Iran Can Stop Economic, Diplomatic Sanctions, Official Says

By Jim Garamone

American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON  – Economic and diplomatic sanctions are “biting” Iran, but Iranian government leaders can stop the pain by ending their nuclear weapons program, a senior Pentagon official said today.

“Our assessment of the program remains the same. … We are very concerned about where they might be headed,” said George Little, acting assistant secretary of defense for public affairs. “An Iran with a nuclear weapon is unacceptable.”

The United States has made that point crystal clear that all options are on the table to prevent Iran from developing that capability, Little said in a meeting with reporters.

“We don’t know, at this stage, whether they have made the decision to proceed with the development of a nuclear weapon,” he said. “It would be unacceptable if they do move forward.”

American experts are working to discern just what Iranian leaders have decided. “Our government has been very clear about what needs to happen,” Little said. If Iran gives up its nuclear program, he noted, the country can rejoin the community of nations.

Little said Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta believes the sanctions are working. Independent news reports out of Tehran also stress the sanctions are impacting Iranians much harder now than in months past.

“The Iranian regime is increasingly isolated because of these sanctions, and they know the impact they are having inside Iran,” Little said. “Whether it factors into their calculus on the nuclear program is up to the Iranians.”

Iran Could Make Gross Misjudgment, Chairman Says

By Jim Garamone

American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON  – Iranian leaders could make a gross misjudgment of American will and suffer the consequences, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said last night.

Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey also explained to Charlie Rose during a PBS interview that while Iran operates on its own internal logic, that doesn’t mean Iranian leaders will be reasonable.

The chairman received some criticism for saying the Iranian regime was rational during recent Capitol Hill testimony.

“Rational meant to me that there is an evident pattern of behavior that this regime has followed since the Islamic Revolution that, first and foremost, expresses their intention to remain in power and to preserve the regime,” he said. “Based on that, there are some things that we know they will respond to. That’s a rational actor.”

By that definition, he said, former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein also was a rational actor. Yet acting with his own logic, the Iraqi leader made a gross misjudgment of American will. The Iranians may find themselves in the same boat. “They could get it wrong and suffer the consequences,” the chairman said.

American and Israeli leaders agree that Iran getting a nuclear weapon would be an existential threat to Israel and hugely destabilizing to the entire Middle East, Dempsey said.

U.S. and Israeli leaders agree the threat exists and only diverge in timing. “We don’t disagree in terms of intent,” the chairman said. “We disagree in terms of time.”

Both U.S. and Israeli leaders say they are determined to prevent Iran from achieving a nuclear weapon. “All options are on the table. And it’s a matter of time,” the general said.

The current U.S. strategy is based on giving economic sanctions and diplomatic pressures time to work. The general would not go into how much time is available. “It’s time not necessarily measured in terms of months or years, but in terms of our ability and capability to collect intelligence, to see if they cross any thresholds,” he said.

An attack on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure would cause many other effects, he noted. The Iranians could, for example, try to close the Strait of Hormuz, through which much of the world’s oil flows.

Iran also is a player in the war in Syria, shipping arms to Bashir al-Assad’s regime, Dempsey said. The United Nations estimates that the regime has killed more than 8,000 Syrians and displaced hundreds of thousands more.

Many have asked for an intervention to protect the people of Syria from their own leaders, much like the NATO intervention that toppled Libyan dictator Moammar Ghadafi last year. U.S. military officials continue to study the situation on the ground.

“Just in terms of geography, size of the country, the demographics of the country, the military capabilities of the country, (it’s a) vastly different challenge” than Libya, Dempsey said.

The opposition groups themselves are fragmented and there is no clear leader like there was in Libya, the general said. And, there is no consensus in the United Nations for action. The Arab League has condemned Assad and asked him to step down, “but has not asked for any intervention,” he said.

“The United States can always act in its own self defense and for its own vital national interests, should those be declared in this case,” he said. “But it’s also very clear that to produce a useful, enduring outcome, it’s always better to do that as part of a coalition.”

The U.S. military has been working on intelligence estimates of the situation in Syria and all the things that would be necessary in order to take planning to the next level. “But we have not yet planned in detail any particular military option in Syria,” he said.

Syria unrest began as a result of the Arab Spring last year when Tunisian and Egyptian citizens rose up against entrenched regimes. Egypt is a powerful U.S. ally in the region and the military-to-military relationship between the countries continues, Dempsey said.

Egypt will become even more important when the Assad regime in Syria falls, the chairman said. “When Syria tumbles, you then have … a Sunni majority government in Damascus that kind of completes an arc of Sunni Islam and standing off kind of against the Shia world,” the chairman said. “The point being that when you have this kind of arc of instability is probably a good way to put it, Egypt becomes a really important player in this. So it’s really important for us to build – to continue to build the relationship with the emerging Egypt.”

In the long-term, Dempsey believes the Arab Spring is a good thing for the world. In the short term it is destabilizing. But it will be good for the world if it remains a discussion about the competition of ideas, and not a competition for power, he said.

U.S. Will Act to Prevent Iran from Developing Nuclear Weapons, Panetta Says

By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, March 6, 2012 – Iran is America’s greatest concern in the Middle East, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta told the American Israel Public Affairs Committee today.

“No greater threat exists to the security of Israel and to the entire region -- and indeed to the United States -- than a nuclear-armed Iran,” Panetta told the group. He noted the United States “is determined to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.”

Panetta is the first sitting defense secretary to address the group in 20 years. He spoke about the closeness of the U.S.-Israeli relationship, calling it a partnership. But he kept going back to the danger Iran’s nuclear program poses for the region and the world.

“Let me be clear: we do not have a policy of containment. We have a policy of preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons,” Panetta said.

He detailed the “unprecedented pressure” the Obama administration and international allies have placed on Tehran. The Iranian regime faces crippling sanctions and growing isolation. Its closest ally -- the Asad regime in Syria -- is tottering and the Iranians face a choice, he said. The regime can “either meet their international obligations and rejoin the community of nations, or violate their international obligations, and face the consequences,” he said.

The United States would rather see a solution come about without the use military force, Panetta said.

“We want diplomacy to work. We will back this diplomacy with strong and increasing pressure … and we will keep all options -- including military action -- on the table to prevent them from obtaining a nuclear weapon,” he said.

Panetta said Iranian leaders must understand that President Barack Obama is not bluffing when he says all options are on the table. He noted the president has made it clear that the United States does not bluff.

“In this town it’s easy to talk tough,” Panetta said. “Acting tough is a helluva lot more difficult.”

He pointed out that Obama ordered 30,000 additional troops into battle in Afghanistan to confront a resurgent Taliban. The president also launched a comprehensive precision bombing campaign to protect the Libyan people, and ultimately toppled a brutal dictator.

“He has ordered U.S. warships to pass through the Strait of Hormuz despite the threats we have received from Iran,” the secretary said. “He has been the driving force behind the most successful and lethal counterterrorism campaign in U.S. history, culminating in the bold decision to send U.S. special operations forces hundreds of miles into Pakistan to take down Bin Laden.”

Panetta said the president has shown he is willing to do whatever is necessary to protect the United States, its allies and its interests, and Iranian leaders should not doubt his determination.

“Military action is the last alternative when all else fails,” Panetta said. “But make no mistake, when all else fails, we will act.”

Panetta: Keeping Iran Free of Nuclear Weapons a Common Goal

By Cheryl Pellerin
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Dec. 2, 2011 – The United States and its allies and partners in the international community must do everything possible to make sure Iran never obtains a nuclear weapon, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said tonight.

Taking questions from the audience after his speech during the opening session of the 2011 Saban Forum, Panetta addressed a range of Middle East issues, including the nuclear threat from Iran.

Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad insists his nation’s nuclear program is a peaceful enterprise, but the International Atomic Energy Agency reported in November about evidence indicating that Iran is trying to build a nuclear bomb.

“Iran’s continued drive to develop nuclear capabilities, including troubling enrichment activities and past work on weaponization documented by the IAEA, and its continued support to groups like Hezbollah, Hamas and other terrorist organizations,” Panetta said in his opening remarks, “make clear that the regime in Tehran is a very grave threat to all of us.”

The forum is an annual gathering of U.S. and Israeli officials and policymakers. This year the group focused on the historic shifts taking place across the Arab world and their implications for U.S.-Israeli security and interests in the Middle East region.

About Iran, an increasingly menacing element of the region, President Barack Obama said last month that the United States will take no options off the table in dealing with that country’s nuclear ambitions.

“At this point, we believe that the combination of economic and diplomatic sanctions that have been placed on Iran have had a serious impact,” Panetta said. “Iran is isolating itself from the rest of the world. It is truly becoming, chiefly as a result of the attack on the British embassy, a pariah in that region. Their own government is off balance in terms of trying to establish any kind of civility within Iran.

The international community has a common goal, Panetta said: an Iran that does not develop a nuclear weapon.

Working together with Israel, with allies in the region and with the international community is the best way to pressure Iran, Panetta said.

“It’s the best way I believe to ultimately weaken this nation, so that ultimately they have to make a decision about whether they continue to be a pariah or whether they decide to join the international community,” the secretary added.

Panetta noted that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said the use of military force should be a last resort. Using military force against Iran’s nuclear program would delay the nuclear effort only by a year or two, the secretary said. “A greater concern is the unintended consequences,” he added. These could include a backlash in the region that would serve to strengthen a regime that is now weak and isolated.

The United State would be blamed for such an attack, the secretary said, “and we could possibly be a target of retaliation from Iran, [which might] strike our ships [and] military bases.”

Using military force against Iran also could produce severe consequences for economies around the world, Panetta said, including those of Europe and the United States. And using force could prompt an escalation in the region, he told the audience -- a nuclear arms race “that I think would consume the Middle East in confrontation and conflict.”

The key, he said, is for the international community to work together to make sure Iran does not acquire a nuclear weapon.

“We have made good progress in these efforts,” the secretary said. “We continue to make good progress in these efforts. That’s where we ought to continue to put our pressures and our economic and diplomatic efforts.”

The world always will have military action as a last resort, Panetta said. “But it must be the last resort, not the first,” he emphasized.

Bushehr

Lots of talk the last few days about Iran's nuclear plant at Bushehr. To make a long story short, its getting loaded with nulcear fuel on 21 August, meaning any strike on the site after that date risks leaking radioactive material into the air.

Lot's of dramatic talk here and here.

If the Israelis were to attack the blow might not be struck from the air at all. Israel has three Dolphin Class submarines capable of launching missiles from its torpedo tubes, probably four a piece. These would be the Popeye AGM/142 Have Nap.

Not a bad bit of punch and not a bad option.