Iran

Source: News Max

News that Russia will load nuclear fuel rods into an Iranian reactor has touched off a countdown to a point of no return, a deadline by which Israel would have to launch an attack on Iran's Bushehr reactor before it becomes effectively "immune" to any assault, says former Bush administration U.N. Ambassador John R. Bolton.

Once the fuel rods are loaded, Bolton told Fox News on Friday afternoon, "it makes it essentially immune from attack by Israel. Because once the rods are in the reactor an attack on the reactor risks spreading radiation in the air, and perhaps into the water of the Persian Gulf."

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin declared in March that Russia would start the Bushehr reactor this summer. But the announcement from a spokesman for Russia's state atomic agency to Reuters Friday sent international diplomats scrambling to head off a crisis.

The story immediately became front-page news in Israel, which has laid precise plans to carry out an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities while going along with President Obama's plans to use international sanctions and diplomatic persuasion to convince Iran's clerics not to go nuclear.

Bolton made it clear that it is widely assumed that any Israeli attack on the Bushehr reactor must take place before the reactor is loaded with fuel rods.

"If they're going to do it that's the window that they have," Bolton declared. "Otherwise as I said before, once the rods are in the reactor, if you attack the reactor you're going to open it up and radiation will escape at least into the atmosphere and possibly into the waters of the Persian Gulf.

"So most people think that neither Israel nor the United States, come to that, would attack the reactor after it's been fueled."

Bolton cited the 1981 Israeli attack on Saddam Hussein's Osirak reactor outside Baghdad and the September 2007 Israeli attack on a North Korean reactor being built in Syria. Both of those strikes came before fuel rods were loaded into those reactors.

"So if it's going to happen in Bushehr it has to happen before the fuel rods go in," Bolton said.

The conversation that touched off the de facto deadline for Israeli military action was a telephone conversation with wire services involving Sergei Novikov, a spokesman for Rosatom, the Russian Energy State Nuclear Corp.

Novikov said: "The fuel will be loaded on Aug 21. This is the start of the physical launch” of the reactor.

"From that moment the Bushehr plant will be officially considered a nuclear-energy installation," Novikov said, adding that the head of Rosatom, Sergei Kiriyenko, will visit Bushehr Aug. 21 to conduct a ceremony for the event.
According to Bolton, once the reactor is operational, it is only a matter of time before it begins producing plutonium that could be used in a nuclear weapon.

"And in the normal operation of this reactor, in just a fairly short period of time, you could get substantial amounts of plutonium to use as nuclear weapons," Bolton told Fox.

Russia, which is operating under a $1 billion contract with Iran, has spent more than a decade building the reactor. If Russia moves forward with its plan to fuel the reactor, it could be seen as a major setback to the Obama administration's strategy of engaging Russian leaders in order to win their cooperation.

"The U.S. urged them not to send the Iranian's fuel rods," Bolton said. "They did that. The Obama administration has urged them not to insert the fuel rods in the reactors, but as they've just announced that will begin next week. What that does over time is help Iran get another route to nuclear weapons through the plutonium they could reprocess out of the spent fuel rods."

The developments mean Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu soon may face a stark choice: Attack the Bushehr reactor in the next 8 days, or allow it to become operational despite the certainty it would greatly enhance Iran's ability to create nuclear weapons.

Russian leaders have said the Bushehr reactor project is being closely monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN's nuclear watchdog group. According to Iran's ISNA news agency, IAEA inspectors will be on hand to observe the fuel-rod loading process that is now scheduled to begin Aug. 21.

According to Russian officials, Iran has promised in writing to send all spent fuel rods from Bushehr back to Russia for reprocessing, to ensure they cannot be used for nuclear weapons.

Bolton said the reactor has been "a hole" in American foreign policy for over a decade.

The failure to demand it be shut down began in the Bush years, he said, and continues with the Obama administration "under what I believe is the mistaken theory that Iran is entitled to the peaceful use of nuclear energy."

"I don't think Iran is entitled to that, or I don't think we ought to allow it to happen, because they're manifestly violating any number of obligations under the non-proliferation treaty not to seek nuclear weapons. But this has been a hole in American policy for some number of years, and Iran and Russia are obviously exploiting it," Bolton said.

Russia’s move would put Iran "in a much better position overall," he said, adding, "I think this is a very delicate point, as I say, it closes off to the Israelis one possible target for pre-emptive military action.

Source: Google/AFP

Russia on Tuesday blasted unilateral European Union sanctions imposed against Iran's energy sector as "unacceptable", saying the move showed a disregard for the UN Security Council.

"We have already said many times that we consider unacceptable the practice of unilateral or collective sanctions measures against Iran, that go beyond the Security Council sanctions regime in operation in the country," the foreign ministry said.

The statement came after EU foreign ministers on Monday formally adopted new sanctions on Iran's key energy sector in a bid to force it to return to talks on its controversial nuclear programme.

Iran is under four sets of UN sanctions over its refusal to heed repeated Security Council ultimatums to suspend uranium enrichment, the most controversial part of its nuclear programme.

Iran says that it is enriching uranium purely for peaceful use, but Western powers are concerned that it intends to develop a nuclear weapon.

Russia said Tuesday that the EU sanctions showed "disregard for the carefully regulated and coordinated provisions of the UN Security Council."

Both the EU and US sanctions "do not promote finding a speedy political and diplomatic resolution of the problem. For us this is obvious," the ministry said.

Russia "categorically rejects" any attempts to use sanctions against companies and individuals from third countries who are "conscientiously carrying out the demands of UN Security Council resolutions," it said.

Source: DEBKAfile

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu keeps on vowing that Iran will not be allowed to establish an outpost on Israel's borders, but he has not lifted a finger to stop this menace ensconcing itself in the north. He cannot realistically expect feeble UN reprimands and the puny French contingent of UNIFIL to blow away the 20,000 Hizballah troops dug in in 160 new positions in South Lebanon, backed by a vast rocket arsenal - even though this is a gross violation of UN Security Council resolution 1701.

Iran's proxy has therefore won the first round of its drive to recover the forward positions lost in the 2006 war and stands ready for the next. Israel has reinforced its border defenses against this massed Hizballah strength just a few hundreds meters away.
...

In one instance last week, French troops on patrol were pulled out of their armed vehicles, their weapons snatched and they were beaten with sticks, rocks and eggs.

This was no spontaneous outburst. debkafile's military sources report that the "villagers" were instructed by Iran's new Iranian commander in Lebanon, Hossein Mahadavi, to hit on the French contingent to punish Paris for supporting the UN Security Council's expanded sanctions for its nuclear violations, while at the same time blocking the peacekeeper's access to the "closed areas" where the new Hizballah bases have been set up.

Tehran nominated a high-ranking officer to Lebanon - Mahadavi's former job was commander of Iran's Overseas Division - indicating the importance it attaches to this volatile borderland. Indeed, if Hizballah gets away with its new deployment in the South and is allowed to make it permanent, the UN force will have lost even this scrappy foothold and Hizballah will be free to carry on its preparations for war without the slightest hindrance.

So much for Netanyahu's pledge, reiterated during his talks and interviews in the United States last week, that in negotiations with Arabs, especially the Palestinians, Israel will never accept any accommodation that permits Iran to set up military and rocket bases on its borders.

The fact is that since he entered the prime minister's office, he and defense minister Ehud Barak have done nothing to hold back the stream of armed Hizballah militiamen flooding South Lebanon, although they are now actively endangering the one-and-a-half million Israelis living just across the border.

If they imagined that UN peacekeepers would suddenly stand up and start repelling this southward tide of men and war materiel, they need only to take note of the tepid UN reprimand last Friday to understand that the Elysee Palace had no intention of letting French troops pick up the Hizballah ball and chase the Shiite terrorists back to their former positions.

Tehran and Hizballah therefore felt they could safely issue a new spate of threats: Israelis traveling anywhere in the world faced kidnap or death in response to a series of hits attributed to their clandestine agencies, such as the assassination of a key Hizballah commander Imad Mughniyeh in Damascus in 2008, the deaths of the Iranian nuclear physicist Prof. Massoud Ali Mohammmadi in the middle of Tehran in January of this year, and the Hamas operative responsible for Iranian money transfers to the Gaza Strip Mohammed al-Mabhouh in Dubai nine days later.

Israel responded to the verbal escalation on July 7, by doing something it has never done before: Col. Ronen Marli, chief of the northern border's Western Brigade - the unit which will have to hold off the enemy in the early hours of attack from Lebanon - exhibited to the public aerial photos and intelligence maps recording the new spread of Hizballah forces: He reported 20,000 armed men scattered through 160 village and towns - only in the South, where its presence is prohibited by the UN-mediated ceasefire of 2006. The images did not include the substantial strength Hizballah maintains in central Lebanon and the Beqaa Valley to the east, or its estimated 40,000 rockets and missiles.

The Israeli colonel was of the opinion that an "event (a military attack or terrorist operation) could erupt today or in a year." He admitted it could be a surprise. Adding: "But we are working in different ways to thwart any event and if happens, we'll know how to handle it."

The IDF backed him up with an announcement that Israel is beefing up its strength along the Lebanese border and, the next day, July 8, the Jerusalem center for terrorist threats, published a warning to Israelis abroad, including the United States, to beware of abductions and murderous attacks.

Saturday, a Hizballah spokesman responded: "All three (UN, France, Israel) are preparing something, but we are ready," it said. "Our forces in the South are on the highest level of war preparedness."

Hezbollah is the real military arm of the nation of Lebanon, and it has an ally in Iran, but in no way would this military organization be capable or willing to win a 'victory' in any sense of the word by attacking Israel. For Hezbollah to carry out such an act defies all common sense and provides no strategic value or longer term security. The outcome of such an act would far outweigh any potential benefits. The notion that Hezbollah would preemptively attack Israel at the behest of anyone, even Iran, is a fiction and this DEBKAfile author either knows it and doesn't care, or is caught in the web of violence self justified by the desire to see even parity of position with other nations as a threat.

Israel regularly allies itself with the U.S if it suits its interests, in fact militaries the world over ally themselves with various nations, even organizing bureaucratic structures like NATO to govern these alliances. It is not by mistake that the link between Iran and Hezbollah warrants an alternative definition in the Western media however, since Hezbollah is not recognized by the Western political apparatus as being a legitimate functioning organ of the Lebanese nation, but is instead branded a 'terrorist organization'.

In the realm of political theatre Lebanon has a military, one which proved largely inactive during Israels bombardment and invasion in 2006, and in proving ineffective gave command over to Hezbollah by way of default. The military in most respects fell out of favour with the Lebanese people. It was Hezbollah that defended the nations borders and secured 'territorial' integrity, even providing aid and assistance in rebuilding once the conflict closed.

If Israel is to see every strengthening of Iran's or Lebanon's military capability to defend itself, since both these countries have a considerable gap to mend to become offensively formidable, than war in the area is assured, caught as it is in a loop of poor logic.

The objective evidence proves without a doubt that Israel has been an aggressor nation since its inception, a nation whose mission of colonialism breeds distrust and defensiveness among it's neighbours. If Israel sees its neighbours acting to work in any tangible way to secure their own defense they thus declare it an act of aggression, or war, justifying their own further aggressiveness.

As long as Islamic nations are treated in the context of a double standard regarding their social/economic and political progress they will forever be branded as threats to the status quo, even if all they wish to do is develop internal nuclear based energy production upon which to grow their nations relative prosperity.

Source: BBC

Iran has accused the UK, Germany and the UAE of refusing to provide fuel to Iranian passenger planes.

The allegation came days after the US enacted unilateral sanctions over Iran's nuclear programme, to penalise foreign companies trading with Tehran.

Britain said it was not aware of any refusal to refuel Iranian planes, and Germany stressed there was no ban.

Oil firms contacted by the BBC said they could not comment on individual contracts.

Tehran says its nuclear industry is for peaceful purposes but Western powers fear it is trying to develop a bomb.

"Since last week, our planes have been refused fuel at airports in Britain, Germany and UAE because of the sanctions imposed by America," Mehdi Aliyari, secretary of the Iranian Airlines Union, told Iranian media.

He said the national carrier Iran Air and a private airline, Mahan Air, had both run into refuelling problems.

"Refusing to provide fuel to Iranian passenger planes by these countries is a violation of international conventions," he added.
'Retaliation'

Iranian lawmaker Heshmatollah Falahatpisheh said Iran would retaliate.

"Iran will do the same to ships and planes of those countries that cause problems for us," Iran's Isna news agency quoted him as saying.

A spokeswoman for the Abu Dhabi Airports Company (ADAC), which manages the airports in the UAE cities of Abu Dhabi and Al Ain, told Reuters news agency the company was continuing to refuel Iranian jets.

"We have contracts with Iranian passenger flights and continue to allow refuelling," she added.

But AFP news agency quoted "a source close to the aviation sector in the UAE" as saying there had been a problem with an unnamed international fuel supplier.

"A servicing company which provides fuelling at several airports around the world has refused to provide Iranian planes with fuel, including at UAE terminals," the source said on condition of anonymity.

A spokesman for the UK's Civil Aviation Authority told the BBC any move to withhold fuel would be down to individual fuel companies.

Germany's transport ministry said the refuelling of Iranian planes was not banned under EU or UN sanctions but it would not comment on whether any individual providers were refusing to fuel Iranian aircraft.

The US sanctions prohibit the sale or provision to Iran of refined petroleum products worth more than $5m (£3.3m) over a year.

Paul Reynolds, world affairs correspondent for the BBC News website, said it might be that fuel companies are worried that their sales over a year might add up to $5m, in which case they could face a possible ban on doing business in the US.

An Iranian aviation official said Iranian airliners were filling up with as much fuel as possible inside Iran.

But they were also having to refuel in countries along their route not imposing a ban, a move which the official said was doubling costs.

The new US sanctions were signed into law by President Barack Obama last week.