US denies entry to 20 Iran officials ahead of UNGA ; Iran Attack Still “On” For 2013

By Oliver Holmes

BEIRUT | Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:59pm EDT

Western states outvoted an Iranian-Egyptian draft proposing a role for the UN nuclear watchdog in nuclear disarmament. It was tabled at the IAEA’s annual meeting Saturday as central to enforcing non-proliferation. After days of closed-door negotiations, the small group led by Iran and Egypt failed to achieve the traditional consensus and the Western bloc voted it down.

Long Knives Target Iran

By Stephen Lendman, Contributor
theintelhub.com
September 21, 2012

Some background:

February 11, 2012 marked the 33rd anniversary of Iran’s 1979 revolution. It ended a generation of repressive rule under Washington’s installed Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi.

In 1953, CIA operative Kermit Roosevelt, Theodore Roosevelt’s grandson and Franklin’s cousin, engineered the Agency’s first coup. Democratically elected Mohammad Mossadeq was ousted. The New York Times called him Iran’s “most popular politician.”

As late as 1977, Jimmy Carter declared Iran an “oasis of stability.” He ignored years of brutal Shah repression. In January 1979, he fled the country. Ayatollah Khomeini returned. He proclaimed the Islamic Republic with overwhelming public support.

US officials thought they could control him. They thought wrong. Iran was free from Western dominance and didn’t look back. Tensions escalated. Washington planned regime change. It remains US policy.

In 1975, Iran and Iraq negotiated the Algiers Agreement. It settled border disputes between the two countries. In March 1980, Saddam Hussein unilaterally abrogated it. Carter officials encouraged him.

Journalist/historian Dilip Hiro noted:

“According to the Iranian president, Bani-Sadr, in early August 1980 his government had purchased secret documents containing a detailed account of the conversations in France between several deposed Iranian generals and politicians, Iraqi representatives, and American and Israeli military experts.”

“If so, the administration of President James Carter had an inkling of Iraqi plans. By supplying secret information, which exaggerated Iran’s military weakness, to Saudi Arabia for onward transmission to Baghdad, Washington encouraged Iraq to attack Iran.”

Saddam was supported by CIA-sponsored Iranian military officers given refuge in Iraq. Soviet Russia feared revolutionary Islam spreading to central Asia.

Saddam saw his chance to wage war and win. He hoped to defeat a regional rival, annex parts of Iran, and strengthen his regional position.

Washington wanted its own regional influence enhanced. The Carter Doctrine pledged Middle East military intervention if US interests were threatened.

According to columnist Jack Anderson, he considered invading Iran, seizing its oil fields, and boosting his electoral prospects, he hoped. Soviet Russia threatened intervention if he followed through.

Carter abandoned his plans. At the same time, his administration remained hostile to Ayatollah Khomeini’s government.

Reagan escalated Carter policies short of committing US forces in combat. Saddam got US backing. America pretended neutrality. It proves repeatedly it can’t be trusted.

Support for the Shah was a key element of US regional policy. Iran’s 1979 revolution changed things. Saddam became Washington’s weapon to defeat a government it opposed.

On September 22, 1980, Iraq invaded Iran. Border clashes preceded all-out conflict. Nearly eight years of war followed. Over a million died, including civilians. America and other Western countries call it the Iran/Iraq war.

Saddam hoped it would be a “whirlwind war.” He renamed it Qadisiyyad Saddam. It was an emotive reference to Arabs defeating Persians in 636. Tehran calls it the “Sacred Defense” or “imposed war.”

On September 21, Press TV headlined “Iran marks (32nd) anniversary of Iraq imposed war with military parades,” saying:

Ceremonies opened “Sacred Defense Week.” They began symbolically at Ayatollah Khomeini’s Tehran mausoleum. Planned events include parades, commemorative concerts, and photo exhibits.

Commemorating the occasion, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad delivered a nationally televised address, saying:

“Our sacred defense was not defending a territory, a nation or a school of thought alone. It was well beyond that. It was defending human dignity, the rights of all nations and those of the oppressed people of the world.”

Iran will “stand and defend its rights,” he asserted. He called the blasphemous anti-Muslim film inciting violence an Israeli plot “to divide (Muslims) and spark sectarian conflict.”

He and Ayatollah Khamenei days earlier noted Western hypocrisy. Condemn Washington, other NATO allies, or Israeli crimes and be denounced. At the same time, insulting Islam is called free expression.

He criticized nations backing Saddam’s invasion. They revealed their imperial regional aims. They’re also fake human rights advocates. They say one thing and do another. Scoundrels operate that way.

Iranian officials turned out in force. High-ranking military ones were present. Iran’s latest military hardware was showcased. On display was its new domestically made air defense system.

Called Raad, or Thunder, it’s more advanced than its Russian predecessor. It’s designed to confront jet aircraft, cruise missiles, smart bombs, helicopters, and drones.

Its capability ranges up to 30 miles. It can strike targets high as 75,000 feet. It’s a formidable defense against attack.

“Sacred Defense Week” commemorates Iran’s commitment to deter aggressors and remain free.

Western and Israeli long knives remain threatening. Tensions are especially high. Netanyahu’s bluster aside, longstanding Washington plans call for regime change.

Iran’s peaceful nuclear program is red herring cover used as pretext. If not that, something else would substitute. Excuses are easy to fabricate. Western media scoundrels regurgitate them ad nauseam.

Fear is generated. Other false charges follow. America is hell bent for war. It has a willing partner in Israel provided Washington plays the lead role.

Potentially catastrophic consequences are ignored. Apparently, so is opposition expressed by current and past high-ranking military and government officials in both countries. Updated war plans are ready to be implemented unless cooler heads go all out to prevent it.

Iran is falsely called an existential threat. Netanyahu and Israeli hardliners claim it constantly. Washington does it on and off. It’s wearing thin but take it seriously. One day crying wolf won’t be bluster or bluffing.

On September 20, Haaretz reported the latest outburst. It headlined “US warns Iran: Time is running out on diplomacy over nuclear program.”

This time UN envoy Susan Rice issued the warning. She gives diplomacy a bad name. She’s one of America’s worst ever ambassadors. Her style is belligerent, arrogant, and offensive.

Addressing the Security Council, she said:

“We believe there is still time and space for diplomacy,” but not much.

“(T)he onus is on Iran to respond constructively.” She added that Washington seeks a “clear, united resolution” regarding Tehran’s nuclear enrichment program.

Her comments were a clear warning. At the same time, she and other US officials know Iran’s nuclear program is peaceful. So do others in Israel, European nations and elsewhere.

Nonetheless, warnings persist. This one comes as Washington, Britain, France, Saudi Arabia, and other US allies stage large-scale Gulf naval drills. Doing so is provocative. It heightens tensions. Make no mistake. Provocation is Washington policy.

This one is codenamed IMCMEX-12. It involves minesweeping and other measures to keep the Strait of Hormuz open if Iran blocks it defensively. It warned about doing it if attacked.

In September, Tehran plans its own drills. It knows the risks and stands ready to confront them.

So do Israelis wanting no part of war. A mid-August Haaretz article headlined “We’ll all pay on doomsday,” saying:

Attacking Iran is madness. It means sharply higher oil prices, deeper global recession, and Israel becoming “even less popular in Europe and the United States than we already are.”

The Bank of Israel and Finance Ministry predict attacking Iran will cause “serious economic damage.” They’re concerned about bankruptcies, mass layoffs, potential panic, and other protracted effects.

World condemnation will follow. Countries, companies, labor organizations, and consumer groups already boycott Israel for good reason. Attacking Iran will intensify their ire.

When “rockets fall on Tel Aviv,” expect investors to flee. Financial assets will suffer. Tax revenues will drop. Deficits will rise.

Iran’s response will be far more robust than anything Israel previously experienced. “You can’t live a normal life under a daily threat like that.”

Israelis will be fearful. They’ll hunker down. Normal activities will be curtailed. Business will suffer. Tourists won’t come. International airlines will cancel flights. Ports will be “paralyzed.”

The shekel will drop sharply. Inflation will rise. Goods will become scarce. The only good news is that unaffordable housing prices will fall. Who’ll buy property vulnerable to destruction?

Haaretz omitted what’s most important. How many millions of Iranian and Israeli lives will be lost? Bombing nuclear facilities in both countries assures widespread irradiation.

Immediate casualties will be huge in both countries. Longer-term ones will be catastrophically high. War on Iran assures all sides lose. Regional countries will be affected. So will most others from economic fallout.

Haaretz is right saying “We’ll all pay on doomsday.” Assuring it doesn’t happen is the only sensible policy. It’s not rocket science. It’s common sense.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. His new book is titled How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion and Class War

Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/

Washington’s Iran war game vs. real Iranian, Israeli war preparations

DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis September 22, 2012, 11:01 AM (GMT+02:00)

Ill-assorted figures this week cited 2013 as the year in which the United States was expected to go to war on Iran. Among them was Iran’s atomic commission director Fereydoun Abbasi-Davani, former US ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk, and players in the US-Iranian war game staged at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy in Washington, whose heads are close to US President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
This apparent US-Iranian concord was unusual but not fortuitous, say debkafile analysts.
On the part of Washington, it had a distinct purpose, which was to demonstrate to Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu that an Israeli attack before the US presidential election would be superfluous.
The message was played out in the Saban institute’s war game: The player representing Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said the Americans are tired of the fight and they are led by a weak man with no stomach for the struggle.
The script then proves him wrong: On July 6, 2013, Iranian agents coming in from Venezuela blow up a hotel on the Caribbean island of Aruba killing 137 people, many of them American holidaymakers including nuclear physicists. It was clearly a revenge attack for the assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists.
The next chapter of this scenario had President Obama, portrayed as reelected in November, ordering Iranian Revolutionary Guards headquarters in eastern Iran to be bombed, 40 Iranian security installations shut down by cyber warfare and Tehran warned that US intelligence had the names of Iranian agents in 38 countries and their lives were at risk.
Iran purportedly responds by blocking the Strait of Hormuz, through which the world receives a third of its oil. The players representing the US government then slap down a 24-hour ultimatum for Iran to halt its nuclear program or else face the destruction of all its facilities, along with the entire Iranian military deployment in the Persian Gulf.
Tehran fails to comply and the US and Iran are at war.
This scenario implicitly made the point that since the US election was only weeks off and America would most likely go to war with Iran next year anyway, Israel had no need to jump the gun before November, 2012.
This was most likely the answer Israel’s Defense Minister Ehud Barak received too when he met with Chicago Mayor and Obama’s former chief of staff Rahm Emanuel for lunch at City Hall Thursday, Sept. 20.

The only known result of their conversation was a gift by the mayor to the minister of a six-pack of Chicago’s famous Goose Island 312 beer. Whether Barak shared it with Netanyahu and whether the beer was to their taste was not revealed.
Apart from this message, the Saban Institute war game notably hinged on two basic premises while skipping a third.

The first was that American and Iranian leaders both acted on wrong strategic and intelligence assessments of the other’s intentions and therefore miscalculated each other’s responses. Had they realized this, the war might have been avoided.

A second working assumption was that Iran had scattered half of its stocked enriched uranium in dozens of places across the country to reduce their vulnerability to attack, while keeping the other half in one place. This was taken to signal qualified Iranian willingness for a diplomatic resolution of its controversy with the United States.
Where the Saban war game erred was in leaving the Syrian factor out of the equation.
debkafile’s military sources point out that Syrian President Bashar Assad is using the same strategy as Iran for his chemical and biological arsenal. Half has been distributed and placed in the care of an estimated 20 Syrian army units; the other half reposes at fixed storage sites – a device indicating to Washington and Moscow that he is open to negotiating an end to the war before deciding to loose his weapons of mass destruction against Syrian rebels.

The Washington think tank’s war game fails to take into account that Iranian and Syrian steps are so closely synchronized that Syrian already looms large as the most likely venue for the approaching core event of a conflict pitting the US and Israel against Iran. Syria and Iran have become almost interchangeable against their shared foes.
Elite units of Iran’s al Qods, the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) external arm, are being airlifted into Syria and Lebanon, as the IRGC chief Gen. Ali Jafari, disclosed Sunday, Sept. 16. I

Iranian troops are now deployed on Israel’s northern and eastern borders.
Israel responded Wednesday, Sept. 19, with a snap military exercise, the largest the IDF has staged in many years, on its borders with Syria and Lebanon.
Not all the Israeli units taking part in the drill returned to home basewhen the drill was over. Substantial military strength, estimated at two divisions, is therefore building up and facing the Iranian troops across the border in Syria and Lebanon.

Indeed, that same Wednesday saw more than one telling event in the same incendiary context:  Iran’s foreign minister Ali Akbar Salehi paid an unscheduled visit to Damascus for talks with Assad on his way home from a meeting in Cairo with Egyptian, Turkish and Iraqi foreign ministers. They gathered on the initiative of Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi for another go at resolving the Syrian disaster. Saudi Arabia which is deeply committed to backing the rebels was pointedly absent.
Iran played ball with Egypt for the purpose of lining up its diplomatic ducks for the war to come by putting together a potential Muslim bloc to stand against the US-Israel-Arab grouping. Tehran is looking ahead to the inevitable propsect of peace negotiations taking off amid the fury of war – or as soon as it ends.
Shortly after the Israeli drill, US intelligence officials accused Iran of “secretly transporting large quantities of weapons and military personnel, almost daily, under the cover of civilian aircraft – via Iraqi airspace – to aid embattled Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.”

The accent on “almost daily” confirmed that a major buildup of Iranian military strength is in progress in Syria. Typically, Iran is disguising its actions by using civilian aircraft.

EU-Iran nuclear talks ‘useful and constructive,’ Iranian envoy reports

timesofisrael.com
September 20, 2012

Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator on Wednesday reported progress in talks aimed at restarting negotiations over Tehran’s nuclear program, calling a meeting with European foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton a day earlier “positive and fruitful.”

Saeed Jalili offered few concrete details about Tuesday’s meeting with Ashton in Istanbul, but said the two had assessed some “common points” reached by technical teams looking into the issue and had discussed “what can be done for a new cooperation.”

Read more

Iran pours more troops into Syria, ready to target Israel from Syria and Lebanon

DEBKAfile Special Report September 20, 2012, 10:50 AM (GMT+02:00)

Iran continues to fly military personnel and quantities of weapons into Syria by civilian aircraft which cut through Iraqi airspace, American intelligence sources disclosed early Thursday, Sept. 20. UN Secretary General Ban ki-Moon also said that, “Unfortunately, both [Syrian] sides, government and opposition forces, seem to be determined to see the end by military means.”

Clearly, Iran is augmenting its military involvement in the constantly escalating Syrian civil war, broadening it into a multinational conflict which threatens to drag Lebanon in, by means of the Iranian-Syrian ally, Hizballah.

The UN Secretary General’s statement implying that the two Syrian sides are determined to fight to the bitter end is echoed in Iran’s resolve to fight to the bitter end for Assad, on Syrian soil.

Tehran is not hiding its actions. Sunday, Sept. 16, Iranian Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) Commander Gen. Ali Jafari said openly that Al Qods Brigades units were present and operational in both Syria and Lebanon.

No comment on this revelation has come from the US, Israel or Israel’s military (IDF) chiefs – notwithstanding its menacing import, namely, that Tehran is no longer hanging about and waiting for its nuclear program to be attacked in order to punish Israel, but is getting ready for a pre-emptive operation.

Still, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak have chosen silence in the face of what any other nation would regard as a casus belli: the open deployment of enemy forces on its northern and eastern borders.
This must have been the catalyst for the IDF’s surprise two-division strength drill Wednesday on Israel’s Golan border with Syria. But the IDF spokesman sounded almost apologetic when he explained that the exercise had nothing to do with the events in Syria or with Hizballah, and that it was no more than a routine drill for testing preparedness.

debkafile’s military sources say that, in the current climate, no military operation by any army on the Syrian border – especially one of this magnitude – may be regarded as “routine.” Only a week ago, the Golani Brigade concluded a large military exercise in northern Israel including the Golan. That sort of frequency must have operational connotations: The IDF is evidently keeping the army on the move and in a constant state of readiness to fight a real war without delay on terrain made familiar by repeated war games.
IDF Chief of Staff Lieutenant General Benny Gantz has a penchant for expressing himself through symbols, his method of overcoming the restrictions placed on his tongue by military and other constraints.

On New Year’s Eve last week, the general handed military correspondents a small gift: The Hebrew edition of the American writer Richard David Bach’s “There’s No Such Place as Far Away.”

For the Golan drill Wednesday, he decided to attach Maj. Gen. (res.) Nati Sharoni, chief artillery officer in the 1973 Yom Kippur War, to his party of advisers and observers.
The book was a clear message to Tehran and doubting Thomases at home that the IDF is fully capable of an operation against Iran’s nuclear program and of successfully accomplishing any mission far from its shores.

Gen. Sharoni’s presence at the Golan exercise, and the exercise itself, was a warning to Iran, Hizballah and Syria that they will be disappointed if they hope to catch Israel unready, as it was by the surprise attack which almost overcame the IDF 39 years ago before the tide of war was turned back against Egypt.