|
US Monitoring Israel's Iran Options
By Nathan Guttman
03/13/06 -- --
Jerusalem Post -- The Pentagon is looking into
the possibility of Israel launching a strike against Iran's nuclear
facilities. In the past months there were several working-level
discussions trying to map out the possible scenarios for such an
attack, according to administration sources who were briefed on
these meetings.
The discussions, which were describes as intelligence-oriented and
not policy-oriented, examined the likelihood of an Israeli
pre-emptive attack against Iran and the method in which such an
attack could be carried out. One of the main questions presented in
these discussions was whether Israel would inform the US in advance
in case such an attack is to take place and when would such an
advance notice be given.
The sources pointed out that it is clear that Israel would have to
coordinate with the US forces air control any attempt to fly over
Iraq on the way to Iran, if Israel chooses to attack using the
shortest route.
Last week, former Israeli Chief of Staff Moshe Ya'alon said in
Washington that the West does have a military option against Iran
and that a joint US-NATO-Israeli air strike against dozens of
nuclear facilities in Iran could set back Teheran's nuclear programs
for several years. [JR: And also launch World War III]
The sources stresses that Ya'alon's remarks were not the trigger for
the Pentagon consultations about a possible Israeli attack but added
that there is a sense in the administration that the Iranian issue
is gaining urgency.
The Washington Post reported Monday that the Bush administration has
made Iran a top priority issue and that the president and his team
had several meetings on the issue to discuss Iran's nuclear plans.
The Pentagon discussions, according to the sources, did not lead to
any conclusion regarding the plausibility of an Israeli attack
against Iran, nor did it recommend any action by the US.
Israeli and US sources have said in the past weeks that the US did
not convey any message to Israel in which it asked to refrain from
an attack and has not raised the issue in bilateral discussions with
the Israelis. Both countries share intelligence on the situation in
Iran and the advance of the nuclear program, but do not discuss -
according to sources who took part in bilateral talks - the
possibility of using military force to stop Iran from acquiring
nuclear weapons.
The American assumption, according to the administration sources, is
that an Israeli decision on attacking Iran is not imminent and that
in any case it would not be taken before the Israeli elections,
scheduled for March 28.
One of the questions Pentagon analysts are grappling with is how an
Israeli attack - if launched - would affect the US and its forces in
the region and whether it would force the US to follow with further
strikes in order to complete the mission. The US is also discussing
what could be the possible avenues of retaliation Iran would take
against US's forces and interests in the region.
US Vice President Dick Cheney said last week that all options are
"on the table" regarding Iran and on Sunday leading senators pointed
out in TV interviews that the US can stop Iran's nuclear program.
Senator George Allen (R-VA) said, relating to the question of using
military force against Iran, that it is not the preferable route,
but "if necessary, it is an option", and Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE)
stressed that he believed that Iran's nuclear program can be stopped
"short of war".
The UN Security Council is expected to take on the Iranian issue
this week. During the weekend consultations continued between the US
and European representatives and those from Russia and China in
attempt to reach an agreement on the language of a Security Council
presidential declaration regarding Iran.
The Americans would like to include a clause that would give Iran a
14 day ultimatum to accept the international community's conditions,
before moving ahead with sanctions. Western diplomats said Monday
that it is not clear if Russia and China would agree to such an
ultimatum and speculated that they might insist on a month's period
instead of the proposed 14 days.
Click below to read or post comment's on this article
(In accordance with Title 17
U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to
those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational purposes.
Information Clearing House has no affiliation whatsoever with the
originator of this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) |
