Tweet
BUSH WON'T SUPPORT ISRAELI ATTACK ON IRAN
PanARMENIAN.Net
26.09.2008 13:41 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ US president told Israeli prime minister he would
not back attack on Iran, senior European diplomatic sources said.
Israel gave serious thought this spring to launching a military strike
on Iran's nuclear sites but was told by President George W. Bush that
he would not support it and did not expect to revise that view for
the rest of his presidency, The Guardian reports.
"The then prime minister, Ehud Olmert, used the occasion of Bush's trip
to Israel for the 60th anniversary of the state's founding to raise the
issue in a one-on-one meeting on May 14, the sources said. "He took it
[the refusal of a US green light] as where they were at the moment,
and that the US position was unlikely to change as long as Bush was
in office", they added.
The sources work for a European head of government who met the Israeli
leader some time after the Bush visit. Their talks were so sensitive
that no note-takers attended, but the European leader subsequently
divulged to his officials the highly sensitive contents of what Olmert
had told him of Bush's position.
Bush's decision to refuse to offer any support for a strike on Iran
appeared to be based on two factors, the sources said. One was US
concern over Iran's likely retaliation, which would probably include
a wave of attacks on US military and other personnel in Iraq and
Afghanistan, as well as on shipping in the Persian Gulf.
The other was US anxiety that Israel would not succeed in disabling
Iran's nuclear facilities in a single assault even with the use
of dozens of aircraft. It could not mount a series of attacks over
several days without risking full-scale war. So the benefits would
not outweigh the costs.
Iran has repeatedly said it would react with force to any attack. Some
western government analysts believe this could include asking Lebanon's
Shia movement Hizbollah to strike at the US.
Even if Israel were to launch an attack on Iran without US approval its
planes could not reach their targets without the US becoming aware of
their flightpath and having time to ask them to abandon their mission.
"The shortest route to Natanz lies across Iraq and the US has total
control of Iraqi airspace", the official said. Natanz, about 100
miles north of Isfahan, is the site of an uranium enrichment plant.
In this context Iran would be bound to assume Bush had approved it,
even if the White House denied fore-knowledge, raising the prospect
of an attack against the US.
Several high-level Israeli officials have hinted over the last two
years that Israel might strike Iran's nuclear facilities to prevent
them being developed to provide sufficient weapons-grade uranium to
make a nuclear bomb. Iran has always denied having such plans.
Olmert himself raised the possibility of an attack at a press
conference during a visit to London last November, when he said
sanctions were not enough to block Iran's nuclear program.
"Economic sanctions are effective. They have an important impact
already, but they are not sufficient. So there should be more. Up to
where? Up until Iran will stop its nuclear program," he said.
The revelation that Olmert was not merely saber-rattling to try to
frighten Iran but considered the option seriously enough to discuss
it with Bush shows how concerned Israeli officials had become.
Bush's refusal to support an attack, and the strong suggestion he would
not change his mind, is likely to end speculation that Washington
might be preparing an "October surprise" before the US presidential
election. Some analysts have argued that Bush would back an Israeli
attack in an effort to help John McCain's campaign by creating an
eve-of-poll security crisis.
Others have said that in the case of an Obama victory, the
vice-president, Dick Cheney, the main White House hawk, would want
to cripple Iran's nuclear program in the dying weeks of Bush's term.
During Saddam Hussein's rule in 1981, Israeli aircraft successfully
destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor at Osirak shortly before it was due
to start operating.
Last September they knocked out a buildings complex in northern Syria,
which US officials later said had been a partly constructed nuclear
reactor based on a North Korean design. Syria said the building was
a military complex but had no links to a nuclear program.
In contrast, Iran's nuclear facilities, which are officially described
as intended only for civilian purposes, are dispersed around the
country and some are in fortified bunkers underground.
In public, Bush gave no hint of his view that the military option
had to be excluded. In a speech to the Knesset the following day he
confined himself to telling Israel's parliament: "America stands with
you in firmly opposing Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions. Permitting
the world's leading sponsor of terror to possess the world's deadliest
weapon would be an unforgivable betrayal of future generations. For the
sake of peace, the world must not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon."
Three weeks after Bush's red light, on June 2, Israel mounted a
massive air exercise covering several hundred miles in the eastern
Mediterranean. It involved dozens of warplanes, including F-15s,
F-16s and aerial refueling tankers.
The size and scope of the exercise ensured that the US and other
nations in the region saw it, said a US official, who estimated the
distance was about the same as from Israel to Natanz.
A few days later, Israel's deputy prime minister, Shaul Mofaz, told
the paper Yediot Ahronot: "If Iran continues its program to develop
nuclear weapons, we will attack it. The window of opportunity has
closed. The sanctions are not effective. There will be no alternative
but to attack Iran in order to stop the Iranian nuclear program."
The exercise and Mofaz's comments may have been designed to boost
the Israeli government and military's own morale as well, perhaps,
to persuade Bush to reconsider his veto. Last week Mofaz narrowly
lost a primary within the ruling Kadima party to become Israel's
next prime minister. Tzipi Livni, who won the contest, takes a less
hawkish position.
The US announced two weeks ago that it would sell Israel 1,000
bunker-busting bombs. The move was interpreted by some analysts as a
consolation prize for Israel after Bush told Olmert of his opposition
to an attack on Iran. But it could also enhance Israel's attack
options in case the next US president revives the military option.
The guided bomb unit-39 (GBU-39) has a penetration capacity equivalent
to a one-tonne bomb. Israel already has some bunker-busters," the
article says.
PanARMENIAN.Net
26.09.2008 13:41 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ US president told Israeli prime minister he would
not back attack on Iran, senior European diplomatic sources said.
Israel gave serious thought this spring to launching a military strike
on Iran's nuclear sites but was told by President George W. Bush that
he would not support it and did not expect to revise that view for
the rest of his presidency, The Guardian reports.
"The then prime minister, Ehud Olmert, used the occasion of Bush's trip
to Israel for the 60th anniversary of the state's founding to raise the
issue in a one-on-one meeting on May 14, the sources said. "He took it
[the refusal of a US green light] as where they were at the moment,
and that the US position was unlikely to change as long as Bush was
in office", they added.
The sources work for a European head of government who met the Israeli
leader some time after the Bush visit. Their talks were so sensitive
that no note-takers attended, but the European leader subsequently
divulged to his officials the highly sensitive contents of what Olmert
had told him of Bush's position.
Bush's decision to refuse to offer any support for a strike on Iran
appeared to be based on two factors, the sources said. One was US
concern over Iran's likely retaliation, which would probably include
a wave of attacks on US military and other personnel in Iraq and
Afghanistan, as well as on shipping in the Persian Gulf.
The other was US anxiety that Israel would not succeed in disabling
Iran's nuclear facilities in a single assault even with the use
of dozens of aircraft. It could not mount a series of attacks over
several days without risking full-scale war. So the benefits would
not outweigh the costs.
Iran has repeatedly said it would react with force to any attack. Some
western government analysts believe this could include asking Lebanon's
Shia movement Hizbollah to strike at the US.
Even if Israel were to launch an attack on Iran without US approval its
planes could not reach their targets without the US becoming aware of
their flightpath and having time to ask them to abandon their mission.
"The shortest route to Natanz lies across Iraq and the US has total
control of Iraqi airspace", the official said. Natanz, about 100
miles north of Isfahan, is the site of an uranium enrichment plant.
In this context Iran would be bound to assume Bush had approved it,
even if the White House denied fore-knowledge, raising the prospect
of an attack against the US.
Several high-level Israeli officials have hinted over the last two
years that Israel might strike Iran's nuclear facilities to prevent
them being developed to provide sufficient weapons-grade uranium to
make a nuclear bomb. Iran has always denied having such plans.
Olmert himself raised the possibility of an attack at a press
conference during a visit to London last November, when he said
sanctions were not enough to block Iran's nuclear program.
"Economic sanctions are effective. They have an important impact
already, but they are not sufficient. So there should be more. Up to
where? Up until Iran will stop its nuclear program," he said.
The revelation that Olmert was not merely saber-rattling to try to
frighten Iran but considered the option seriously enough to discuss
it with Bush shows how concerned Israeli officials had become.
Bush's refusal to support an attack, and the strong suggestion he would
not change his mind, is likely to end speculation that Washington
might be preparing an "October surprise" before the US presidential
election. Some analysts have argued that Bush would back an Israeli
attack in an effort to help John McCain's campaign by creating an
eve-of-poll security crisis.
Others have said that in the case of an Obama victory, the
vice-president, Dick Cheney, the main White House hawk, would want
to cripple Iran's nuclear program in the dying weeks of Bush's term.
During Saddam Hussein's rule in 1981, Israeli aircraft successfully
destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor at Osirak shortly before it was due
to start operating.
Last September they knocked out a buildings complex in northern Syria,
which US officials later said had been a partly constructed nuclear
reactor based on a North Korean design. Syria said the building was
a military complex but had no links to a nuclear program.
In contrast, Iran's nuclear facilities, which are officially described
as intended only for civilian purposes, are dispersed around the
country and some are in fortified bunkers underground.
In public, Bush gave no hint of his view that the military option
had to be excluded. In a speech to the Knesset the following day he
confined himself to telling Israel's parliament: "America stands with
you in firmly opposing Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions. Permitting
the world's leading sponsor of terror to possess the world's deadliest
weapon would be an unforgivable betrayal of future generations. For the
sake of peace, the world must not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon."
Three weeks after Bush's red light, on June 2, Israel mounted a
massive air exercise covering several hundred miles in the eastern
Mediterranean. It involved dozens of warplanes, including F-15s,
F-16s and aerial refueling tankers.
The size and scope of the exercise ensured that the US and other
nations in the region saw it, said a US official, who estimated the
distance was about the same as from Israel to Natanz.
A few days later, Israel's deputy prime minister, Shaul Mofaz, told
the paper Yediot Ahronot: "If Iran continues its program to develop
nuclear weapons, we will attack it. The window of opportunity has
closed. The sanctions are not effective. There will be no alternative
but to attack Iran in order to stop the Iranian nuclear program."
The exercise and Mofaz's comments may have been designed to boost
the Israeli government and military's own morale as well, perhaps,
to persuade Bush to reconsider his veto. Last week Mofaz narrowly
lost a primary within the ruling Kadima party to become Israel's
next prime minister. Tzipi Livni, who won the contest, takes a less
hawkish position.
The US announced two weeks ago that it would sell Israel 1,000
bunker-busting bombs. The move was interpreted by some analysts as a
consolation prize for Israel after Bush told Olmert of his opposition
to an attack on Iran. But it could also enhance Israel's attack
options in case the next US president revives the military option.
The guided bomb unit-39 (GBU-39) has a penetration capacity equivalent
to a one-tonne bomb. Israel already has some bunker-busters," the
article says.