nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Inside story: Will Iran’s supreme leader revise his ‘nuclear fatwa’?

 https://amwaj.media/article/inside-story-will-iran-s-supreme-leader-revise-his-nuclear-fatwa 5 May 24

The direct confrontation between Iran and Israel has sparked speculation about a potential shift in the Islamic Republic’s nuclear policies under the leadership of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Following Iran’s Apr. 14 military action against Israel in response to the Apr. 1 bombing of the Iranian consulate in Damascus, a senior commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) explicitly suggested the possibility of a revision to Tehran’s objection to atomic weapons. The suggestion may only be a part of the war of words between Iran and Israel. However, the fact that such discourse is rapidly becoming mainstream in Iran raises questions of what may lie ahead—including whether a shift may take place under Khamenei, who has long opposed atomic weapons on a religious basis.

Rapidly changing discourse

Amid media speculations of a major Israeli attack in response to Iran’s Apr. 14 drone and missile strike on sites inside Israel, Gen. Ahmad Haqtalab—the commander of the Protection and Security Corps of Nuclear Centers—on Apr. 18 stated, “If the Zionist regime wants to use the threat of attacking our country’s nuclear centers as a tool to pressure Iran, it is possible to review the nuclear doctrine and policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran and deviate from the previous considerations.”

The warning was rare, and even as tensions eased between Tehran and Tel Aviv, Iranian officials continued to underscore the significance of the matter. Four days after Haqtalab’s intervention, former IRGC commander and current MP Javad Karimi Qoddousi tweeted, “If permission is issued, there will be [only a] week before the first [nuclear] test.” Qoddousi separately posited that the same amount of time was needed to test missiles with an increased range of 12,000 km (7,456 miles).

However, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Nasser Kanani promptly interjected, dismissing the notion of any alteration to the country’s nuclear doctrine. Meanwhile, government-run Iran daily slammed Qoddousi, characterizing his statements as “untrue” and possibly being exploited by “enemies” to pursue further sanctions and fear mongering against Iran. Several other outlets, including conservative-run media, notably echoed such criticisms.

Yet, despite the blowback, Qoddousi went ahead and posted a video on Apr. 25 in which he said that Iran needs only half a day to produce the 90%-enriched uranium necessary to build nuclear bombs.

Khamenei and the ‘nuclear fatwa’

In Shiite Islam, a fatwa is a religious edict issued by a high-ranking Islamic jurist on the basis of interpretation of Islamic law. To followers of the jurist in question, fatwas are binding and the primary point of reference for everything from major life decisions to day-to-day matters. Fatwas can also be a part of state policies.

Ayatollah Khamenei has on multiple occasions over the past two decades reiterated his objection to the development, stockpiling, and usage of nuclear weapons as haram or religiously impermissible. Among believers, violating what is deemed haram would have serious consequences both in this life and the hereafter. In 2010, the supreme leader reiterated his objection to weapons of mass destruction in a message to an international conference on nuclear disarmament, stating they “pose a serious threat to humanity” and that “everyone must make efforts to secure humanity against this great calamity.”

Critics of what became known as the nuclear fatwa have over the years raised a variety of objections, from the modality of Khamenei’s religious edict to the manner in which it has been presented. Some even question whether the ruling really exists. What is indisputable, however, is that the religious edict has previously averted conflict by aiding diplomacy.

For instance, in connection with the 2013-15 nuclear negotiations that led to the signing of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) between Iran and world powers—which saw Tehran agree to restrictions on its atomic program in exchange for sanctions relief—there were suggestions that the Islamic Republic should codify the fatwa.

Amid the nuclear negotiations with Iran, then-US secretary of state John Kerry in 2014 stated, “We take [Khamenei’s fatwa] very seriously….a fatwa issued by a cleric is an extremely powerful statement about intent. Our need is to codify it.” In another interview the same year, Kerry asserted that “the requirement here is to translate the fatwa into a legally binding, globally recognized, international understanding…that goes beyond an article of faith within a religious belief.”

Only days after the signing of the JCPOA in 2015, Khamenei said, “The Americans say they stopped Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. They know it is not true. We had a fatwa, declaring nuclear weapons to be religiously forbidden under Islamic law. It had nothing to do with the nuclear talks.”

Will Khamenei change his fatwa?

Khamenei is not the first Iranian Islamic jurist to issue a fateful religious edict on a highly politicized matter. Back in 1891, Mirza Mohammad Shirazi (1815-95), a leading Shiite religious authority at the time, issued a hokm or verdict against the usage of tobacco in what became known as the Tobacco Protest. The move came in protest against a concession granted by the Qajar monarch Naser Al-Din (1848-98) to the British Empire, granting control over the growth, sale, and export of tobacco to an Englishman. The hokm issued by Shirazi ultimately led to the repeal of the concession.

Neither a fatwa nor a hokm is set in stone and can be revised. The main distinction between the two types of rulings is that a hokm tends to have more conditions and requirements attached to it. Moreover, while a fatwa must be followed by the followers of the Islamic jurist who issued it, a hokm must be followed by all believers—including Shiites who are not followers of the jurist in question.

Explaining the intricacies of a hokm, a cleric and professor of Islamic law (fiqh) at the Qom Seminary told Amwaj.media, “There are primary hokm and secondary hokm. The former is like the necessity of the daily prayer that is mentioned in the Quran and the hadiths [traditions], or the prohibition on consuming alcohol. The secondary hokm is based on expediency and necessity that leads to the first ruling being changed. For example, if alcohol helps someone stay alive, then it is not haram [religiously impermissible] for him or her [to make use of it].” He added, “A fatwa can be changed too.”

May 6, 2024 Posted by | Iran, politics, weapons and war | Leave a comment

IAEA’s top nuclear salesman-cum-watchdog to visit Iran

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has confirmed that its Director-General, Rafael Grossi, will travel to Iran on May 6 to engage with high-ranking officials.

He will attend the International Conference on Nuclear Science and Technology during the visit, taking place in Isfahan, just months after officials in Iran claimed to be within reach of nuclear weapons. Grossi just days ago also claimed Iran was “weeks not months” from a nuclear weapon.

Im February Grossi admitted a “drifting apart” in relations between the agency and an increasingly defiant Iran.

Grossi noted in the same month that although the rate of uranium enrichment in Iran had decreased slightly since the previous year’s end, Iran continued to enrich uranium at a significant rate of approximately 7 kg per month to 60 percent purity, near weapons grade.

Under the terms of a 2015 agreement with world powers, Iran was only permitted to enrich uranium up to 3.67 percent.

However, after former President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the agreement in 2018 and reinstated sanctions, Iran exceeded the limits. As a result, the IAEA has stated that the 2015 nuclear deal has “all but disintegrated”.

May 3, 2024 Posted by | Iran, safety | Leave a comment

Why Iran may accelerate its nuclear program, and Israel may be tempted to attack it

Bulletin, By Darya Dolzikova, Matthew Savill | April 26, 2024

On April 19, Israel carried out a strike deep inside Iranian territory, near the city of Isfahan. The attack was apparently in retaliation for a major Iranian drone and missile attack on Israel a few days earlier. This exchange between the two countries—which have historically avoided directly targeting each other’s territories—has raised fears of a potentially serious military escalation in the region.

Israel’s strike was carried out against an Iranian military site located in close proximity to the Isfahan Nuclear Technology Center, which hosts nuclear research reactors, a uranium conversion plant, and a fuel production plant, among other facilities. Although the attack did not target Iran’s nuclear facilities directly, earlier reports suggested that Israel was considering such attacks. The Iranian leadership has, in turn, threatened to reconsider its nuclear policy and to advance its program should nuclear sites be attacked.

These events highlight the threat from regional escalation dynamics posed by Iran’s near-threshold nuclear capability, which grants Iran the perception of a certain degree of deterrence—at least against direct US retaliation—while also serving as an understandably tempting target for Israeli attack. As tensions between Israel and Iran have moved away from their traditional proxy nature and manifested as direct strikes against each other’s territories, the urgency of finding a timely and non-military solution to the Iranian nuclear issue has increased.

A tempting target. While the current assessment is that Iran does not possess nuclear weapons, the Islamic Republic maintains a very advanced nuclear program, allowing it to develop a nuclear weapons capability relatively rapidly, should it decide to do so. Iran’s “near-threshold” capability did not deter Israel from undertaking its recent attack. But Iran’s nuclear program is a tempting target for an attack that could have potentially destabilizing ramification: The program is advanced enough to pose a credible risk of rapid weaponization and at a stage when it could still be significantly degraded, albeit at an extremely high cost.

Iran views its nuclear program as a deterrent against direct US strikes on or invasion of its territory, acting as an insurance policy of sorts against invasion following erroneous Western accusations over its nuclear program, ala Iraq in 2003. That’s to say, during an attempted invasion, Iran could quickly produce nuclear weapons……………………………

Israel sees the Iranian nuclear program as an existential threat and has long sought its elimination. For this reason, reports that Israel might have been preparing to target Iranian nuclear sites as retaliation for Iran’s strikes against its territory came as little surprise……………………………………………………………………….

A range of bad options. The possibility of Iranian weaponization and Israeli attacks on Iran’s nuclear sites could lead to a serious escalation spiral and, potentially, a wider military conflict in the region……………………………………………………………

Following past instances of Israeli sabotage against the Iranian nuclear program, Tehran has doubled down—rebuilding damaged sites, hardening facilities, and ramping up its nuclear activity. The same is likely to be true should Iranian facilities be targeted directly this time, only to a greater degree. The shift from a proxy conflict between Iran and Israel to a direct engagement will only increase the value Iran places on its nuclear program as a deterrent against further direct attack on its territory and US military intervention. Should Iran assess that its regional proxies and its missile and drone capabilities have been insufficient to deter Israel from conducting direct strikes against its strategically significant nuclear program, Tehran may see the actual weaponization of its nuclear program as the only option left that can guarantee the security of the Iranian regime……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. more https://thebulletin.org/2024/04/why-iran-may-accelerate-its-nuclear-program-and-israel-may-be-tempted-to-attack-it/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=MondayNewsletter04292024&utm_content=NuclearRisk_IranNuclearProgramIsrael_04262024

April 30, 2024 Posted by | Iran, Israel, politics international | Leave a comment

Iran says nuclear weapons have no place in its nuclear doctrine

By Reuters, April 22, 2024,
Reporting by Dubai Newsroom; Editing by Alex Richardson, William Maclean, https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iran-says-nuclear-weapons-have-no-place-its-nuclear-doctrine-2024-04-22/

DUBAI, April 22 (Reuters) – Nuclear weapons have no place in Iran’s nuclear doctrine, the country’s foreign ministry said on Monday, days after a Revolutionary Guards commander warned that Tehran might change its nuclear policy if pressured by Israeli threats.

“Iran has repeatedly said its nuclear programme only serves peaceful purposes. Nuclear weapons have no place in our nuclear doctrine,” ministry spokesperson Nasser Kanaani said during a press conference in Tehran.

Following a spike in tensions with Israel, the Guards commander in charge of nuclear security Ahmad Haghtalab said last week that Israeli threats could push Tehran to “review its nuclear doctrine and deviate from its previous considerations.”

Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the last say on Tehran’s nuclear programme, banned the development of nuclear weapons in a fatwa, or religious decree, in the early 2000s.

April 24, 2024 Posted by | Iran, politics | Leave a comment

Under UN Charter, Iran’s Attack Was a Legal Response to Israel’s Illegal Attack

Iran’s attack on Israel was lawful self-defense carried out in compliance with international humanitarian law.

On April 13, Iran’s aircraft struck two air bases in the Negev desert, where the April 1 attack on Iran’s consulate had been launched. “Iran retaliated against those targets in Israel directly related to the Israeli attack on Iran,”

By Marjorie Cohn , TRUTHOUT, April 18, 2024

On April 1, Israel mounted an unprovoked military attack on a building that was part of the Iranian Embassy complex in Damascus, Syria, killing seven of Iran’s senior military advisers and five additional people. The victims included Gen. Mohamad Reza Zahedi, head of Iran’s covert military operations in Lebanon and Syria, and two other senior generals.

Although Israel’s attack violated the United Nations Charter, the UN Security Council refused to condemn it because the United States, the U.K. and France exercised their vetoes on April 4.

Iran considered this attack on its consulate “an act of war,” Trita Parsi wrote at Foreign Policy.

On April 11, the Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations stated: “Had the UN Security Council condemned the Zionist regime’s reprehensible act of aggression on our diplomatic premises in Damascus and subsequently brought to justice its perpetrators, the imperative for Iran to punish this rogue regime might have been obviated.”

Then, on April 13, in response to Israel’s attack, Iran fired more than 300 drones and missiles at the Israeli air base from which the April 1 attacks had emanated. Only two of them landed inside Israel and no one was killed; a Bedouin girl was injured. The U.S., U.K., France, Jordan and Israel intercepted the remaining Iranian missiles and drones. A senior U.S. military official said “there’s no significant damage within Israel itself.”

The Iranian mission to the UN wrote in an April 13 letter to the UN secretary-general that Iran’s action was conducted “in the exercise of Iran’s inherent right to self-defense” under Article 51 of the UN Charter “and in response to the Israeli recurring military aggressions, particularly its armed attack” on April 1 “against Iranian diplomatic premises, in the defiance of Article 2(4) of the Charter of the United Nations.”

The April 1 attack was not the first time Israel had attacked key Iranian personnel………………………………………………………………………….

Iran made clear that it seeks to avoid further escalation that could spark a widespread regional war. An April 13 social media post from Iran’s permanent mission to the UN stated, “The matter can be deemed concluded. However, should the Israeli regime make another mistake, Iran’s response will be considerably more severe. It is a conflict between Iran and the rogue Israeli regime, from which the U.S. MUST STAY AWAY!”

At a Security Council meeting on April 14, Iran’s UN Ambassador Saeid Iravani defended the lawfulness of the missile and drone attack on Israel. He noted the hypocrisy of the U.S. and its allies that claim Israel is acting in self-defense as it conducts its genocide of the Palestinian people:………………………………………..

Israel’s Attack on Iranian Consulate Violated the UN Charter and Vienna Conventions

Iran’s April 13 attack on Israel was a lawful exercise of self-defense in response to Israel’s unlawful April 1 attack on the Iranian consulate. The Israeli attack was an illegal act of aggression.

Article 2 (4) of the UN Charter states, “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.”

An act of aggression is inconsistent with the purposes of the UN. Article 39 of the Charter says, “The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression.”

An “‘act of aggression’ means the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations,” under the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court. Aggression includes “the invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State.”

Moreover, “Consular premises shall be inviolable,” according to Article 31 of the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. Article 1 defines consular premises as “the buildings or parts of buildings and the land ancillary thereto, irrespective of ownership, used exclusively for the purposes of the consular post.”

The 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations likewise provides in Article 22.1 that, “The premises of the mission shall be inviolable. The agents of the receiving State may not enter them, except with the consent of the head of the mission.”

During Israel’s bombing of Iran’s consulate in Syria, it targeted and killed very senior Iranian officials. The attack constituted an act of aggression, which triggered Iran’s right to self-defense.

Iran’s April 13 Attack on Israel Constituted Lawful Self-Defense

Article 51 states, “Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.”

An armed attack includes not just an attack against the territory of a state, including its airspace and territorial sea, but also attacks directed against its armed forces or embassies abroad.

On April 13, Iran’s aircraft struck two air bases in the Negev desert, where the April 1 attack on Iran’s consulate had been launched. “Iran retaliated against those targets in Israel directly related to the Israeli attack on Iran,” former U.S. weapons inspector Scott Ritter wrote.

Nevertheless, the Security Council has failed to adopt a resolution condemning Israel’s attack on Iran’s consulate, as Iran pointed out in its April 13 letter to the UN secretary-general.

At an April 14 meeting of the Security Council, the Israeli representative declared that Iran is the number one global sponsor of terrorism and the world’s worst human rights violator. It is Israel, however, that has killed nearly 34,000 Palestinians — two-thirds of them women and children — during its campaign of genocide in Gaza that has now entered its seventh month.

Iran’s self-defense action was the natural outcome of Israel’s violations of international law — both on Syrian territory and elsewhere — the representative from the Syrian Arab Republic said at the April 14 council meeting. Israel is trying to cover up its genocide and military failures in Gaza, the Syrian representative added.

Iran’s Attack Satisfied the Principles of Proportionality, Distinction and Precautions……………………………………………………………….

Netanyahu Is Gunning for War With Iran

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would like nothing better than to start a war with Iran. Netanyahu considers Iran an “existential threat” to Israel. He persuaded former President Donald Trump to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal, which was working to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

As the world waits for Israel’s response to the Iranian attack, President Joe Biden said the U.S. would not assist Israel in an offensive military action against Iran but it would give Israel defensive support if Iran attacks Israel. “But the distinction between offensive or defensive support becomes meaningless the second a war breaks out,” wrote Trita Parsi.

Today, the U.S. and U.K. imposed additional punishing sanctions on Iran. Unilateral coercive measures, levied without the imprimatur of the Security Council, are illegal and generally harm only the general population…………………………………………………………………………………………… more https://truthout.org/articles/under-un-charter-irans-attack-was-a-legal-response-to-israels-illegal-attack/

April 23, 2024 Posted by | Iran, Legal, politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Israel: the road to Masada

historical Masada is a rationalization for a future Masada —another crazy sect – of Jewish true believers self-destructing—Zionists.

In 73 A.D., legend has it, 960 Jewish rebels under siege in the ancient desert fortress of Masada committed suicide rather than surrender to a Roman legion.

News Forensics JULIAN MACFARLANE, APR 16, 2024

The Iran attack story continues to unfold. Everybody has an opinion – but we still don’t actually know what really happened. As a result, some think the attack was a victory for Iran. Others, even those on the Left, think not. Finian Cunningham calls it “lame retaliation”.

The Iranians say they gave the American 72 hours’ notice.

Pepe Escobar says that the Iranians and Americans met in Oman and the Iranians told the Americans their attack would be on military bases only. And…

THE SHADOWPLAY So this is how it happened. Burns met an Iranian delegation in Oman. He was told the Israeli punishment was inevitable – and if the US got involved then all US bases will be attacked, and the Strait of Hormuz would be blocked. Burns said we do nothing if no civilians are harmed. The Iranians said it will be a military base or an embassy. The CIA said go ahead and do it.

The Americans of course deny this.

So, somebody’s lying.

Over the years the Iranians have shown a tendency to exaggerate – usually about military capability—but they do not usually lie directly.

The US however doesn’t just fib a bit – it likes really really big lies. For America, the truth is whatever is most convenient for its policies, knowing that the media will always propagate Official Doctrine, just as in the Middle Ages the Vatican could be sure it’s pronouncements would be heard in sermons all over Europe, and believers would take them to heart. Those who dissented could be burned at the stake. We don’t do that — we have Belmarsh prison.

As Putin says, the US is the Empire of Lies.

In this case, the Americans keep on changing their story.

At first, the American said there were 170 drones and 30 cruise missiles. They did not mention ballistic missiles.

Now, the number is 170 drones, 30 cruise missiles, and 100 ballistic missiles. T The media are talking up MIRVs and hypersonic weapons.

The US number now is the same as the IDF was claiming in the beginning. but it seems the number is going up.

The IDF insists that its ”David Sling” system intercepted 99% of 120 missiles breaching its airspace.

The Americans and Brits intercepted only drones apparently—47% of the drones— which means that about 80 entered Israeli airspace to add to the other hardware hurtling through Israeli skies.

Israelis say — or at least said — there were only two hits – with an unrealistically high percentage of interception. According to some Western analysts, however, the Iranians achieved a 6% success rate and 9 hits on Israeli targets— with both drones and missiles.

Israeli missile interceptors are impressive in the sky…………………………………………………………………………….

Given 72 hours advance warning, Western media speculate the Israelis should have been able to do a lot better, especially with US support.

Now we hear talk of MIRV missiles (multiple warheads) or hypersonic missiles which neither the Americans nor the Israelis would be able to intercept at all, much less 99%.

The Iranians may have, in fact, experimented with both kinds of sophisticated weaponry – but not in any quantity.

The fact that the Israelis were able to down so many “projectiles” – albeit at a cost of $3 billion suggests that the Iranians were, as I posited before, mostly using old stuff, demonstrating that even with that they could get through.

That said, while American sources are admitting nine hits, there may have been more as Andrei Martynov suggests.

So what happens if shit hits the fan? What if Finian Cunningham is right? What if the Israelis mistake the message and escalate?

The Iranians have promised a gloves off response of a magnitude perhaps 100 times greater.

The Russian Playbook

Netanyahu is Israel’s Zelensky. Israel is America’s Ukraine.

By contrast, Iran seems to be following the Russian playbook.

Their attack was classic Russian tactics. Drones, decoys air defense systems, followed by missiles of different types. Precision targeting. Avoidance of civilian casualties. Restraint

IF Israel mounts a major attack against Iran, it is likely to be vicious – just like Ukrainian attacks in Ukraine. Therefore, you can expect Iranians to apply other successful Russian strategies.

John Helmer has suggested Iran might adopt Russia’s current strategy of attacking critical infrastructure. That means Israel’s offshore oilfields and especially power stations – the electrical grid—which are highly vulnerable— and unlike in the Ukraine, localized……………………………….

Masada

Does history repeat itself? Of course it does.

Everyone thinks it doesn’t.

That’s because no one really knows – or wants to know – what happened in the first place—we mythologize and fictionalize events in the past to correspond to present day realities and needs.

Masada never happened as Israelis think it did – so they have learnt nothing. That thing about history —we don’t want to learn and when it repeats we don’t know what’s happening..

Masada? It wasn’t the Romans that “done it”.

It was a crazy sect of Jewish true believers who self-destructed.

That historical Masada is a rationalization for a future Masada —another crazy sect – of Jewish true believers self-destructing—Zionists.

April 22, 2024 Posted by | Iran, Israel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Iran Israel: An audible sigh of relief in the Middle East

By Lyse Doucet,Chief international correspondent, 20 Apr 24, more https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68861607

The latest round in the region’s most dangerous rivalry appears to be over, for now.

Israel still has not officially acknowledged that the attack in Iran in the early hours of Friday morning was its doing.

Meanwhile, Iran’s military and political leaders have downplayed, dismissed and even mocked that anything of consequence happened at all.

The accounts over what kind of weaponry was deployed on Friday and how much damage was caused are still conflicting and incomplete.

American officials speak of a missile strike, but Iranian officials say the attacks, in the central province of Isfahan and in northwest Tabriz, were caused by small exploding drones.

“The downed micro air vehicles caused no damage and no casualties,” Iran’s Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian insisted to the semi-official Tasnim News Agency.

But these simple quadcopters are Israel’s calling card – it has deployed them time and again in its years of covert operations inside Iran.

This time their main target was the storied central province of Isfahan, which is celebrated for its stunning Islamic heritage.

Of late, however, the province is more famous for the Natanz nuclear facility, the Isfahan Nuclear Technology Centre and a major air base, which was used during Iran’s 14 April attack on Israel.

It is also an industrial heartland housing factories which produce the drones and ballistic missiles that were fired by the hundreds in Israel’s direction last Sunday.

So a limited operation seems to have carried a powerful warning – that Israel has the intelligence and assets to strike at will at Iran’s beating heart.

It is a message so urgent that Israel made sure it was sent before, rather than after, the start of the Jewish Passover, as was widely predicted by Israel watchers.

US officials have also indicated that Israel targeted sites such as Iran’s air defence radar system, which protects Natanz. There is still no confirmed account of its success.

So this attack may also be just an opening salvo. But it was, for the moment, an unintended 85th birthday gift to Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Israel’s official silence gave Iran’s ultimate decision-maker vital political space. Tehran did not have to invoke its new rule that whenever its arch-enemy strikes, Iran will hit back hard, with the risk of sparking a perilous escalatory spiral.

Hardline President Ebrahim Raisi did not even mention these most recent events in his Friday speeches.

For the Islamic Republic, it is all about what it dubs Operation True Promise – its unprecedented onslaught against Israel in the dead of night last Sunday. He hailed what he called his country’s “steely will”.

Iran has prided itself for years on its “strategic patience”, its policy of playing a long game rather than retaliating immediately and directly to any provocations.

Now, it is invoking “strategic deterrence”. This new doctrine was triggered by the 1 April attack on its diplomatic compound in Damascus, which destroyed its consular annex and killed seven Revolutionary Guards, including its most senior commander in the region.

Iran’s supreme leader was under mounting pressure to draw a line as Israel ramped up its targets during the last six months of the grievous Gaza war.

No longer just striking Tehran’s assets, including arms caches, buildings, bases and supply routes on battle grounds like Syria and Lebanon, Israel was also assassinating top-ranking officials.

A decades-long hostility, which had previously played out in shadow wars and covert operations, erupted in open confrontation.

Whatever the specifics of this latest tit for tat, there is a more fundamental priority for both sides: deterrence – a more solid certainty that strikes on its own soil will not happen again. If they do, there is a cost to pay, and it will hurt.

For the moment there is an audible sigh of relief in the region, and in capitals far and wide.

Israel’s latest move, under anxious urging from its allies to limit its retaliation, will have eased this tension, for now. Everyone wants to stop a catastrophic all-out war. But no one will be in any doubt that any lull may not last.

The region is still on fire.

The Gaza war grinds on, causing a staggering number of Palestinian casualties.

Under pressure from its staunchest allies, Israel has facilitated the delivery of greater quantities of desperately needed aid, but the blighted territory still teeters on the brink of famine.

Israeli hostages have still not come home, and ceasefire talks are stalled. Israel still warns of battles to come in Hamas’s last stronghold in Rafah – what aid chiefs and world leaders say would be yet another untold humanitarian disaster.

Iran’s network of proxies across the region, what it calls an “Axis of Resistance” stretching from Hezbollah strongholds in Lebanon through Iran-aligned militias in Iraq and Syria, to the Houthis of Yemen, are at the ready, still attacking daily.

In the last few weeks, simultaneously everything and nothing has changed in the region’s darkest, most dangerous days.

April 20, 2024 Posted by | Iran, Israel, politics international | Leave a comment

I’ve seen Iran’s nuclear HQ – these are the risks if Israel tries to destroy it.

The fortified Natanz uranium enrichment facility is thought to
be a top target if Israel attacks Iran. The uranium enrichment plant in the
Iranian desert has long been a centre of geopolitical controversy.

“Don’t take any photos. The guards will be watching. If they see you holding a camera, they’ll probably shoot us.”
That was my guide’s strict instruction as our mini-bus slowly approached
the Natanz uranium enrichment plant in the heart of the Iranian desert,
during my trip to the country in 2014. Despite growing optimism back then
about international negotiations over Iran’s nuclear programme, security
for Iran’s biggest and most controversial nuclear facility remained as
tight as ever.

You might think it odd that a public road would run within a
few hundred metres of such a sensitive area. We were driving on Freeway 7
from the city of Esfahan to the ancient village of Abyaneh, and the
quickest route happened to pass by Natanz.

One thing I remember from that
journey is the sight of anti-aircraft guns pointing towards the sky. If
Israel attacks Iran in vengeance for its drone and missile assault at the
weekend – following Israel’s own strike on the Iranian consulate in
Damascus – then Natanz is likely to be among the top desired targets for
its jets.

Rafael Grossi, director general of the International Atomic
Energy Agency, revealed on Monday that the extreme Islamic regime in Tehran
closed its nuclear sites over the weekend because of “security
considerations”. Asked if he believed that Israel might attack the
facilities, the head of the UN watchdog replied: “We are always concerned
about this possibility.” Mr Grossi called for “extreme restraint”.

Natanz has long been central to Iran’s nuclear programme. It is where
centrifuges spin uranium gas at extremely high speed to separate a lighter
form – uranium-235- from a heavier variant. It is the uranium-235 isotope
that can be split to produce energy. Even if Israel succeeded in blowing up
Natanz, the Washington-based Arms Control Association has warned: “Tehran
may have already diverted certain materials, such as advanced centrifuges
used to enrich uranium, to covert sites.

” If the Israeli prime minister
Benjamin Netanyahu decides to strike Natanz, or any other site in Iran,
then it’s hard to know where this crisis might end – with worries about a
wider regional conflict or even World War Three suddenly seeming realistic.

iNews 17th April 2024

https://inews.co.uk/news/world/iran-nuclear-hq-israel-risks-3010773

April 20, 2024 Posted by | Iran, safety | Leave a comment

Iranian commander says Tehran could review ‘nuclear doctrine’ amid Israeli threats

By Reuters, April 18, 2024, Reporting by Dubai Newsroom, editing by Edmund Blair, Alex Richardson and Timothy Heritage  https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iranian-commander-warns-tehran-could-review-its-nuclear-doctrine-amid-israeli-2024-04-18/

DUBAI, April 18 (Reuters) – Iran could review its “nuclear doctrine” following Israeli threats, a senior Iranian Revolutionary Guards commander said on Thursday, raising concerns about Tehran’s nuclear programme which it has always said was strictly for peaceful purposes.

Israel has said it will retaliate against Iran’s April 13 missile and drone attack, which Tehran says was carried out in response to a suspected Israeli strike on its embassy compound in Damascus earlier this month.

“The threats of the Zionist regime (Israel) against Iran’s nuclear facilities make it possible to review our nuclear doctrine and deviate from our previous considerations,” Ahmad Haghtalab, the Guards commander in charge of nuclear security, was quoted as saying by the semi-official Tasnim news agency.

Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has the last say on Tehran’s nuclear programme, which the West suspects has military purposes

In 2021, Iran’s then-intelligence minister said Western pressure could push Tehran to seek nuclear weapons, the development of which Khamenei banned in a fatwa, or religious decree, in the early 2000s.

“Building and stockpiling nuclear bombs is wrong and using it is haram (religiously forbidden) … Although we have nuclear technology, Iran has firmly avoided it,” Khamenei reiterated in 2019.

Iran’s foreign ministry did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment.

“If the Zionist regime wants to take action against our nuclear centres and facilities, we will surely and categorically reciprocate with advanced missiles against their own nuclear sites,” Haghtalab said.

Indirect talks between Tehran and Washington to revive Iran’s 2015 nuclear pact has stalled since 2022. The accord, aimed at keeping Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, required Tehran to accept restrictions on its nuclear program and more extensive United Nations’ inspections, in exchange for an end to U.N., European Union and U.S. sanctions.

The deal, which had capped Iran’s uranium enrichment at 3.67%, was abandoned in 2018 by then-U.S. President Donald Trump, who said it was too generous to Tehran.

Rafael Grossi, the head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog, said in February that Iran continued to enrich uranium at rates up to 60% purity, which is far beyond the needs for commercial nuclear use.

April 20, 2024 Posted by | Iran, politics international | Leave a comment

Israel has nuclear weapons. Iran does not

Israel has always refused to confirm its possession of a nuclear arsenal and maintains a policy of strategic ambiguity throughout the region.

The country’s ballistic missile programme, called Jericho, is highly classified. Few details are in the public domain, but the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) estimates Israel has around 24 nuclear-capable missiles.

In general, Israeli leaders do not say much about their country’s atomic capabilities. But in November, far-right cabinet minister Amichai Eliyahu claimed it was an option to launch a nuclear strike on the Gaza strip – comments that were quickly disavowed by Benjamin Netanyahu.

In 2016, a leaked cache of emails from former US secretary of state Colin Powell included one that read: “The boys in Tehran know Israel has 200 [nuclear weapons], all targeted on Tehran, and we have thousands.”

Iran does not have nuclear weapons, but has several nuclear facilities across its territory which experts fear are being used to develop them. Tehran claims they are for civilian use.

In 2016, the country signed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action – widely known as the Iran nuclear deal – which lifted sanctions and around $100bn of frozen funds in exchange for an end to atomic weapon research.

………..Tehran has continued to enrich uranium at these sites of rates up to 60 per cent purity – which exceeds needs for commercial use and is just a step away from weapons-grade 90 per cent, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

That means Iran’s so-called “breakout time” – the time it would need to produce enough weapons-grade uranium for a nuclear bomb – is between six months to a year, according to experts.

Iran also vowed to revise its weapons doctrine if its nuclear sites were targeted by Israel before the attack on Friday morning.

What happens next?

So far, it is unclear. Israel maintains its policy of strategic ambiguity and Iran has immediately downplayed the severity of Israel’s attack – saying it would not respond.

A senior official said the country was looking at it more as an “infiltration” rather than an “external attack” – but previously Iran’s president said an attack would be met with a “severe response”. https://au.news.yahoo.com/many-nuclear-weapons-israel-iran-144603850.html

April 20, 2024 Posted by | Iran, Israel, weapons and war | 1 Comment

A new Iranian nuclear deal is being considered

A veteran of the Foreign Office told i: “I don’t think the world realises
how advanced the Iran nuclear programme has got. The issue has long been
how to bring Iran back to some form of a deal.” They suggested Tehran
could have been stepping up work on the nuclear programme while Western
powers were focussed on Russia and China, saying: “When the world’s
attention is elsewhere, they accelerate.”

A source close to the Biden
administration added: “Iran has made it quite clear that it has no
intention of attacking Israel again, unless Israel strikes back in response
to last weekend. The administration believes a diplomatic route is by far
the best route forward, and that both sides can be catered for. “The
president is doing everything he can to avert a war in the Middle East, and
a new Iran nuclear deal is one way being considered to achieve that. It’s
not the only strategy, but it’s on the table.”

iNews 17th April 2024

Biden could try to revive Iran nuclear deal to avert wider war, source says

April 20, 2024 Posted by | Iran, politics international | Leave a comment

Iran Closes Nuclear Sites Fearing Israeli Attack: IAEA Chief

Tuesday, 04/16/2024 Iran International Newsroom, https://www.iranintl.com/en/202404162504

Iran shut down its nuclear facilities last Sunday over “security considerations,” UN nuclear chief Rafael Grossi has said, expressing concern over the “possibility” of an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear sites.

Speaking to reporters in New York on Monday, IAEA Director General confirmed that the facilities had reopened within 24 hours, but with no IAEA supervision, as the agency has decided to keep its inspectors away until the situation is “completely calm.”

Grossi was referring to rising tensions between Israel and Iran, which many fear may lead to an all-out war between the two countries and potentially engulf the whole Middle East.

Israel bombed Iran’s consulate in Damascus on 1 April, killing seven members of the Islamic Revolution’s Guards Corpse (IRGC), including a high-ranking commander and his deputy. Iran retaliated on 13 April, launching more than 300 missiles and drones towards Israel –all but a few of which were intercepted by Israel and its allies.

On Monday, Israeli officials vowed to respond to the attack. When asked about the possibility of Israel hitting Iran’s nuclear sites, Grossi said, “We are always concerned about this possibility.” He urged both sides to show “extreme restraint”.

Grossi also reiterated the IAEA’s concerns about Iran’s nuclear program.

“A bit more than a year ago, I went to Tehran and signed a joint declaration with the Iranian government indicating a number of actions that we will be taking together with Iran,” Grossi said. “We started that process and that process was interrupted. And I have been insisting that we need to go back to that understanding that we had in March 2023.”

In September 2023, Iran withdrew the designation of several inspectors assigned to conduct verification activities in Iran under the Non-Proliferation Treaty Safeguards Agreement. Iran’s nuclear chief Mohammad Eslami later claimed that those expelled had had a history of “extremist political behavior”.

“We are always urging, asking and requiring Iran to cooperate with us in full,” Grossi told Iran International’s Maryam Rahmati. “It’s not that we are not there, but we are not there at the level that we consider we should be.”

The IAEA reported in February that Iran is enriching and stockpiling near-weapons-grade uranium, warning that such elevated purity cannot be explained by civilian applications.

When asked about Iran’s enrichment levels by Iran International, Grossi siad, “the fact that there is an accumulation of uranium enriched at very, very high levels does not automatically mean you’re having a weapon…but it raises questions in the international community.”

Iran has always denied seeking nuclear weapons, but no other state has enriched to that level without producing them.

A report published last month by the Institute for Science and International Security claimed that Iran is moving ahead with building a nuclear site deep underground near Natanz.

“This Iranian nuclear weapons-making facility could be impervious to Israeli and perhaps even American bombs,” Foundation for Defense of Democracies CEO Mark Dubowitz said at the time. “Time is quickly running out, as Iran moves into a zone of nuclear immunity, to deny the regime permanent use of this deadly site.”

April 18, 2024 Posted by | Iran, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Iran President Warns of ‘Massive’ Response if Israel Launches ‘Tiniest Invasion’

 https://english.aawsat.com/world/4969876-iran-president-warns-massive-response-if-israel-launches-tiniest-invasion–– 17 Apr 24

Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi warned on Wednesday that the “tiniest invasion” by Israel would bring a “massive and harsh” response, as the region braces for potential Israeli retaliation after Iran’s attack over the weekend.

Raisi spoke at an annual army parade that was relocated to a barracks north of the capital, Tehran, from its usual venue on a highway in the city’s southern outskirts. Iranian authorities gave no explanation for its relocation, and state TV did not broadcast it live, as it has in previous years.

Iran launched hundreds of missiles and drones at Israel over the weekend in response to an Israeli strike on Iran’s embassy compound in Syria on April 1 that killed 12 people, including two Iranian generals.

Israel successfully intercepted nearly all the missiles and drones.

It has vowed to respond, without saying when or how, while its allies have urged all sides to avoid further escalation.

Raisi said Saturday’s attack was a limited one, and that if Iran had wanted to carry out a bigger attack, “nothing would remain from the Zionist regime.” His remarks were carried by the official IRNA news agency.

April 18, 2024 Posted by | Iran, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Israel attacking Iran ‘could prompt it to develop nuclear bomb in months’

‘Any Israeli strike inside Iran will take this risk,’ said one regional security analyst

. ‘Any Israeli strike inside Iran will take this risk,’ said one
regional security analyst. ‘If Iran’s general deterrence goes down, we
are at risk of the weaponisation of Iran’s nuclear programme’.

 iNews 17th April 2024

https://inews.co.uk/news/world/israel-attack-iran-nuclear-bomb-months-3009662

April 18, 2024 Posted by | Iran, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Bombs and viruses: The shadowy history of Israel’s attacks on Iranian soil

 https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/4/15/bombs-and-viruses-the-shadowy-history-of-israels-attacks-on-iranian-soil

From cyberattacks and assassinations to drone strikes, Israel-linked plots have targeted Iran and its nuclear programme for years.

Israel’s leaders have signalled that they are weighing their options on how to respond to Iran’s attack early Sunday morning, when Tehran targeted its archenemy with more than 300 missiles and drones.

Iran’s attack, which followed an Israeli strike last week on the Iranian consulate in Damascus, Syria, that killed 13 people was historic: It was the first time Tehran had directly targeted Israeli soil, despite decades of hostility. Until Sunday, many of Iran’s allies in the so-called axis of resistance — especially the Palestinian group Hamas, the Lebanese group Hezbollah, Yemen’s Houthis and armed groups in Iraq and Syria — were the ones who launched missiles and drones at Israel.

But if Israel were to hit back militarily inside Iran, it wouldn’t be the first time. Far from it.

For years, Israel has focused on one target within Iran in particular: the country’s nuclear programme. Israel has long accused Iran of clandestinely building a nuclear bomb that could threaten its existence — and has publicly, and frequently, spoken of its diplomatic and intelligence-driven efforts to derail those alleged efforts. Iran denies that it has had a military nuclear programme, while arguing that it has the right to access civil nuclear energy.

As Israel prepares its response, here’s a look at the range of attacks in Iran — from drone strikes and cyberattacks to assassinations of scientists and the theft of secrets — that Israel has either accepted it was behind or is accused of having orchestrated.

Assassinations of Iranian scientists

  • January 2010: A physics professor at Tehran University, Masoud Ali-Mohammadi, was killed through a remote-controlled bomb planted in his motorcycle. Iranian state media claimed that the US and Israel were behind the attack. The Iranian government described Ali-Mohammadi as a nuclear scientist.
  • November 2010: A professor at the nuclear engineering faculty at Shahid Beheshti University in Tehran, Majid Shahriari, was killed in a car explosion on his way to work. His wife was also wounded. The president of Iran at the time, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, blamed the United States and Israel for the attacks.
  • January 2012: Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, a chemical engineering graduate, was killed by a bomb placed on his car by a motorcyclist in Tehran. Iran blamed Israel and the US for the attack and said Ahmadi Roshan was a nuclear scientist who supervised a department at Iran’s primary uranium enrichment facility, in the city of Natanz.
  • November 2020:Prominent nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh was killed in a roadside attack outside Tehran. Western and Israeli intelligence had long suspected that Fakhrizadeh was the father of an Iranian nuclear weapons programme. He was sanctioned by the United Nations in 2007 and the US in 2008.
  • May 2022: Colonel Hassan Sayyad Khodaei of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) was shot five times outside of his home in Tehran. Majid Mirahmadi, a member of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, alleged the assassination was “definitely the work of Israel”.

Israel’s cyberattacks on Iran

  • June 2010:The Stuxnet virus was found in computers at the nuclear plant in Iran’s Bushehr city, and it spread from there to other facilities. As many as 30,000 computers across at least 14 facilities were impacted by September 2010. At least 1,000 out of 9,000 centrifuges in Iran’s Natanz enrichment facility were destroyed, according to an estimate by the Institute for Science and International Security. Upon investigation, Iran blamed Israel and the US for the virus attack.
  • April 2011: A virus called Stars was discovered by the Iranian cyberdefence agency which said the malware was designed to infiltrate and damage Iran’s nuclear facilities. The virus mimicked official government files and inflicted “minor damage” on computer systems, according to Gholamreza Jalali, the head of Iran’s Passive Defense Organization. Iran blamed Israel and the US.

  • November 2011    : Iran said it discovered a new virus called Duqu, based on Stuxnet. Experts said Duqu was intended to gather data for future cyberattacks. The Iranian government announced it was checking computers at main nuclear sites. The Duqu spyware was widely believed by experts to have been linked to Israel.
  • April 2012: Iran blamed the US and Israel for malware called Wiper, which erased the hard drives of computers owned by the Ministry of Petroleum and the National Iranian Oil Company.
  • May 2012: Iran announced that a virus called Flame had tried to steal government data from government computers. The Washington Post reported that Israel and the US had used it to collect intelligence. Then-Israeli Vice Prime Minister Moshe Yaalon did not confirm the nation’s involvement but acknowledged that Israel would use all means to “harm the Iranian nuclear system”.
  • October 2018: The Iranian government said that it had blocked an invasion by a new generation of Stuxnet, blaming Israel for the attack.
  • October 2021: A cyberattack hit the system that allows Iranians to use government-issued cards to purchase fuel at a subsidised rate, affecting all 4,300 petrol stations in Iran. Consumers had to either pay the regular price, more than double the subsidised one, or wait for stations to reconnect to the central
  • distribution system. Iran blamed Israel and the US.
  • May 2020: A cyberattack impacted computers that control maritime traffic at Shahid Rajaee port on Iran’s southern coast in the Gulf, creating a hold-up of ships that waited to dock. The Washington Post quoted US officials as saying that Israel was behind the attack, though Israel did not claim responsibility.

Israel’s drone strikes and raids on Iran

  • January 2018: Mossad agents raided a secure Tehran facility, stealing classified nuclear archives. In April 2018, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced that Israel discovered 100,000 “secret files that prove” Iran lied about never having a nuclear weapons programme.
  • February 2022: Former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett admitted in an op-ed published in The Wall Street Journal in December 2023, that Israel carried out an attack on an unmanned aerial vehicle, and assassinated a senior IRGC commander in February of the previous year.
  • May 2022: Explosives-laden quadcopter suicide drones hit the Parchin military complex southeast of Tehran, killing an engineer and damaging a building where drones had been developed by the Ministry of Defence and Armed Forces. IRGC Commander Hossein Salami pledged retaliation against unspecified “enemies”.
  • February 2024: A natural gas pipeline in Iran was attacked. Iran’s Oil Minister Javad Owji alleged that the “explosion of the gas pipeline was an Israeli plot”.
  • January 2023: Several suicide drones struck a military facility in central Isfahan, but they were thwarted and caused no damage. While Iran did not immediately place blame for the attacks, Iran’s UN envoy, Amir Saeid Iravani, wrote a letter to the UN chief saying that “primary investigation suggested Israel was responsible”.

April 17, 2024 Posted by | Iran, Israel, secrets,lies and civil liberties, weapons and war | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »