Iran to hold nuclear talks with France, Germany, UK
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/11/24/iran-to-meet-with-germany-france-uk-in-nuclear-talks
The meeting follows an IAEA resolution denouncing Iran for what it called a lack of cooperation.
Iran says it will hold nuclear talks with officials from France, Germany, and the United Kingdom this week, amid escalating tensions over Iran’s nuclear programme.
The meeting, which is set to happen on Friday, was announced by Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Sunday, and UK officials confirmed the meeting.
“A range of regional and international issues, including the issues of Palestine and Lebanon, as well as the nuclear issue, will be discussed,” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said.
Neither London nor Tehran said where the meeting would take place.
On Thursday, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) adopted a resolution denouncing Iran for what it called a lack of cooperation. The three European nations, whose representatives will meet Iranian officials, were among those voting for the resolution.
Nineteen countries out of the 35-member IAEA voted to censure Iran – a largely symbolic gesture – while 12 countries abstained. Russia, China, and Burkina Faso voted against the resolution. Thursday’s resolution marked the third time the United Nations body had taken such action since 2020.
The move came as tensions ran high over Iran’s nuclear programme, which critics fear is aimed at developing a nuclear weapon – something Tehran has repeatedly denied.
On Friday, Iran announced a “series of new and advanced centrifuges”, technology that refines enriched uranium into gas. “We will substantially increase the enrichment capacity with the utilisation of different types of advanced machines,” Behrouz Kamalvandi, Iran’s atomic energy organisation spokesman, told Iranian state TV.
Despite the announcement, Iran said it would continue to cooperate with the IAEA.
“We remain committed to taking every diplomatic step to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, including through snapback if necessary,” the UK’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office told the AFP news agency.
In 2015, Iran reached an agreement with world powers, including the United States, to curb its nuclear programme due to concerns about the country potentially developing nuclear weapons.
But in 2018, during President Donald Trump’s first term, the US unilaterally withdrew from the agreement and imposed sanctions on Iran – a move that stoked tensions between Washington and Tehran.
Since then, Tehran has scaled back its cooperation with the IAEA, deactivating surveillance devices put in place by the UN. Concurrently, Iran has increased its stockpile of enriched uranium.
Iran has “begun implementation of preparatory measures” to cap its stockpile of highly enriched uranium. According to leaked reports from the IAEA, Iran is close to the 90 percent threshold needed to produce a nuclear warhead.
Israel preparing to strike Iranian nuclear sites – media
https://www.rt.com/news/609279-israel-iran-strikes-report/ 14 Dec 24
Events in Syria have created a window of opportunity, sources have told the Times of Israel.
The Israeli Air Force is preparing for “potential strikes” on Iranian nuclear facilities, military officials have told the Times of Israel.
The Jewish state believes that the surprise takeover of Syria by jihadist rebels has weakened Tehran’s position in the region, which could prompt Iran to speed up its atomic program, the outlet said.
Meanwhile, Israeli airstrikes have taken out most of Syria’s air defenses, clearing the way for an operation against Iran.
Tehran has long insisted that its nuclear program is peaceful and civilian in nature, contrary to allegations by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Iran has sought an atomic bomb. In 2015, the world’s top five nuclear powers struck a deal with Iran to monitor its nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief, but the US unilaterally withdrew from the agreement in 2018.
Israel reportedly considered strikes on Iranian nuclear sites after Tehran’s October 1 missile barrage, but did not follow through on those plans.
Netanyahu’s government has used the recent events in Syria to destroy its neighbor’s military capabilities, launching “one of the largest attack operations in the history” of its air force. Earlier this week, Israeli jets struck over 250 targets across Syria, including airports and seaports, air defense and missile sites, military industry facilities and warehouses. Israeli troops also moved beyond the buffer zone in the Golan Heights, claiming Mount Hermon.
Bashar Assad’s government in Syria was overthrown by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) militants last week. The jihadist group has not yet consolidated power.
Israel reportedly believes that Iran is “isolated” after the ousting of Assad and that its other main ally in the region, Lebanon-based Hezbollah, has been significantly weakened by the recent IDF offensive there. This could push Iran to speed up its nuclear program and create a window of opportunity for an Israeli pre-emptive strike, according to the Times of Israel.
Iran’s uranium enrichment ‘worrisome’ – nuclear watchdog
The head of the UN nuclear watchdog has told the BBC Iran’s decision to
begin producing significantly more highly enriched uranium was “very
worrisome”. Rafael Grossi, director general of the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA), said Iran was increasing its stockpile of uranium
enriched to 60%, just below the level of purity needed for a nuclear
weapon.
This will be seen by many in the region as Tehran’s response to its
military and diplomatic setbacks in Syria, Lebanon and Gaza in recent
months. Mr Grossi said it was “no secret” some politicians in Iran were
calling for the development of a nuclear weapon – but after holding talks
in Tehran in recent weeks, he said that “doesn’t seem to be the path of
choice” by the current leadership.
BBC 6th Dec 2024,
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c20ee6qylwgo
Iran deploys advanced centrifuges in defiance of IAEA resolution
Iran has begun deploying advanced centrifuges which enrich uranium for the
country’s nuclear program in response to a resolution by the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) calling for greater transparency
into Iran’s nuclear activities.
Speaking during an open session of
parliament on Sunday, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf criticized the resolution,
accusing the United States and European nations of using Iran’s nuclear
program as a pretext for unjustified actions. He said, “The Islamic
Republic of Iran’s reciprocal response to this political misuse of the
Board of Governors was immediately put into action, and the deployment of a
set of new and advanced centrifuges has begun”.
Iran International 24th Nov 2024,
https://www.iranintl.com/en/202411240306
Iran warns West: abandon pressure or face more uranium enrichment
Iran International 23rd Nov 2024
he West still has an opportunity to pursue engagement and abandon pressure, but Tehran is ready to confront any challenges, spokesperson and deputy head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, announced on Saturday.
Addressing Western nations, Behrouz Kamalvandi wrote in a Tehran newspaper, “There is still time for engagement and for setting aside pressure and threats. While Iran has prepared itself to counter threats, it prefers dialogue over confrontation.”
Iranian officials have condemned a censure resolution adopted during the November 21 quarterly meeting of the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors. While they claim Iran is ready to negotiate over its nuclear commitments, their calls for dialogue come against the backdrop of years of failed diplomatic efforts by the IAEA and Western powers to address concerns over Tehran’s reduced cooperation with the UN watchdog.
The IAEA Board of Governors approved a resolution proposed by four Western powers condemning the expansion of Iran’s nuclear activities and Tehran’s lack of necessary cooperation with the agency. The resolution passed with a majority vote.
This marked the second resolution adopted against the Islamic Republic by the Board of Governors in the past six months.
On Friday, Kamalvandi responded to the IAEA resolution by announcing a “significant increase” in uranium enrichment levels.
Speaking to state media, he said this step was part of Iran’s “compensatory measures in response to the new Board of Governors resolution” and noted that the process had “already begun immediately.”…………………………………………
https://www.iranintl.com/en/202411239657
What would Iran do: A race to the bomb or a deal with Trump?
A proposed censure of Iran for its lack of cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog
raises important questions at a critical time after Donald Trump’s
reelection when Tehran faces regional weakness, economic pressure and
Israel.
The planned censure is likely going through despite Tehran offering
to cap its highly enriched uranium stock. France, Britain, Germany, and the
United States will introduce the resolution at Wednesday’s meeting of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Governors despite, Iran
International has learned.
Iran and nuclear experts agree on one thing:
Trump’s return to the White House will have an impact on the Islamic
Republic, but whether and how the incoming administration and the Islamic
Republic may engage on the nuclear issue is up for debate.
Iran International 20th Nov 2024,
https://www.iranintl.com/en/202411203852
Iran has offered to keep uranium below purity levels for a bomb, IAEA confirms
Patrick Wintour Diplomatic editor, mhttps://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/nov/20/iran-has-offered-to-keep-uranium-below-purity-levels-for-a-bomb-iaea-confirms
UN inspectorate chief calls Tehran’s move a ‘concrete step in the right direction’, amid threat of restored sanctions.
Iran has offered to keep its stock of uranium enriched up to 60% – below the purity levels required to make a nuclear bomb – the head of the UN nuclear inspectorate, Rafael Grossi, has confirmed amid the threat of restored European sanctions over Tehran’s nuclear activities.
“I think this is … a concrete step in the right direction. We have a fact which has been verified by us. It is the first time Iran has agreed to take a different path,” Grossi said in Vienna on Tuesday.
The move negotiated by Grossi with Iranian officials, including the president, Masoud Pezeshkian, on a visit to Tehran last week is designed to head off a move at the IAEA board this week by European diplomats to request a comprehensive report on Iranian compliance that could lead to the snapback of UN sanctions. The agreement covering Iran’s nuclear activities formally expires in September, 10 years after it was negotiated in 2015.
A snapback would involve the reimposition of security council sanctions from earlier resolutions on Iran in the event of “significant non-performance” of Iran’s commitments under the nuclear deal.
“I went last week and I got something, and by moving step by step and getting concrete results the trajectory may be less confrontational,” Grossi said.
Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, has however hinted that the Iranian offer of a cap on enrichment might be withdrawn if the European powers – France, Germany and the UK – insist on commissioning the report. Grossi said he had spoken to Araghchi on Tuesday night but there had been no Iranian threat or warning during the conversation.
Araghchi said in a statement: “If the other parties ignore Iran’s goodwill and interactive approach and put non-constructive measures on the agenda at the meeting of the governing council through the issuance of a resolution, Iran will respond appropriately and proportionately.”
He said the offer to freeze the stockpile was a sign of goodwill, but the European powers are likely to regard the Iranian offer to cap the 60% stockpile as less groundbreaking than either Grossi or the Iranians do. Grossi clearly believes it is a sign of constructive progress after nearly two years of impasse.
He added that four new, experienced nuclear inspectors were being allowed into Iran.
European powers are worried both by Iran’s continued refusal to give IAEA inspectors access to its nuclear sites, and also by the steady increase in its stockpile of nearly weapons-grade uranium. The strikes and counter-strikes between Israel and Iran this year has led to a growing debate inside Iran whether it should drop the fatwa on producing a nuclear weapon, with some Iranian officials claiming they had already mastered most of the techniques necessary to do so. Iran has always claimed that its nuclear work is solely for peaceful civilian purposes.
Israel and the US have both said they will not allow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon, but the incoming Trump administration has so far put the emphasis on tightening economic sanctions against Iran rather than a military attack on Iran’s nuclear sites.
In its latest report to the IAEA board, the IAEA said Iran’s stockpile of 60% enriched uranium had increased by 17.6kg to 182.3kg (402lbs). Assuming no change, that means Trump would enter office in January with Iran having enough nuclear fuel for four atomic bombs. It would take Iran just a few days to convert the 60% material into weapons-grade material.
Israeli strikes hit ‘component’ of Iran’s nuclear programme: Netanyahu
PM says last month’s attacks hit Tehran’s nuclear capabilities as EU and UK impose more sanctions.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says his country’s air attack on Iran last month hit “a component” of Tehran’s nuclear programme and degraded its defence and missile production capabilities.
“There is a specific component in their nuclear programme that was hit in this attack,” Netanyahu said in a speech in Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, on Monday without providing details on the element hit.
“The programme itself and its ability to operate here have not yet been thwarted,” he added.
On October 26, Israeli fighter jets launched three waves of strikes targeting Iranian military assets, weeks after Iran had fired about 200 ballistic missiles at Israel, saying its attack was in response to Israel’s killings of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in the southern suburbs of Beirut and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran.
At the time of Israel’s attack, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei said the strikes “should not be exaggerated nor downplayed”. United States President Joe Biden said before the strikes took place that he would not support an attack on Iranian nuclear sites, which would open up the possibility of an even further escalation in the region.
In addition to the claim of an attack on Iran’s nuclear programme, Netanyahu also said in Monday’s speech – which was interrupted by family members of Israeli captives held in Gaza – that three Russian-supplied S-300 surface-to-air missile defence batteries stationed near Tehran had been hit.
Netanyahu said Russia had supplied four of the defence batteries to Iran and the other one had been destroyed during an exchange of direct attacks between Iran and Israel in April.
Iran has not commented on the Israeli claims.
Last week, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian told the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Rafael Grossi, that his government was prepared to address concerns about its nuclear programme before US President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration in January.
Grossi said achieving “results” in nuclear talks with Iran was vital to avoid a new conflict in the region already inflamed by Israel’s wars on Gaza and Lebanon, stressing that Iranian nuclear installations “should not be attacked”.
Stepping up sanctions
Netanyahu gave his speech as the European Union and the United Kingdom on Monday expanded their sanctions against Iran over its alleged support for Russia’s war on Ukraine……………………………………………………………… more https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/11/18/israeli-strikes-hit-component-of-irans-nuclear-programme-netanyahu
UN nuclear head to visit Iran for talks on country’s nuclear program as next Trump presidency looms
VIENNA (AP) — The head of the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog said Sunday he will travel to Iran in the coming days to hold talks regarding the country’s nuclear program. The visit comes amid wider tensions gripping the Mideast over the Israel-Hamas war and uncertainty over how U.S. President-elect Donald Trump will approach Iran after his inauguration in January.
Specifically, the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mariano Grossi, will have high level meetings with the Iranian government and will hold technical discussions on all aspects related to the joint statement agreed with Iran in March 2023.
It is intended as a path forward for cooperation between the IAEA and Iran on how to expand inspections of the Islamic Republic’s rapidly advancing atomic program.
The 2023 statement included a pledge by Iran to resolve issues around sites where inspectors have questions about possible undeclared nuclear activity, and to allow the IAEA to “implement further appropriate verification and monitoring activities.”
The meetings in Tehran will build on Grossi’s discussions with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in September, a statement by the IAEA said.
“It is essential that we make substantive progress in the implementation of the joint statement agreed with Iran in March 2023,” Grossi said. “My visit to Tehran will be very important in that regard.”
Iran is rapidly advancing its atomic program and continues to increase its stockpile of uranium enriched to near weapons-grade levels in defiance of international demands, according to recent reports by the IAEA.
Grossi, has warned that Tehran has enough uranium enriched to near-weapons-grade levels to make “several” nuclear bombs if it chose to do so. He has acknowledged the U.N. agency cannot guarantee that none of Iran’s centrifuges may have been peeled away for clandestine enrichment………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
As Trump is to take office again in a few weeks, Iranians are divided on what his next presidency will bring. Some foresee an all-out war between Tehran and Washington, particularly as other conflicts rage in the region. Others hold out hope that America’s 47th president might engage in unexpected diplomacy as he did with North Korea. https://apnews.com/article/iaea-grossi-iran-nuclear-negotiations-efa8ad94a3424135eb21261cccaf4641
Israel’s attacks on Iran were an apocalyptic error by Netanyahu. Here’s why
Martin Jay, Strategic Culture Foundation, Thu, 31 Oct 2024,
https://www.sott.net/article/495896-Israels-attacks-on-Iran-were-an-apocalyptic-error-by-Netanyahu-Heres-why
We see that Israel has no longer term military strategy, only short term excursions which will drain both its resources and the morale of its frontline soldiers.
While the whole world now waits with bated breath as to the result of the U.S. elections in only a matter of days, many are also waiting to see what are the implications for Israel’s recent strike on Iran. Despite being told by Joe Biden that it could not strike military installations it went against the advice of its chief sponsor and did precisely that. Perhaps there has never been a better example of western diplomacy failing than this incident, given that while Israel lies to its own people and the western world via news outlets more than happy to spin a yarn about the reality of the attacks, Iran now has to look at a number of options in how it will respond. But respond it surely will.
Yet this singular act is probably the most reckless to date from Netanyahu. Never before has the Israeli PM gone so far out on a limb and taken such a gambit which not only pushes the U.S. to the brink of a war with Iran but also throws a spotlight on the existential question of Israel itself. The next strike on Israel’s military infrastructure might be the final blow for Israel to function as a military entity forcing the U.S., or the next president, to intervene with Trump’s critics already pointing out that he owes a number of favours to the Zionists which they will certainly call in.
Netanyahu is desperate to keep wars on all fronts alive simply so he can remain relevant. But what is hardly talked about is the state of Israel itself, with an economy in pieces. Just how far will the next U.S. president go in supporting Israel’s new war with Iran, both in terms of military spending and breathing new life into the economy which has seen 40,000 businesses go under since October 7th 2023 and almost a million Israelis leave the country.
Netanyahu now is like a poker player who has used up all his IOUs at the table and is holding two pairs. How can he even believe he can take on Iran when even in Gaza and in Lebanon he is losing soldiers at a rate which should worry him and his generals. Yes, he has struck Hezbollah and reduced its capabilities but by no stretch of the imagination has he taken out the Iranian proxy which is still sending missiles and drones into Israel making the Israelis run to their air raid shelters even to this day.
The decision to strike Iran was surely out of an act of a gross political dilemma. However, the act itself has backfired on a level that neither he nor his entourage could imagine. Most of the targets were not even significantly damaged with a very low percentage of Israel’s missiles getting through Iran’s air defence which is so efficient that even Israel’s air force were too afraid actually fly into Iran’s airspace. Many in the west will be taken in by the spin from Israel’s lobby and impressive PR machine that it was a great victory and many sites were taken out, regardless of the fact that the IDF can’t provide one single shred of video evidence to back up such ludicrous claims, as it did previously in Gaza and Lebanon.
But the real defeat for Israel under Netanyahu is yet to come. Iran now has all the hard evidence it needs to strategize and hit Israel even harder than before. The erroneous strike on Iran by Netanyahu is not so much measured by the minor harm it did to a couple of weapons sites. It is by how now the myth of Israel’s military strength has been debunked once and for all. For decades Israel claimed superiority to everyone else, including Iran, and this was taken for granted by partisan western journalists who kept the dream alive. Remarkably, the strike on Israel by Iran on October 1st showed even Israelis that their air defence systems were hopelessly inadequate against Iran’s hypersonic missiles. That should have been enough to cool down the hot heads which straddle Netanyahu. At this point, the message he delivered at the UN, that there is “no place in Iran which Israel’s missiles cannot reach” should have been taken at face value and interpreted literally. Reaching Iranians sites is one thing. Actually taking them out is another.
Now, as the dust settles and Israel now waits for Iran’s response, the second myth that Israel’s strike capability was highly effective against Iran’s air defences is also blown. It seems like now Netanyahu’s folded as he has no more bluffs to play at the poker table. Unless of course he is deliberately coaxing his own country into a suicide strategy where Iran will completely desecrate Israel’s military leaving the U.S. little choice but to install itself on a grand scale. This so-called suicide strategy can’t be ruled out but seems hard to believe. The truth is that until Israel struck Iran, it didn’t know whether its own missiles and aircraft had the capability to penetrate Iran’s air defence system, supported heavily by Russia which sent it S-400 systems in August.
For the moment the Israeli press, as an act of desperate patriotism one can only assume, has indulged itself in a flurry of fake news stories about Iran’s air defence systems being destroyed as well as missile factories. But the jubilation will not last long. Oddly, the same media are becoming more pragmatic about Israel’s operations in Lebanon which has gone on for well over a month and in just two days managed to send over 80 body bags back to Israel, spurning a narrative which already is beginning to question the decision to cross the Lebanese border. The Jerusalem Post, in an oped, actually is admitting that the campaign is losing its credibility due to the number of lost lives of IDF soldiers. “The number of soldiers being killed in southern Lebanon also appears to be rising instead of falling over time” it opines. “The strikes against Hezbollah, such as the killing of Radwan commanders in September and the elimination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, should have weakened the group’s command and control”.
The article is a remarkable admission of Israel’s strategy being misconceived and poorly planned, just like the 2006 invasion. But getting IDF soldiers out of southern Lebanon will be much harder than sending them there as Netanyahu has pushed his arm into a hornet’s nest. Israel cannot consider a war of attrition against Hezbollah as even Netanyahu knows he cannot win. His only means to scoring points are assassinations and bombing civilians in southern Beirut, a strategy which many would call terrorism. His team of military goons have not learnt the lesson that aerial bombardment is not a deal breaker in a war against a disciplined guerrilla outfit. It failed in Iraq. It even failed in Vietnam. Again, we see that Israel has no longer term military strategy, only short term excursions which will drain both its resources and the morale of its frontline soldiers.
Iran says it can produce nuclear weapon if faced with existential threat
Nov 2, 2024, https://www.iranintl.com/en/202411011480
ran is capable of producing nuclear weapons and an existential threat could cause a rethink of the Supreme Leader’s injunction against them, one of his top foreign policy advisors told Lebanese news outlet Al Mayadeen.
“If the Islamic Republic of Iran faces an existential threat, we would have no choice but to adjust our military doctrine,” Former foreign minister Kamal Kharrazi said in an interview with the pro-Tehran channel.
“We already have the technical capabilities to produce weapons; only a religious decree forbidding nuclear weapons prevents us from doing so,” he added, referring to a religious decree by the country’s ultimate decision maker Ali Khamenei.
Kharrazi heads the Strategic Council on Foreign Relations and has hinted before that Iran could ditch its stated opposition to acquiring nuclear weapons but was offering his first public remarks since Israeli air strikes on Iran on Oct. 26.
Members of the body he leads are by handpicked by Khamenei and its reports and advisories have often presaged major policy shifts by the ruling system.
Iran has maintained that it will not pursue nuclear arms because the 2010 fatwa banned all weapons of mass destruction including nuclear bombs. The decree could potentially be interpreted by Iranian decision-makers as an advisory opinion lacking legal status, however.
Israel launched air strikes on military targets in Iran over the weekend in response to a missile barrage Tehran fired on the Jewish state on Oct. 1.
The attack hit missile facilities and air defense capabilities, killing four Iranian soldiers and a civilian.
Kharrazi told Al Mayadaeen that Iran would seek to expand the reach of weapons. “There’s a possibility that Iran may increase its missile range,” he said.
Upping Iran’s official rhetoric, all three top leaders of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps on Thursday said a damaging counterstrike to Israel by Tehran was assured.
Iran says it rejects nuclear weapons but will defend itself by all means
Iran International, 4 Nov 24
Iran’s Foreign Ministry said on Monday it remains committed to a peaceful nuclear program but asserted Tehran would prepare whatever it takes to defend itself against Israel.
“The official stance of Iran in rejecting weapons of mass destruction and regarding the peaceful nature of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s nuclear program is clear,” said Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei.
“As emphasized in the recent speech by the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, we will equip ourselves to the extent necessary for the defense of Iran,” he added.
For weeks, Iranian officials have ramped up their narrative that Tehran possesses the capability to produce nuclear weapons, asserting that only Khamenei’s religious fatwa prevents it from doing so.
Baghaei also claimed that the country will use all its “material and spiritual resources to respond to the recent aggressions by the Zionist regime.”
This statement comes as Iran’s leadership intensifies its stance amid escalating tensions with the United States and Israel.
Khamenei has called on officials to make every necessary preparation to defend the country against the US and Israel…………………………………………………………………………… more https://www.iranintl.com/en/202411041034
Media Hawks Make Case for War Against Iran
This depiction of Iran as an aggressor that has victimized the United States for 45 years, causing “suffering for thousands of Americans,” is a parody of history. The fact is that the US has imposed suffering on millions of Iranians for 71 years, starting with the overthrow of the country’s democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh in 1953. It propped up the brutal Pahlavi dictatorship until 1979, then backed Iraq’s invasion of Iran, helping Saddam Hussein use chemical weapons against Iranians (Foreign Policy, 8/26/13). It imposes murderous sanctions on Iran to this day (Canadian Dimension, 4/3/23).
What Stephens is deploying here is the tired and baseless propaganda strategy of hinting that World War II redux is impending if America doesn’t crush the Third World bad guy of the moment.
Gregory Shupak, FAIR, 25 Oct 24
The media hawks are flying high, pushing out bellicose rhetoric on the op-ed pages that seems calculated to whip the public into a war-ready frenzy.
Just as they have done with Hezbollah (FAIR.org, 10/10/24), prominent conservative media opinionators misrepresent Iran as the aggressor against an Israel that practices admirable restraint.
Under the headline, “Iran Opens the Door to Retaliation,” the Wall Street Journal editorial board (10/1/24) wrote that Iran’s October 1 operation against Israel “warrants a response targeting Iran’s military and nuclear assets. This is Iran’s second missile barrage since April, and no country can let this become a new normal.”
The editors wrote:
After April’s attack, the Biden administration pressured Israel for a token response, and President Biden said Israel should “take the win” since there was no great harm to Israel. Israel’s restraint has now yielded this escalation, and it is under no obligation to restrain its retaliation this time.
‘We need to escalate’
The New York Times‘ self-described “warmongering neocon” columnist Bret Stephens (10/1/24), in a piece headlined “We Absolutely Need to Escalate in Iran,” similarly filed Iran’s April and October strikes on Israel under “aggression” that requires a US/Israeli military “response.” And a Boston Globe editorial (10/3/24) wrote that Iran “launched a brazen attack,” arguing that the incident illustrated why US students are wrong to oppose American firms making or investing in Israeli weapons.
All of these pieces conveniently neglected to mention that Iran announced that its October 1 missile barrage was “a response to Israel’s recent assassinations of leaders of [Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps], Hezbollah and Hamas” (Responsible Statecraft, 10/1/24). One of these assassinations was carried out by a bombing in Tehran, the Iranian capital. But we can only guess as to whether the Globe thinks those killings are “brazen,” Stephens thinks they qualify as “aggression,” or if the Journal believes any country can let such assassinations “become a new normal.”
Likewise, Iran’s April strikes came after Israel’s attack on an Iranian consulate in Damascus that killed seven Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps officers (CBS, 4/14/24). At the time, Iran reportedly said that it would refrain from striking back against Israel if the latter agreed to end its mass murder campaign in Gaza (Responsible Statecraft, 4/8/24).
‘Axis of Aggression’
A second Stephens piece (New York Times, 10/8/24) claimed that “the American people had better hope Israel wins” in its war against “the Axis of Aggression led from Tehran.” The latter is his term for the coalition of forces resisting the US and Israel from Palestine, Yemen, Lebanon and Iran, which refers to itself as the “axis of resistance.” Stephens’ reasoning is that, since Iran’s 1979 revolution, the country has meant suffering for thousands of Americans: the hostages at the US embassy in Tehran; the diplomatsand Marines in Beirut; the troops around Baghdad and Basra, killed by munitions built in Iran and supplied to proxies in Iraq; the American citizens routinely taken as prisoners in Iran; the Navy SEALs who perished in January trying to stop Iran from supplying Houthis with weapons used against commercial shipping.
The war Israelis are fighting now—the one the news media often mislabels the “Gaza war,” but is really between Israel and Iran—is fundamentally America’s war, too: a war against a shared enemy; an enemy that makes common cause with our totalitarian adversaries in Moscow and Beijing; an enemy that has been attacking us for 45 years. Americans should consider ourselves fortunate that Israel is bearing the brunt of the fighting; the least we can do is root for it.
This depiction of Iran as an aggressor that has victimized the United States for 45 years, causing “suffering for thousands of Americans,” is a parody of history. The fact is that the US has imposed suffering on millions of Iranians for 71 years, starting with the overthrow of the country’s democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh in 1953. It propped up the brutal Pahlavi dictatorship until 1979, then backed Iraq’s invasion of Iran, helping Saddam Hussein use chemical weapons against Iranians (Foreign Policy, 8/26/13). It imposes murderous sanctions on Iran to this day (Canadian Dimension, 4/3/23).
Given this background, suggesting—as the Journal, the Globe and Stephens do—that Iran is the aggressor against the US is not only untenable but laughable. Furthermore, as I’ve previously shown (FAIR.org, 1/21/20), it’s hardly a settled fact that Iran is responsible for Iraqi attacks on US occupation forces in the country. Stephens’ description of the Navy SEALs who died in the Red Sea is vague enough that one might be left with the impression that Iran or Ansar Allah killed them, but the SEALs died when one of them fell overboard and the other jumped into the water to try to save him (BBC, 1/22/24).
Stephens went on:
Those who care about the future of freedom had better hope Israel wins.
We are living in a world that increasingly resembles the 1930s, when cunning and aggressive dictatorships united against debilitated, inward-looking, risk-averse democracies. Today’s dictatorships also know how to smell weakness. We would all be safer if, in the Middle East, they finally learned the taste of defeat.
What Stephens is deploying here is the tired and baseless propaganda strategy of hinting that World War II redux is impending if America doesn’t crush the Third World bad guy of the moment. More realistically, the “future of freedom” is jeopardized by the US/Israeli alliance’s invading the lands of Palestinian and Lebanese people and massacring them. These crimes suggest that, in the Journal’s parlance, it’s the US/Israeli partnership that is the “regional and global menace.” Or, to borrow another phrase from the Journal’s editorial, it’s Israel and the US who are the “dangerous regime[s]” from which “the civilized world” must be defended.
‘A global menace’
Corporate media commentators didn’t stop at Iran’s direct strikes on Israel, casting Iran as, in the Journal‘s words (10/1/24), “a regional and global menace”:…………………………………………………………………
Painting Iran as the mastermind behind unprovoked worldwide aggression helps prop up the hawks’ demands for escalation. But the US State Department said there was “no direct evidence” that Iran was involved in the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led attack on Israel, “either in planning it or carrying it out” (NBC, 10/12/23)…………………………………………………………………………………..
Propaganda goes nuclear
As usual, those who are itching for a war on Iran invoke the specter of an Iranian nuclear weapon. Stephens (New York Times, 10/1/24) wrote:
This year, Secretary of State Antony Blinken warned that Iran was within a week or two of being able to produce enough weapons-grade uranium for a nuclear bomb. Even with the requisite fissile material, it takes time and expertise to fashion a nuclear weapon, particularly one small enough to be delivered by a missile. But a prime goal for Iran’s nuclear ambitions is plainly in sight, especially if it receives technical help from its new best friends in Russia, China and North Korea.
Now’s the time for someone to do something about it.
That someone will probably be Israel.
By “something,” Stephens said he also meant that “Biden should order” military strikes to destroy the “Isfahan missile complex.” “There is a uranium enrichment site near Isfahan, too,” Stephens wrote suggestively.
The LA Times published two guest op-eds in less than two weeks urging attacks on Iran based on its alleged nuclear threat. Yossi Klein Halevi (10/7/24) wrote:…………………………………..
‘Threshold’ is a ways away…………………………………………………….
Recent history shows that Iran has been willing to “stop itself” from acquiring nuclear weapons. Iran abided by the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), popularly known as the Iran nuclear deal, under which Iran limited its nuclear development in exchange for a partial easing of US sanctions. It stuck to the deal for some time even after the United States unilaterally abandoned it.
Just before President Donald Trump ripped up the agreement in 2018, the IAEA reported that Iran was “implementing its nuclear-related commitments” under the accord. The year after the US abrogated the agreement, Iran was still keeping up its end of the bargain.
‘Provocative actions’ from US/Israel
Iran subsequently stopped adhering to the by then nonexistent deal—often advancing its nuclear program, as Responsible Statecraft (5/7/24) noted, “in response to provocative actions from the US and Israel”:
In early 2020, the Trump administration killed Iranian Major General Qassem Soleimani, leader of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, and soon after Tehran announced that it would no longer abide by its enrichment commitments under the deal. But, even so, Tehran said it would return to compliance if the other parties did so and met their commitments on sanctions relief.
In late 2020, Iranian nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh was assassinated near Tehran, reportedly by Israel. Soon after, Iran’s Guardian Council approved a law to speed up the nuclear program by enriching uranium to 20%, increasing the rate of production, installing new centrifuges, suspending implementation of expanded safeguards agreements, and reducing monitoring and verification cooperation with the IAEA. The Agency has been unable to adequately monitor Iran’s nuclear activities under the deal since early 2021.
However, situating Iranian policies in relation to US/Israeli actions like these would get in the way of the Journal’s campaign, which it articulated in another editorial (10/2/24), to convince the public that “If Mr. Biden won’t take this opportunity to destroy Iran’s nuclear program, the least he can do is not stop Israel from doing the job for its own self-preservation.”
Of course, the crucial, unstated assumption in the articles by Stephens, Halevi, Heilman and the Journal’s editors is that Iran’s hypothetical nuclear weapons are emergencies that need to be immediately addressed by bombing the country—while Washington and Tel Aviv’s vast, actually existing nuclear arsenals warrant no concern. https://fair.org/home/media-hawks-make-case-for-war-against-iran/
Israel strikes Iran military targets amid fears of a wider war
The Age, October 26, 2024
Israel said it struck military sites in Iran early on Saturday in retaliation for Tehran’s attacks on Israel earlier this month, the latest step in the escalating conflict between the heavily armed rivals.
Iranian media reported multiple explosions over several hours in the capital and at nearby military bases, but there were no immediate reports of damage or casualties.
Before dawn, Israel’s public broadcaster said three waves of strikes had been completed and that the operation was over.
The Middle East has been on edge awaiting Israel’s retaliation for a ballistic-missile barrage carried out by Iran on October 1, in which around 200 missiles were fired at Israel and one person was killed in the West Bank.
Tensions between arch-rivals Israel and Iran have escalated since Hamas, the Iran-backed Palestinian militant group based in Gaza, attacked Israel on October 7 last year. Hamas has been supported by Lebanon-based Hezbollah militants, also backed by Iran.
Fears that Iran and the United States would be drawn into a regional war have risen with Israel’s intensifying assault on Hezbollah since last month, including airstrikes on the Lebanese capital Beirut and a ground operation, as well as its year-old conflict in the Gaza Strip………………………………………………………….
US President Joe Biden had warned that Washington, Israel’s main backer and supplier of arms, would not support a strike on Tehran’s nuclear sites and has said Israel should consider alternatives to attacking Iran’s oil fields.
Iranian authorities have repeatedly warned Israel against any attack.
“Iran reserves the right to respond to any aggression, and there is no doubt that Israel will face a proportional reaction for any action it takes,” the semi-official Tasnim news agency said on Saturday, quoting sources…………………………………………..
Videos carried by Iranian media showed air defences continuously firing at apparently incoming projectiles in central Tehran, without saying which sites were coming under attack.
The semi-official Iranian Fars news agency said several military bases in the west and southwest of Tehran had also been targeted…………………………………………………………………….
US informed ahead of strikes
……………………………..The US was notified by Israel ahead of its strikes on targets in Iran but was not involved in the operation, another US official told Reuters.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, in the Middle East for another attempt to broker a peace deal, said on Wednesday that Israel’s retaliation should not lead to greater escalation.
Even as it sought to convince Israel to calibrate its strikes, the US moved to reassure its closest ally in the Middle East that it would aid in its defence should Tehran decide to stage a counter-attack.
This included Biden’s decision to move the US military’s THAAD anti-missile defences to Israel, along with about 100 US soldiers to operate them. …………………………….. more https://www.theage.com.au/world/middle-east/israel-raids-gaza-hospital-strike-on-a-home-kills-13-children-20241026-p5kli5.html
Iran complains to IAEA about possible Israeli attack on nuclear sites
Iran International, Oct 21, 2024,
Iran has written to the UN nuclear watchdog to complain about Israel’s threats against its nuclear sites in a possible retaliatory strike, foreign ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei said on Monday.
“Any acts of aggression towards nuclear sites are condemned under international law,” Baghaei said during his weekly news conference.
He added that Tehran had officially communicated its position to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), saying, “we have sent a letter about it to… the UN nuclear watchdog.”
Israel has vowed to attack Iran in retaliation for a volley of Iranian missiles launched on October 1, leading to widespread speculation that Iran’s nuclear sites could be among Israel’s targets.
On October 1, Iran fired more than 180 missiles at Israel, a move described as retaliation for the killings of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran and Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah in Lebanon. It was the second Iranian attack on Israel this year. Israel responded to the first missile volley in April with an air strike on an air defense site in central Iran.
After the attack, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned that Tehran had made a “big mistake tonight” and vowed that “it will pay for it.” Later, the Biden administration revealed that it told Israel not to attack Iran’s nuclear sites.
Last week, Netanyahu’s office said Israel would listen to key ally the United States regarding a response to Iran’s missile attack but would decide its actions according to its own national interest.
His statement was attached to a Washington Post article which said Netanyahu had told President Joe Biden’s administration that Israel would strike Iranian military targets, not nuclear or oil sites.
Baghaei, responding to a question about the possibility of Iran changing its official nuclear doctrine, said “weapons of mass destruction have no place in our policy”. Tehran would decide on how and when to respond to any Israeli attack.
Israel, which has long accused Tehran of plans to develop nuclear weapons, regards Iran’s nuclear activities as a threat. Tehran denies these accusations, insisting that its program is entirely peaceful.
Additionally, Israel’s former premier Naftali Bennett called for the country’s leaders to launch an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities as the Jewish state weighs its response to the barrage of 181 ballistic missiles.
Bennet slammed Biden who had called for a “proportionate” response, saying, “President Biden has said that Israel can retaliate against Iran, but must keep the response ‘proportionate’. The president also urged Israel not to attack Iran’s nuclear program.”
Moreover, prominent Israeli opposition lawmaker and former defense minister Avigdor Liberman also called on the government to use “all the tools” at its disposal to confront the threat of Iran’s nuclear program, tacitly suggesting that Israel should use a nuclear weapon against the Islamic Republic.
“In order to stop the Iranian nuclear program, which is already at weaponization stages, we must use all the tools at our disposal… It must be clear that, at this stage, it is impossible to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons via conventional means.”……………………………………………………………………………………https://www.iranintl.com/en/202410210736
1 This Month
Shut down the radiation-damaged Heysham nuclear reactors now
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
-
Archives
- October 2026 (268)
- September 2026 (339)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
