Spanning(en) rond Iran

[Harald]

Germany Confirms Sale of Nuclear-Capable Sub to Israel

BERLIN — Germany will sell Israel a sixth nuclear capable Dolphin-class submarine, Germany's defense minister confirmed on March 20 after talks in Berlin with his Israeli counterpart Ehud Barak.

"An additional submarine will be delivered to Israel," Thomas de Maiziere told a joint press conference with Barak, adding that Germany would subsidize the cost although he did not say by how much.

A German government source in November said Germany would foot a third of the bill, amounting to a maximum of 135 million euros ($178 million).

Germany reconsidered the sale of the submarine to Israel in the wake of tensions over Jewish settlement construction in the occupied Palestinian territories, Israeli newspaper Yediot Aharonot reported in October.

But Berlin then agreed to sell Israel the vessel after the Jewish state released millions of dollars in customs duties to the Palestinian Authority, Israeli army radio reported two months later.

The Israeli navy currently has three German-made Dolphin-class submarines, two of which were bought after the 1991 Gulf War.

Two others are under construction at Kiel shipyard and are due for delivery in 2012. An option for a sixth was also included in the contract.

Media reports have said the submarines can carry nuclear warheads and have an operating range of 4,500 kilometers (2,800 miles).

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120320/DEFREG01/303200007/Germany-Confirms-Sale-Nuclear-Capable-Sub-Israel?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

[Jah]

Obama's boodschap:

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Kuwait says Iran has assured it will not shut Hormuz

Published on Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 18:52 |  Source : Reuters

DUBAI (Reuters) - Iran has assured Kuwait it will not try to close the vital Strait of Hormuz shipping route, Kuwait's ruler said in remarks carried by state-run news agency KUNA on Tuesday.

Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmad al-Sabah said Kuwait nevertheless had been working for "a long time" on building up an oil stocks outside the Gulf to ensure steady supplies to customers.

After threats by Iran that it could shut the most important oil transit channel in the world, if Western governments stop it from selling crude, Kuwait's emir and other Gulf leaders have sought assurances that Tehran will not follow through with the threats.

"(We) have contacted officials in Iran to ensure that no action is taken to close the Strait of Hormuz," according an English version of his remarks to Japanese press distributed by Kuwait state news agency KUNA.

"We have received assurances from Iran that it will not take this step," the emir said during a visit to Japan, one of the Gulf oil exporter's biggest customers.

"For a long time, Kuwait has been working on providing a stockpile of oil through its global companies outside the Gulf region to ensure constant supply," he said.

Several Iranian officials have said Iran should block the waterway in response to sanctions targeting its nuclear programme. Western governments suspect Iran is trying to make atomic weapons. Tehran denies this.

OPEC member Kuwait, which is producing around 3 million barrels a day, ships all its oil exports through Hormuz.

(Reporting by Sylvia Westall, editing by Daniel Fineren and Reed Stevenson)

http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/wire-news/kuwait-says-iran-has-assured-it-will-not-shut-hormuz_683095.html

[Jah]

Iraans nieuwjaar vandaag en de eerste boodschap, van de Israëlische president, is al binnen:

Nu wachten op die van Obama.

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

March 19, 2012
Israelis agree Iran hasn't decided on atom bomb

JERUSALEM (AP) — Despite saber-rattling from Jerusalem, Israeli officials now agree with the U.S. assessment that Tehran has not yet decided on the actual construction of a nuclear bomb, according to senior Israeli government and defense figures.

Even so, there is great concern in Israel about leaving Iran "on the cusp" of a bomb — explaining why Israel continues to hint at a military attack on Iran's nuclear installations before it moves enough of them underground to protect them from Israel's bombs.

Israel's leaders have been charging in no uncertain terms for years that Iran is trying to build nuclear weapons. Though officials say they accept the more nuanced American view, they warn that it is just a matter of semantics, because an Iran on the verge of being able to build a bomb would still be a danger.

The United States is playing up its assessment that Iran has not made its final decision in a public campaign to persuade Israel to call off any attack plan and allow the increasingly harsh sanctions against Iran time to persuade Tehran to back down.

The concern — which is widely shared in Israel as part of a complex calculation — is of an Iranian retaliation that might spark regional conflict and send oil prices soaring, at a time when the world economy is already struggling and U.S. presidential elections loom.

Also in the equation are concerns about the ability of the Israeli home front to withstand a sustained barrage of Iranian missiles fired in retaliation. Iranian surrogates Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza Strip could also bombard Israel with thousands of rockets, and U.S. troops in the Gulf region could also become targets.

Several senior Israeli officials who spoke in recent days to The Associated Press said Israel has come around to the U.S. view that no final decision to build a bomb has been made by Iran. The officials, who are privy to intelligence and to the discussion about the Iranian program, said this is the prevailing view in the intelligence community, but there are also questions about whether Tehran might be hiding specific bomb making operations.

The concern, they said, is about allowing the Iranian program to reach the point where there is enough enriched weapons grade material that a bomb could quickly be assembled, within a year.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Sunday, "Iran, whose leader foments terrorism and violence around the globe and calls for our destruction ... this regime must never be allowed to have nuclear weapons."

Israel officials have said that with Iran moving its installations underground, Israel's level of bunker-busting capability leaves it with a window of no more than several months to act effectively. The United States, with more powerful bombs, would have a much longer period — but leaders here are loathe to be entirely dependent on U.S. determination on the issue.

The suspicion in Israel is that the Iranians have held off on a decision in order to deny Israel — and other countries — the pretext for an attack, officials said, noting that to a certain extent the matter is semantic and therefore secondary.

All the officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the subject is deemed too delicate to be discussed on the record, and the government has ordered silence.

Israel views Iran as a threat to its survival and, like the West, sees Tehran's ramped-up enrichment of uranium, a key element of bomb making, as undercutting its claims that its nuclear program is purely civilian. The U.N. nuclear agency cited its concerns about Iran's ultimate designs in reports, but notes its inspectors have found no direct evidence that Iran is moving toward an atomic weapon.

Netanyahu ratcheted up the tough talk this month, emphasizing during a White House visit and in a high-profile speech at home that Israel was prepared to act alone if necessary, even over U.S. objections.

In advance of Netanyahu's White House visit and during a speech to a powerful pro-Israel lobby, President Barack Obama took an increasingly assertive tone about U.S. refusal to tolerate a nuclear Iran and willingness to block that militarily.

Still, he tempered this tone by saying there was "too much loose talk of war" and emphasized his preference for diplomacy and sanctions. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton reiterated shortly before Netanyahu arrived in Washington the prevailing U.S. view that Tehran has not decided to produce weapons.

Iran reported in February that it possesses up to 100 kilograms of uranium enriched to 20 percent, which would be enough for four bombs if further processed. Uranium must be enriched to 90 percent to be military grade.

Israeli intelligence officials, like other intelligence agencies worldwide, estimate that once a decision to build a bomb is reached, it would take months to upgrade the enrichment and months more to build a crude bomb — in all, a year to 18 months.

Then, to fit a bomb to a Shahab-3 missile capable of striking Israel would take Iran two years, Israeli defense officials say.

Israeli officials who favor a strike do not want Iran even to reach the point where work on a bomb could begin.

Israeli leaders have invoked the Nazi Holocaust of World War II, when 6 million Jews were killed, in their warnings about Iran, citing its nuclear program, repeated references to Israel's destruction, support for anti-Israel militants on the southern and northern borders and development of missiles capable of being fitted with nuclear warheads.

There is also fear of an Iranian bomb sparking a nuclear arms race across an already volatile region with an active illicit, cross-border weapons trade.

Israel itself is widely believe to have an arsenal of nuclear weapons, though it has a policy of neither confirming nor denying that.

Israel has been warning of an Iranian nuclear threat since the 1990s and has been working on a possible military strike for years.

Leaders here have welcomed the increased sanctions on Iranian oil exports and banks, but they remain skeptical of an Iranian climbdown, especially because Russia and China refuse to join the effort.

http://www.eagletribune.com/worldnational/x1511619380/Israelis-agree-Iran-hasnt-decided-on-atom-bomb

[KapiteinRob]

Irak buigt exportroutes olie om

BAGDAD -  Irak werkt aan alternatieve exportroutes voor zijn voornaamste inkomstenbron, olie. Dat zei een regeringswoordvoerder zondag. De zoektocht naar alternatieven heeft alles te maken met het dreigement van buurland en aartsrivaal Iran om de voornaamste route, de Straat van Hormuz, te blokkeren.

Tot de alternatieven behoren onder meer het verhogen van de export via een pijleiding naar Turkije, het overschakelen van schepen op vrachtwagens en het repareren van leidingen die al jaren buiten gebruik zijn.

Irak produceert momenteel ruim 3 miljoen vaten ruwe olie per dag, waarvan er circa 2,1 miljoen geëxporteerd worden. Circa 80 procent van de export gaat via de Straat van Hormuz, die Iran wil blokkeren als wraak voor sancties tegen het land van onder meer de Verenigde Staten en de Europese Unie.

Bron: De Financiele Telegraafg dd. 180312

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Former Minister: Iran to Close Strait of Hormoz if Threatened

TEHRAN (FNA)- Former Iranian intelligence minister Ali Fallahian underlined the strategic significance of the Strait of Hormoz for Iran's defensive power, and repeated the country's earlier warnings that it would cut off the world oil lifeline if it is threatened militarily.

Fallahian warned Western countries not to underestimate Iran's ability to close the strategic Strait of Hormuz in reaction to the West's escalating pressures.

Reacting to reports about the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT) decision to discontinue offering service to the Iranian banks, Fallahian said on Saturday that closing SWIFT to Iran is "like closing international waterways".

"If the United States or Europe considers it its right to ignore international laws to meet its own interests, Iran may also decide to respond in kind wherever possible," he added.

Israel and its close ally the United States have recently intensified their war rhetoric against Iran. The two arch foes of the Islamic Republic accuse Iran of seeking a nuclear weapon, while they have never presented any corroborative document to substantiate their allegations. Both Washington and Tel Aviv possess advanced weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear warheads.

Iran vehemently denies the charges, insisting that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only. Tehran stresses that the country has always pursued a civilian path to provide power to the growing number of Iranian population, whose fossil fuel would eventually run dry.

Iran has, in return, warned that it would target Israel and its worldwide interests in case it comes under attack by the Tel Aviv.

The United States has long stressed that military action is a main option for the White House to deter Iran's progress in the field of nuclear technology.

Iran has warned that in case of an attack by either the US or Israel, it will target 32 American bases in the Middle East and close the strategic Strait of Hormuz.

An estimated 40 percent of the world's oil supply passes through the waterway.

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=9012152629

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Gunboat diplomacy: America launches Persian Gulf surge

Published: 18 March, 2012, 04:44

Washington is planning to deploy even more ships, subs and choppers to the Persian Gulf despite the fact that it already stations aircraft carriers in the region. This was confirmed by Chief of Naval Operations Jonathan W. Greenert.

­Speaking during a Friday breakfast in Washington, Greenert told reporters about the bold plans to deploy more patrol boats, minesweepers, Sea Stallion helicopters and drone subs – all keeping an eye on Iran, which is clearly uncomfortable with being surrounded by the warships of a hostile country.

While Greenert had already announced plans to up the number of minesweepers in the region to eight on Wednesday, his latest statements shine a light on the Navy's long-term perspective.

First of all, Greenert talked about deploying five more patrol boats equipped with Gatling guns and close-range missiles capable of hitting Iranian shores from four miles away.

"It's like being in an alley with a rifle and maybe what you need is a sawed-off shotgun," he said, talking about the Gatling guns.

Secondly, the Navy is planning on sending torpedoes that can compensate for the "turbidity" and "particulate" drags of the Gulf waters, as Greenert put it.

Thirdly, Drone minesweeping submarines, or as Greenert called them "some underwater unmanned neutralization autonomous units."

And finally, more aircraft carriers, though this is still to be discussed with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta.

All these new vessels will arrive equipped the latest infrared and electro-optical visibility systems to help navigate through the foggy Gulf even at night. In the meantime, BAE Systems, one of the Pentagon's military contractors, is working on a new Gatling/laser gun mashup. While Greenert said nothing on equipping the patrol boats in question with these guns, Iran had earlier promised to block the Strait of Hormuz, which is used to transport about a fifth of the world's oil, in retaliation against sanctions imposed by the US and the EU with the intention of forcing Iran to quit its nuclear program.

In January, General Michael Dempsey, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, confirmed that Iran has the capability to block the Strait of Hormuz for a certain period of time, and that the US must be prepared to reopen it by force.

Greenert openly admitted that America's naval presence in the region is already superior to Iran's. So why deploy so much weaponry and equipment to region? Are Obama and his military advisors already covertly thinking about a military solution to the Iranian crisis? Or is it just the implementation of Dempsey's call for preparedness?

With the Pentagon asking for an additional $100 million to beef up its military presence in the Persian Gulf, it seems like the US is increasingly leaning towards military action. Although President Obama did insist on using sanctions and diplomacy to force Tehran to quit its controversial nuclear program, he admitted that "no options are off the table."

http://rt.com/news/america-persian-gulf-surge-831/

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Iran may have weapons able to hit British forces in Cyprus and Afghanistan

17 March, 2012

British Foreign Minister Alistair Burt, giving evidence to a House of Lords Select Committee regarding Iran's nuclear programme, has warned that the country already has weapons which could hit British forces in Cyprus and Afghanistan, and was now seeking to acquire the nuclear bomb.

Burt also highlighted concern over Iran's missile programme after Prime Minister David Cameron said last week it appeared to be seeking an intercontinental ballistic missile force in the Middle East with 200-300 medium range missiles, including the Shabab 3 that has been tested to hit targets at a distance of 2,000 km.

''To put this into perspective, Cyprus and UK troops in Afghanistan fall within that range with Israel, Turkey and Saudi Arabia,'' he said.

Iran, he concluded, is taking a ''grave risk'' if it does not end its banned nuclear programme and show the world it is not seeking to acquire the bomb.

He said UK authorities were on alert for possible terrorist activity of Iranian agents against British targets.

http://www.financialmirror.com/news-details.php?nid=25921

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Netanyahu Warns Again of Israel Taking Unilateral Action Against Iran

J. Robert Smith

A wire service is reporting that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is renewing his pledge to attack Iran's nuclear facilities, even in the teeth of Obama administration objections. The wire service report appears at the online edition of the Washington Times.

Mr. Netanyahu is correctly blaming the Iranians for stepped up rocket attacks from Gaza and an increase in cross-border violence initiated from Palestinian territory. The Prime Minister would be wise to attack Iran this year if his cabinet and he have any belief that President Obama will win re-election.

There's quite a bit of complicated political and military arithmetic that is going into Mr. Netanyahu's calculation when - not if - to go after Iranian nuclear facilities. Though it's hard to say what's going on behind the scenes, certainly the Prime Minister is weighing President Obama's re-election chances as a critical factor in timing an attack.

As American Thinker readers appreciate, a lame duck term for Mr. Obama gives him a free hand to act even more boldly in pursuing his leftist agenda at home and abroad. Mr. Obama has been hostile to Israel for the better part of his term.

Erosion of support for Mr. Obama among the nation's Jewish voters has caused him to soften his anti-Israel stances. The president's election year posturing isn't fooling the Israelis and shouldn't fool Israel's American supporters.

Mr. Obama receives daily national security briefings. Intelligence data simply must confirm Mr. Netanyahu's charge about continued Iranian complicity in Palestinian attacks on Israel. Moreover, Mr. Obama is fully apprised of the Iranians' longstanding financial and logistic support for terrorism against the United States, its allies, and American interests overseas. Retarding Iran's nuclear weapons development is an imperative for Israeli and American security.

But hard realities have never stopped Mr. Obama and the American left from stubbornly clinging to their fancies - or their prejudices. Civil and democratic Israel ranks below the Islamic thugocracies and the terrorist-controlled Palestinian territories in Mr. Obama's universe. You know about Mr. Obama and the left: Third World solidarity and all that gunk.

Prime Minister Netanyahu is correct to insist that the Israel's exercise their fundamental right to strike the Iranians in self-defense, regardless Mr. Obama's objections. Let's hope that the elections of a Republican president and Congress become more evident as the election season progresses. It would certainly be optimal for the Israelis to strike the Iranians at a time of their choosing rather than being forced to do so by the American election clock.

And it would be most helpful for the Israelis to strike Iran with the blessings and full backing of an American president whose name isn't Obama.

more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/03/netanyahu_warns_again_of_israel_taking_unilateral_action_against_iran.html#ixzz1pIMe9nSW

[KapiteinRob]

Al zou het dol-fijn zijn als De Haag de wereld zou vertellen dat, in het geval van escalatie, een dergelijke eenheid ergens in de regio ter plekke zou kunnen zijn.

Dit heb ik al enige tijd geleden geventileerd en er zijn mensen die dat onverstandig vinden of zelfs betrekken op de veiligheid van de bemanning van zo'n dolfijneboot. Ik ga e.e.a. niet herhalen....

[Marc66]

Het is niet slim van de bv Nederland om een of enkele eenheden in het gebied te hebben op dit moment, dat staat nl. gelijk aan provocatie en, nou ja, Radio 10 is er niets bij, maar het is niet slim.

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Sssstttt.... Iets met een Dolfijn?

Al zou het dol-fijn zijn als De Haag de wereld zou vertellen dat, in het geval van escalatie, een dergelijke eenheid ergens in de regio ter plekke zou kunnen zijn.

Hierbij hoeft de eenheid fysiek niet eens in de directe regio te zijn, het signaal zou al voldoende zijn om te zeggen dat er een bijdrage van Nederlandse zijde is.

Daarnaast zouden de Iraniërs in een mogelijk conflict middelen moeten reserveren en inzetten voor een tegenstander die er wel of niet is, iets wat ook een bijdrage levert.

Het nadeel na zo'n uitspraak is natuurlijk dat hier in Nederland, per direct, weer een aantal politieke partijen op de, toch al niet hoge, kast zitten.

[KapiteinRob]

Anders is er vast nog wel een onderzeeboot on de regio ondergedoken (ver weg van de publiciteit)

Sssstttt.... Iets met een Dolfijn?

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Kwestie van kippen en konijnen, maar als ik het goed gehoord heb, zit de RUYT nu in SNMG1 en gaat na aflossing door EVTN met de NH-90 aan de rit. De ZPRV ligt in onderhoud en v.w.b. de TRMP hou ik even mijn mond, maar die heeft schijnbaar ook een leuk klusje toebedeeld gekregen na het zomerverlof. Maar ja, indien nodig kun je van alles omgooien dus een LCF kun je altijd wel ergens vandaan trekken. En de VSPK komt uiteindelijk ook weer uit MJO.

Laat ze in Den Haag eerst maar eens een signaal afgeven (als ze het lef hebben)

Anders is er vast nog wel een onderzeeboot in de regio ondergedoken (ver weg van de publiciteit)