the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington

on April 12-13. Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was invited to the conference; Iranian leaders were not. After the Obama-Hu phone conversation, the foreign ministry in Beijing delivered the Chinese president's consent to attend the summit. His reply was delayed

to signal displeasure over US arms sales to Taiwan and Obama's White House welcome for the Dalai Lama. It would be the first time a US president has come close to considering withholding his veto from an anti-Israel resolution at the Security Council. This implied willingness

may have been partly responsible for breaking the ice in Sino-US relations.According to our Middle East sources, White House officials dealing with Arab governments were quick to pass the word around of the evolving Obama approach. They tied it in with the US president's

special envoy George Mitchell's new plan to push for a negotiated Israel-Palestinian deal

on the borders of a Palestinian state to be struck within four months. Mitchell arrives in Jerusalem on April 12 - shortly before the Israeli prime minister is due to take off for Washington.
The two combined US steps add up to a further widening of the Obama

distance from Jerusalem, a rift which may even lead at some point to his

parallel condemnatory sanctions against Israel and Iran. He is determined to force the Netanyahu government to bow to Washington's say-so on issues vital to Israel's security,

namely the Iranian nuclear threat and its claim to secure borders.Beijing's turnabout on sanctions against Iran brought Saeed Jalili, the director of Iran's National Security Council, running to Beijing Thursday to demand explanations. The US president's openness

to Beijing's proposed sanctions trade belies the outreach his aide Dan Shapiro,

National Security Council Middle East Senior Director, sought to achiieve in a

to Jewish community representatives Friday. He tried denying relations were in

crisis after Netanyahu's chilly welcome at the White House last month and insisted

that there had been more agreement than disagreement between the two leaders.

Washington sources report that the American-Jewish leaders addressed by Shapiro

received his message with extreme skepticism.

Iran, The New Nuclear Club Member.

Iran had plenty to celebrate on its National Nuclear Day Friday, April 9. President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad unveiled the new "third generation" centrifuge which he claimed
was capable of six times the speed of the machines in current use in Natanz and there
and then proclaimed Iran a nuclear power.
He had three more reasons to crow: 1. Iran's first atomic reactor at the southern
town of Bushehr began its main and final test at high temperatures after eight
months of test runs. If all the components of the Russian-built 1000-megawatt plant
work smoothly, the reactor will finally go into full operation in June or in August at
the latest after years of delays.
Mahmoud Jafari, who heads the project, said all parts are working well and there is
no reason why the plant should not start producing electricity before the end of this
year. On March 18, Russian prime minister Vladimir Putin also said Bushehr would
go on stream this summer. military sources report that the spent fuel rods from this
reactor will soon be providing Iran with an easy and plentiful source of
weapons-grade plutonium.
2. So too will the Arak heavy water plant which Iran has been building secretly southeast
of Tehran in violation of its Non-Proliferation Treaty obligations. Work there was
discovered this week to have advanced by leaps and bounds and brought the project
close to completion, against all estimates that the reactor would not be ready before
2015. Our military and intelligence sources note that Arak and Boushehr will combine
to provide Iran with the large quantities of plutonium for nuclear warheads. This fissile
material has advantages over enriched uranium in its accessibility from heavy water
and light water reactors, its smaller size for a nuclear explosion, and its use in smaller
and lighter nuclear warheads for delivery by smaller missiles.A former IAEA official,
John Carlson, once warned that large light water reactors "of the sort Iran is building
at Bushehr can produce 330 kilograms of near-weapons grade plutonium - enough to
make more than 50 crude nuclear bombs." The process of separating plutonium from
spent fuel "employs technology little more advanced," he said, "than that required for
producing dairy products or pouring concrete."3. Jafari also announced on the occasion of National Nuclear Day that Iran had uncovered in the central province of Yazd large new
deposits of uranium ore plentiful enough to make Iran independent of foreign imports
for both its military and civilian needs. political sources add: These three breakthroughs on Iran's road to a nuclear weapon are radical enough to put Tehran in the driving seat in negotiations with the 5+1 Group (five permanent UN Security Council members plus
Germany) over its illicit production of enriched uranium and their offer to process it
outside Iran as a compromise gesture. Iran has shown the world it no longer needs
outside help for reprocessing uranium up to the critical 20 percent level, which is a
short jump to weapons grade and the fissile core of a nuclear bomb. Tehran has made
good use of every second allowed by the US-led world powers' lame efforts to dissuade
it from its nuclear goals by means of partly-effective sanctions, attractive incentives and diplomatic engagement, a policy which gained momentum after Barack Obama became US president. Even this week, he was still telling Tehran that the door to diplomacy still stood open.