On Friday, August 27, Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee Chairman Yuval Steinitz said that the Iranians have relatively few Shihab-3 missiles, that these missiles are of questionable accuracy, and that the only payload ready for them now is a conventional seven-hundred kilo bomb. He indicated that at present then, Iran cannot keep its promise of eliminating the Israeli nuclear facility in Dimona, much less wiping out the country as a whole, as Iran had promised to do.
Steinitz also said that 'little Israel' should not be expected to stop Iran, when Iran constitutes a threat to the whole world. In a sense, his remarks were directed at the world community, the Western community especially, and reminded them it is their responsibility to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. He also wanted to give the signal that an Israeli attack is not imminent, and thus perhaps lower the heat of the public verbal confrontation between Iran and Israel.
If Steinitz is correct, then it would appear that the Iranians have been bluffing and exaggerating. When, in early August, Shamkhani, the Iranian defense minister, claimed that their Shihab-3 missile had reached a new level of performance, an accuracy that would enable it in effect to destroy Israel's missile bases, he apparently was 'stretching it' quite a bit.
On the other hand, should Steinitz be wrong, then his error might be a very dangerous one, for it suggests that emergency action need not be taken now to stop Iran. Steinitz suggests that there is still time to stop Iran. This not only gives the would-be preemptors more time, but gives the Iranians more time.
Ze'ev Schiff in Haaretz has another view of what Iran has been doing. He suggests that Iran has in fact been testing the Shihab-3 with a chemical warhead. And that this is a dangerous escalation. While indicating that the Shihab-3 is far less accurate than the Iranians would like the world to believe, he notes that Iran is in the process of continual work to improve the range and accuracy of its missiles and the magnitude of their destructive power. In a sense, Schiff's analysis provides a certain relief to those who fear Iranian nuclear weapons, as the historical evidence indicates that chemical weapons are nowhere close to nuclear weapons in their destructive power.
While continuing its weapons development, Iran has been in the past couple of weeks making steps to assure the IAEA, for the world community, that it is not now on the verge of making nuclear weapons. Its major action in this regard was the announcement that the Bushehr one-thousand megawatt, Russian-built facility will not go online, as some feared, at the end of this year, but only in two years from now, at the earliest. The Debkafile news analysis website sees this announcement as a way of distracting the world community from paying attention to Iran's other nuclear facilities, where it will be speeding up work.
Iran has taken other steps to buy time. It has repeated the claim that its enrichment of nuclear material is not for weapons-making. It has called for UN action to make the Middle East a nuclear-free zone. It has even gone so far as to allow one official to contradict the Defense Minister and say that Iran would not be the first to attack, that Iran would not attack Israel unless provoked. In the most appeasing statement from Iran to come in a long time, its President Mohammed Khatami said that for Muslims, it is forbidden to use weapons of mass destruction and therefore Iran has no intention of attaining them. Unfortunately, his words are belied by two decades of Iranian effort, clandestine and not, to develop nuclear weapons.
The 'time-buying', appeasing measures came as Iran has been under increasing international pressure. The US commission on 9/11 found an Iranian connection to some of the terrorists. President Bush and his National Security Advisor indicated that they would not allow Iran to go nuclear. A number of Arab spokesmen suggested that the Iranian nuclear program is directed at intimidating the Arabs and not at confronting the Israelis. It at times appears as if on this issue, France, Germany and Great Britain are actually joining with the United States in an anti-Iranian stance.
Iran, feeling the pressure mounting on all sides, has made a tactical retreat. It does not, after all, wish to be treated as the one outlaw bandit state in the world. It wants that role reserved exclusively for Israel.
During this time, Iran also received certain support and encouragement from various factors. The American Council on Foreign Policy issued a report calling for dialogue with Iran, warning against how harmful an Israeli preemptive strike would be to American interests in the Middle East. There has also been an effort by certain UN officials to shift the focus of the debate and make the question of nuclear disarmament in the entire Middle East a priority item on the world's agenda.
Iran has, for now, toned down its hostile messages directed at the US, even as US forces do battle around one of the Shiite world's holy sites in Najaf. In this, too, as in the restraint it shows in not supporting the Chechnyans in their actions against the Russians, Iran shows a practical restraint, a tactical wisdom, even if it means for the time being reigning in their ideological fervor. Iran senses when world pressure is becoming dangerously great and does its best to reduce that pressure.
And all this, when only Iran knows how much clandestine work is being done now to further its nuclear weapons development project. Again there are time estimates by various experts, none of which has truly solid evidence behind it.
The IAEA is supposed to make another report this September. No doubt Iran's toning down of its rhetoric are connected with this. As for the IAEA, there are reports that it will make a relatively mild rebuke of Iran, say that the enriched uranium centrifuge found in Iran clearly came from outside Iran and is not a sign that Iran itself has enriched uranium. It will vaguely demand Iran's cooperation and, of course, not threaten Iran with UN sanctions. In other words, it will be, most likely, the kind of report that Iran can ignore without any special fear or worry.
As for the US and Israeli reactions, there is little apparently to expect in the short term. Bush is concentrated on winning the election. Israel shows no signs of taking an initiative on its own.
It almost seems that with their own continual re-estimating of the time at which Iran will go nuclear, both the United States and Israel also seem to want to 'buy time'. And this, no doubt, because of the awareness of the major risks involved in any kind of preemptive strike on Iran.
However, while the Iranian nuclear weapons program gains by 'buying time', it is difficult to understand what those hoping perhaps for a miraculous regime change in Iran, or a perhaps even more miraculous unified world effort to peacefully stop Iran, hope to gain by it.
In a related matter, and in the wake of the double suicide bombing in Beersheva this week, Debkafile reports that the Palestinian terrorist organizations are in increasing contact with Hizbullah and that agents of the Iranians are now more and more involved in Palestinian terror. The Iranians are now more and more a major factor in the war against the United States in Iraq, as well.
Recently, I have been involved in tracing the deceitful efforts of the evil regime in Iran to acquire nuclear weapons, but much more investigation needs to be done on this number one terror state, Iran, and its increasing part in the civilizational war of radical Islam against all that is sacred in human life.
May G-d lift up the souls of the terror victims, and provide a speedy and complete healing to the injured.
Steinitz also said that 'little Israel' should not be expected to stop Iran, when Iran constitutes a threat to the whole world. In a sense, his remarks were directed at the world community, the Western community especially, and reminded them it is their responsibility to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. He also wanted to give the signal that an Israeli attack is not imminent, and thus perhaps lower the heat of the public verbal confrontation between Iran and Israel.
If Steinitz is correct, then it would appear that the Iranians have been bluffing and exaggerating. When, in early August, Shamkhani, the Iranian defense minister, claimed that their Shihab-3 missile had reached a new level of performance, an accuracy that would enable it in effect to destroy Israel's missile bases, he apparently was 'stretching it' quite a bit.
On the other hand, should Steinitz be wrong, then his error might be a very dangerous one, for it suggests that emergency action need not be taken now to stop Iran. Steinitz suggests that there is still time to stop Iran. This not only gives the would-be preemptors more time, but gives the Iranians more time.
Ze'ev Schiff in Haaretz has another view of what Iran has been doing. He suggests that Iran has in fact been testing the Shihab-3 with a chemical warhead. And that this is a dangerous escalation. While indicating that the Shihab-3 is far less accurate than the Iranians would like the world to believe, he notes that Iran is in the process of continual work to improve the range and accuracy of its missiles and the magnitude of their destructive power. In a sense, Schiff's analysis provides a certain relief to those who fear Iranian nuclear weapons, as the historical evidence indicates that chemical weapons are nowhere close to nuclear weapons in their destructive power.
While continuing its weapons development, Iran has been in the past couple of weeks making steps to assure the IAEA, for the world community, that it is not now on the verge of making nuclear weapons. Its major action in this regard was the announcement that the Bushehr one-thousand megawatt, Russian-built facility will not go online, as some feared, at the end of this year, but only in two years from now, at the earliest. The Debkafile news analysis website sees this announcement as a way of distracting the world community from paying attention to Iran's other nuclear facilities, where it will be speeding up work.
Iran has taken other steps to buy time. It has repeated the claim that its enrichment of nuclear material is not for weapons-making. It has called for UN action to make the Middle East a nuclear-free zone. It has even gone so far as to allow one official to contradict the Defense Minister and say that Iran would not be the first to attack, that Iran would not attack Israel unless provoked. In the most appeasing statement from Iran to come in a long time, its President Mohammed Khatami said that for Muslims, it is forbidden to use weapons of mass destruction and therefore Iran has no intention of attaining them. Unfortunately, his words are belied by two decades of Iranian effort, clandestine and not, to develop nuclear weapons.
The 'time-buying', appeasing measures came as Iran has been under increasing international pressure. The US commission on 9/11 found an Iranian connection to some of the terrorists. President Bush and his National Security Advisor indicated that they would not allow Iran to go nuclear. A number of Arab spokesmen suggested that the Iranian nuclear program is directed at intimidating the Arabs and not at confronting the Israelis. It at times appears as if on this issue, France, Germany and Great Britain are actually joining with the United States in an anti-Iranian stance.
Iran, feeling the pressure mounting on all sides, has made a tactical retreat. It does not, after all, wish to be treated as the one outlaw bandit state in the world. It wants that role reserved exclusively for Israel.
During this time, Iran also received certain support and encouragement from various factors. The American Council on Foreign Policy issued a report calling for dialogue with Iran, warning against how harmful an Israeli preemptive strike would be to American interests in the Middle East. There has also been an effort by certain UN officials to shift the focus of the debate and make the question of nuclear disarmament in the entire Middle East a priority item on the world's agenda.
Iran has, for now, toned down its hostile messages directed at the US, even as US forces do battle around one of the Shiite world's holy sites in Najaf. In this, too, as in the restraint it shows in not supporting the Chechnyans in their actions against the Russians, Iran shows a practical restraint, a tactical wisdom, even if it means for the time being reigning in their ideological fervor. Iran senses when world pressure is becoming dangerously great and does its best to reduce that pressure.
And all this, when only Iran knows how much clandestine work is being done now to further its nuclear weapons development project. Again there are time estimates by various experts, none of which has truly solid evidence behind it.
The IAEA is supposed to make another report this September. No doubt Iran's toning down of its rhetoric are connected with this. As for the IAEA, there are reports that it will make a relatively mild rebuke of Iran, say that the enriched uranium centrifuge found in Iran clearly came from outside Iran and is not a sign that Iran itself has enriched uranium. It will vaguely demand Iran's cooperation and, of course, not threaten Iran with UN sanctions. In other words, it will be, most likely, the kind of report that Iran can ignore without any special fear or worry.
As for the US and Israeli reactions, there is little apparently to expect in the short term. Bush is concentrated on winning the election. Israel shows no signs of taking an initiative on its own.
It almost seems that with their own continual re-estimating of the time at which Iran will go nuclear, both the United States and Israel also seem to want to 'buy time'. And this, no doubt, because of the awareness of the major risks involved in any kind of preemptive strike on Iran.
However, while the Iranian nuclear weapons program gains by 'buying time', it is difficult to understand what those hoping perhaps for a miraculous regime change in Iran, or a perhaps even more miraculous unified world effort to peacefully stop Iran, hope to gain by it.
In a related matter, and in the wake of the double suicide bombing in Beersheva this week, Debkafile reports that the Palestinian terrorist organizations are in increasing contact with Hizbullah and that agents of the Iranians are now more and more involved in Palestinian terror. The Iranians are now more and more a major factor in the war against the United States in Iraq, as well.
Recently, I have been involved in tracing the deceitful efforts of the evil regime in Iran to acquire nuclear weapons, but much more investigation needs to be done on this number one terror state, Iran, and its increasing part in the civilizational war of radical Islam against all that is sacred in human life.
May G-d lift up the souls of the terror victims, and provide a speedy and complete healing to the injured.