More

Israel On Iran: Anything It Takes To Stop Nukes

ANNE GEARAN   07/27/09 10:32 PM ET   AP

Mideast Israel Palestinians

JERUSALEM — Israel hardened its insistence Monday that it would do anything it felt necessary to stop Iran from getting a nuclear bomb, just the ultimatum the United States hoped not to hear as it tried to nudge Iran to the bargaining table.

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates reassured Israel that the new Obama administration was not naive about Iran's intentions, and that Washington would press for new, tougher sanctions against the Iranians if they balk. He didn't say what those might include.

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak used a brief news conference with Gates to insist three times that Israel would not rule out any response – an implied warning that it would consider a pre-emptive strike to thwart Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

"We clearly believe that no option should be removed from the table," Barak said. "This is our policy. We mean it. We recommend to others to take the same position, but we cannot dictate it to anyone."

The question of how to deal with Iran's rapid nuclear advancement has become a notable public difference between the new administrations in Jerusalem and Washington, despite overall close relations. Israel considers itself the prime target of any eventual Iranian bomb.

Iran says it is merely trying to develop nuclear reactors for domestic power generation. Israeli leaders fear the U.S. prizes its outreach to Iran over its historic ties to Israel and appears resigned to the idea that Iran will soon be able to build a nuclear weapon.

Obama says he has accepted no such thing. Still, the United States argues that an Israeli attack against Iran would upset the fragile security balance in the Middle East, perhaps triggering a new nuclear arms race and leaving everyone, including Israel and Iran, worse off.

Gates emphasized areas of agreement with Israel, including that the offer of talks with Iran must not be open-ended.

Later, in neighboring Jordan, Gates was blunt in describing what Iran might expect if it refuses the offer of international arms control talks this year, or walks away from Obama's wider offer of better relations with Washington.

"If the engagement process is not successful, the United States is prepared to press for significant additional sanctions," Gates said. He added that the U.S. would try to abandon the current policy of gradual international pressure, where layers of generally mild sanctions have been added each time Iran has flouted international demands.

"We would try to get international support for a much tougher position," Gates said.

"Our hope remains that Iran would respond to the president's outstretched hand in a positive and constructive way, but we'll see."

Gates' brief stop in Israel was part of a parade of top Washington officials visiting Israel this week, with Iran and the expansion of Jewish settlements on Arab land the main topics. In each case, the Obama administration is taking a harder line with Israel than the positions taken by President George W. Bush.

Obama's special Mideast envoy, former Sen. George Mitchell, was the first U.S. official to arrive, largely to discuss U.S.-Israeli differences over the settlements. Gates will be followed Wednesday by National Security Adviser James Jones and his deputy, Mideast and Iran specialist Dennis Ross, both expected to press for Israeli cooperation on Iran. Gates met with Jordanian King Abdullah II in Amman after leaving Israel on Monday.

Mitchell urged Israel to start "dealing with difficult issues like settlements." At the same time, he urged Arab nations to take "genuine steps" toward normalizing ties with Israel.

The differences over Iran come on top of U.S.-Israeli disagreements over the Mideast peace process – particularly Washington's calls for a halt to Israeli settlement building. The Obama administration is having to press Israel on multiple fronts at once, complicating its diplomacy as it makes a major push to revive Arab-Israeli negotiations.

All this comes at a time when Washington's policy of dialogue with Iran itself has hit an impasse because of that country's election turmoil.

A more cooperative Iran is important for the Mideast peace drive. With its links to Hamas and Hezbollah militants, Iran is capable of heightening tensions in Israel and the Palestinian territories. At the same time, an Israeli strike on Iran would probably push Arab nations away from any peace gestures toward Israel, despite their own rivalries with Tehran.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu "reiterated the seriousness (with) which Israel views Iran's nuclear ambitions and the need to utilize all available means to prevent Iran from achieving a nuclear weapons capability," Netanyahu's office said following his meeting with Gates.

While the United States also reserves the right to use force if need be, the Obama administration is playing down that possibility while it tries to draw Iran into talks. Gates said Washington still hopes to have an initial answer in the fall about negotiations.

"The timetable the president laid out still seems to be viable and does not significantly raise the risks to anybody," Gates said in Israel.

Both Barak and Gates said time is short. Other officials have said Iran is perhaps one to three years away from being able to build a nuclear weapon.

Barak, speaking in both English and Hebrew, gave only lukewarm endorsement to the negotiating strategy.

"We are not in a situation in which we can tell the United States to hold, or not to hold discussions with Iran," Barak said. "But we repeatedly state our position in closed conversations, which is that a discussion like this should be limited in time, result-oriented, and able to decide if the Iranians are truly serious or not."

Itamar Rabinovich, a former Israeli ambassador to the U.S., said Israel "isn't anxious to launch military action."

"It doesn't want this, but Israel thinks more should be done and that diplomacy alone isn't enough. I think Israel and the U.S. are on the same page but on different sides of the paper," he said.

___

Associated Press writers Josef Federman, Lee Keath and Matti Friedman contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST WORLD

JERUSALEM — Israel hardened its insistence Monday that it would do anything it felt necessary to stop Iran from getting a nuclear bomb, just the ultimatum the United States hoped not to hear as ...
JERUSALEM — Israel hardened its insistence Monday that it would do anything it felt necessary to stop Iran from getting a nuclear bomb, just the ultimatum the United States hoped not to hear as ...
Filed by Marcus Baram  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 194
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
03:48 AM on 08/03/2009
Everyone watch this for better perspective!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SbjAanvUqs&feature=PlayList&p=4AB4F9B66B165F8B&index=0&playnext=1
10:20 AM on 08/01/2009
There are two things to consider here; 1) when Israel threatens an unprovoked attack on Iran, they are also threatening the US with a depression that will rival or surpass the great depression. Iran will mine the gulf and take other steps that will cause the price of oil to go to about $500 per barrel. Gas will go to 12 per gallon. There will be massive joblessness, hunger, and damage to 10s of thousands of businesses.

2) Israels fervor to vilify Iran and make them the center of US attention is based on their desire to take our attention away from the worlds only violently enforced colonial settler movement, and to enjoin the settlers paranoia and insanity with manufactured US paranoia and insanity.

We really ought to be threatening Israel (keeping all options on the table) if they even THINK about an unprovoked attack on Iran.
06:21 PM on 07/28/2009
Is there quite a bit of antisemetics going on here. Perhaps its just me. Iran has just been the perfect little choir boy. I suppose their not funding Alqaeda either or Hamas. your saying their not the enemy, their government that is.
07:42 PM on 07/28/2009
So it's acceptable for The US to fund Israel to the tune of 3 billion in direct military funding aid and another 3 billion in forgiven loans each year but Iran isn't allowed to give a few million to Hamas. Please provide a creditable source for Iran funding Al Qaeda.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:29 PM on 07/28/2009
Wrong again, Israel has not defaulted on any of the loan guarantees.
09:59 PM on 07/28/2009
The Iranians are sworn enemies of Al qeada. They would kill them on sight. They do give money and support to Hamas, but so do many other middle eastern nations. They are not in any way unique in that respect, and if they stopped tomorrow, Hamas would continue unabated.

It is not antisemitic to disagree with Israel using the bogus threat of Iran to distract from the fact that they wish to continue to run the worlds only violently enforced colonial settler movement, that uses ethnic cleansing and apartheid as tools to steal as much land as possible from the Palestinians while keeping them in some of the worlds most deplorable conditions.
07:54 PM on 07/29/2009
Iranians helped AL Sadr and his band which included some Al qeada fighters. Iran also provided him with safe haven to flow back and forth between the two countries. Iran also is a funder of Hezbolah. The Gaza leaders used humanitarian aid for weapons. These cultures aren't like Americans we don't care for war as a whole. Those cultures have been at each others throats since the dawn of time it would seem. They will never reconize Israel's right to exist. Somthing may get signed to get some more money. Its not likly to be adhered to. According to many of you Hamas, Hezbolah, Iran, Syria they are our friends. They have and will continue to fight Israel regardless. It's a sibling hatred that defy's rational thinking. They love to fight, else there'd have been peace years ago. Any one setting off a nuclear weapon has to realize, that its the beginning of the end. It's called MAD [Mutually Assured Destruction].
02:04 PM on 07/28/2009
israel has to receive permission from the us to use airspace(iraq) to get there,right?if so, this is their same old tantrum throwing time after time.

da@8! even george bush wouldn't let them have their way.
12:04 PM on 07/28/2009
Why is Israel doing this, why attack a country that has not attacked you or others recently, why kill innocent civilians who just a few days ago were marching peacefully in the streets..
12:05 PM on 07/28/2009
Answer:
Greed.
12:07 PM on 07/28/2009
For what... The oil? ... Everything comes down to oil
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
06:41 PM on 07/28/2009
Iran has made numerous explicit threats against Israel regarding their intentions once they have the bomb.
10:04 PM on 07/28/2009
name a sinlge explicit threat that Iran made to actuallu attack Israel. There are none.

Israel, however, has threatened MANY TIMES, VERY EXPLICITLY, to attack Iran without any provocation.
10:16 PM on 07/28/2009
Observation:
MEMRI has been putting out false propaganda.

Reference:
http://www.arbeiterfotografie.com/iran/index-iran-0013.html
11:00 AM on 07/28/2009
An Israeli strike against Iran would almost certainly be the start of war between those two states. Is that what the Israeli government wants? More war?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Wisdo
semantics shamantics
11:12 AM on 07/28/2009
As long as only they have the nukes, sure - they cant lose.

War is good business for Israel - And uncle Sam will pay, so why not?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:24 AM on 07/28/2009
Israel fighting Iran is actually a last resort, they want the US to fight for them so we're the ones that have the soldiers coming home in body bags. We also get all the fun repercussions of pre-emptively invading a country that hasn't attacked anyone in over 250 years.
12:02 PM on 07/28/2009
It is Iran who wants war. They have been trying to provoke Israel multiple times by building nukes, using Hamas and Hezbollah to attack Israel, and trash talking to make Israelis angry.
12:06 PM on 07/28/2009
LOL so they have built nukes... And many times?? Ok....
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Wisdo
semantics shamantics
12:13 PM on 07/28/2009
ah yes "trash talking to make israelis angry"

I can see that war is totally unavoidable now for Israel. Someone was 'diss'in them.
10:54 AM on 07/28/2009
As a European-based colonization effort, Israel is clearly bent on becoming the dominant power in the Middle East and it is in its benefit to completely level any surrounding nation that can at any point in its future equal Israel's military might. It lobbied for Iraq to be destroyed and now its Iran's turn. They will not rest until they attack every nation around it and destroy their military capabilities so that they can become the dominant power. all under the guise of "Preemptive Strikes."
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
06:44 PM on 07/28/2009
Obviously you have no understanding of the word colonization. It does not remotely apply to Israel's situation. Israel did not lobby whatsoever for the US to attack Iraq.
07:30 PM on 07/28/2009
wrong
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Paula Ann
10:43 AM on 07/28/2009
If Iran wants to develop nuclear power as an energy source, who has the right to deny it?
Couldn't these plants be monitored to ensure nuclear bombs were not being produced (I won't comment on their right to have them to save muddying the water.

I would appreciate serious answers.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
monkeysuit
10:58 AM on 07/28/2009
I don't think it has ever been a question of whether or not they deserve nuclear energy for the use of power. The problem is when they are enriching uranium capable of being used in a nuclear bomb. The reasons they can't have those are obvious. You cannot threaten neighbors and other countries and also make nuclear bombs. Especially when those threats involve wiping countries off of the map.



Monkeysuit
http://randompoliticalthoughtsandnews.blogspot.com/
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Wisdo
semantics shamantics
11:14 AM on 07/28/2009
hmm but you CAN threaten neighbours if you already have a bomb it seems. Threaten them, harass them and invade them.

do you EVER stop to think how incredibly hypocritical both the US and Israel sound on this issue?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:25 AM on 07/28/2009
Israel won't even admit that they have nuclear warheads, nor will they allow inspections. How is it that they're even taken seriously for criticizing another country that wants to protect themselves from Israel?
10:35 AM on 07/28/2009
Israel needs enemies to justify US exorbitant protection and dollars. The main enemy used to the PLO, then Hamas and now Iran, but Benjamin Netanyahu was unable to convince President Obama.

Nevertheless, the President nearly fell for it during the Iranian street protest -- when he came close to succumbing to critics who were taunting him, claiming he was too soft on Iran. The aim was (and still is) to trick the President into confrontation with Iran, which can only be good for their masters in Tel Aviv.

In a manner of speaking, Israel was the only child of the US, but now, we have a President who is trying to adopt more children. It means less quality time and toys for Israel. And by Jove, she is throwing tantrums and tears.

My fear is that if the diversionary tactics (from the “Two State Solution”) of the Israel fails, the Israelis might, out of desperation, do something silly to undo President Obama US foreign policy reset.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
monkeysuit
11:02 AM on 07/28/2009
Wow conspiracy theory? Nice. Maybe you should look at the facts. They are that Hamas wants to destroy Israel they have state so and with better weapons would mount a much larger scale attack then the little rockets they on occasion launch over the border. Then Iran who has a day of celebration where they call for the destruction of Israel. Their president has on more than on instance called for Israel to be wiped off the map.


Monkeysuit
http://randompoliticalthoughtsandnews.blogspot.com/
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Wisdo
semantics shamantics
11:21 AM on 07/28/2009
Facts: lots of people want to destry israel (for good resons) doesnt mean its going to happen.
Why I myself want to destroy texas, but with good reason, texas is not concerned.

Fact: Israel HAS nukes, Iran does NOT HAVE nukes.
Fact: Israel has massive US military support, Iran has no support from anyone.

Iran would never invade Israel and has never threatened to wipe Israel off any map.

They have said that the zionist regime will fade from the "pages of history"...

and Im sure thats true too. Its a hateful regime (just like Irans). But theres a heck of a difference between wanting political change in israel and threats of nuclear holocaust. (which would result in the destruction of most of the middle east and southern europe including Iran).

On the flip side Israel is a war mongering, mad country. War after war after War and last time I checked all were recently Initiated by Israel. Also Israel is currently illegally occupying palestine and torturing, starving and butchering those people.
Whens that going to be dealt with?

Lastly - if the Palestinians did have better arms and a few tanks maybe people like you would stop complaining that they only use indescriminate rocket fire to liberate themselves.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:29 AM on 07/28/2009
Hamas no longer has that position.

How about being balanced and recognizing that while Hamas did have that as their policy for years, they have made no progress. Meanwhile, Israel refuses to recognize Palestine or Palestinians right to exist and is actually wiping them off the map, they just won't say it.

http://palestinethinktank.com/2006/05/10/the-shrinking-map-of-palestine/
10:07 AM on 07/28/2009
Israel attacking Iran would be devastating to the US economy.

Israeli religious fundies don't care about the impact of their actions on the global economy. Since Americans provide billions and billions in taxdollars to Israel each year, they can weather the fallout.

While the average worker in the mid-west will be screwed when oil goes to 200/bl after Israel bombs Iran.

There is no benefit to America from Striking Iran, it'll just hurt more American families and put our troops over there at needless risk. So why do we let Israel threaten American National Security with these reckless actions?

Israelis don't give a crap about American Families, but they love our taxdollars and spineless politician sellouts.
10:04 AM on 07/28/2009
HOW ABOUT THIS FOR A SOLUTION - ISRAEL GIVES UP IT'S NUKES.

ALL THIS FUROR OVER IRAN IS ISRAELI PROPAGANDA. Israel has 200 nukes and never signed the NPT, it is the cause of a middle east arms race.

So if Israel will also submit to the same things asked of Iran with regards to nuclear weapons, it would be clear that Israel is actually in violation.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
06:50 PM on 07/28/2009
Israel's nuclear program is infinitely more responsible than the US program. Which country has used them on civilians not once but twice.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TrekBear
10:03 AM on 07/28/2009
Improved US-Iranian relations will do more for US and MIddle Eastern interests than US-Israel relations have or would. Israel needs to get over itself. It's no longer a victim of anyone or anything.
09:49 AM on 07/28/2009
Once again.

There is no evidence that Iran has ever pursued nuclear weapons, NONE

If anyone has solid evidence that Iran has pursued nuclear weapons, please share it with us.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jonjon66
09:19 AM on 07/28/2009
Israel attacking Iran is Israel grand idea to keep bringing in the billions in US aid , no real story here.
09:01 AM on 07/28/2009
I wonder just because Iran hasn't invaded anyone in over 100 years (they did invade and conquered a lot while they were known as Persians) doesn't mean that they will not invade if they feel an outside threat and believe that they have a reasonable chance of winning if they do invade/
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
stanschurman
09:20 AM on 07/28/2009
Great logic worthy of George Bush. That could pretty much be said of any country, right?
09:36 AM on 07/28/2009
true it can be said of any country. anyone with an army and thinks they'll win and have serious disagreements will likely invade the other country to settle the differences. I was just using the previous thing as an attempt (most likely failed) to say "just because they haven't attacked anyone in a while doesn't mean that they will not attack in the future