text:
The Global Intelligence Files,
files released so far...
Index pages
by Date of Document
Our Partners
Al Akhbar - Lebanon
Al Masry Al Youm - Egypt
Asia Sentinel - Hong Kong
Bivol - Bulgaria
Carta Capital - Brazil
CIPER - Chile
Dawn Media - Pakistan
L'Espresso - Italy
La Repubblica - Italy
La Jornada - Mexico
La Nacion - Costa Rica
Malaysia Today - Malaysia
McClatchy - United States
Nawaat - Tunisia
NDR/ARD - Germany
Owni - France
Pagina 12 - Argentina
Philip Dorling - Fairfax media contributor - Australia
Plaza Publica - Guatemala
Publica - Brazil
Publico.es - Spain
Rolling Stone - United States
Russian Reporter - Russia
Ta Nea - Greece
Taraf - Turkey
The Hindu - India
The Yes Men - Bhopal Activists
Sunday Star-Times - New Zealand
Community resources
courage is contagious
The Global Intelligence Files
On Monday February 27th, 2012, WikiLeaks began publishing The Global Intelligence Files, over five million e-mails from the Texas headquartered "global intelligence" company Stratfor. The e-mails date between July 2004 and late December 2011. They reveal the inner workings of a company that fronts as an intelligence publisher, but provides confidential intelligence services to large corporations, such as Bhopal's Dow Chemical Co., Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and government agencies, including the US Department of Homeland Security, the US Marines and the US Defence Intelligence Agency. The emails show Stratfor's web of informers, pay-off structure, payment laundering techniques and psychological methods.
Re: Blue Sky Bullet - Tuesday Nov 8
Released on 2012-10-15 17:00 GMT
Email-ID | 3867288 |
Date | unspecified |
From | email@example.com |
To | email@example.com |
From: "Melissa Taylor" <email@example.com>
To: "Invest" <firstname.lastname@example.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2011 10:44:04 AM
Subject: Fwd: Blue Sky Bullet - Tuesday Nov 8
10pm call in 4312
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: "Michael Wilson" <firstname.lastname@example.com>
To: "Analyst List" <email@example.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2011 9:25:37 AM
Subject: Blue Sky Bullet - Tuesday Nov 8
IRAN/SYRIA/WEST - We have seen the reports indicating a diplomatic
escalation from US, Israel, UK and the west in general on Iran (both
threats of attack and the IAEA report). Who is driving this escalation?
Israel? US? What's actually changed that could impact our standing
assessment on an attack scenario on Iran?
We have also seen the Arab League deal with Syria which seems doomed to
fail, followed by reports of Turkey and/or KSA escalating matters. We have
basically dismissed Syrians cooperation with the Arab league as just
political appearances (there may still be some internal argument on this),
but what if thats exactly what the west wanted. They wanted Syria to fail
so they could escalate matters diplomatically? Otherwise why is Arab
league (meaning the states that make it up) going along with this
- - - -- - - - --
POLAND/GERMANY/RUSSIA - Poland announced it was taking Gazprom to court
over pricing issues, following a few other countries. They did this right
as NordStream comes online. The question is how NordStream affects their
negotiating position as supplies through Germany are cheaper than supplies
in Poland and there will be a surplus for awhile. It seems to give Poland
a breathing room in negotiations
- - - - - - -
GREECE/EU/ITALY - UPDATE - We are still waiting for Greece to come up with
a PM, negotiations are over when to call elections. It looks like the
government will be there to pass austerity to get bailout tranche.
Berlusconi faces a confidence vote on the 15th. It looks like he will pass
a routine vote on a budge measure today. Today is an EU27 EconFin meeting
(they adopted EU commission's 6 pack negotiations) following an EU17 one
yesterday. They still haven't come up with any real solutions. Still
talking about leverage and SPIV. Yesterday their document said - Euro zone
countries want to finish legal and technical preparations for leveraging
the EFSF bailout fund to around 1 trillion euros by the end of November to
deploy it in December.
I dont really want to dicuss this but putting here in case G wants an
- - - - - - - - -
UK/EU - The UK has an interest in Europe not failing. The question is,
what happens when UK is faced with eurozone dissolution versus stronger
EU17 integration outside their influence? While they have always had an
interest in continental Europe not becoming too strong one way theyve dont
this is to maintain influence in decision making. Stronger EU 17
integration would put them outside they decision making circle, something
they have recently warned against. Right now the UK wants the ECB to step
in and save Europe, but a side effect of that could be tighter control by
Germany as condition to their doing that. And more generally speaking that
idea of EU17 and some sort of greater control there, is interesting
explained in the below reuters report
- - -
RUSSIA/IRAN (Chris) Russian Envoy Margelov yesterday has said that
diplomacy is the way to deal with the Iran issue, the standard Russian
line. However in the process of saying this he also issued somewhat of a
warning to Iran. He said that Russia is watching closely what Iran is
doing in the FSU countries, particularly Armenia, that Russia notes that
Russian aircraft are restricted in flying in Iranian airspace and that
Iran has shelled Russian fishing boats in the Caspian Sea.
This may be standard behaviour for this relationship and it's the first
time that I'm picking up on it. I bring it up because it seems a little
out of place after we recently saw Russia move closer to Iran as Moscow
creates a bargaining position vis a vis the US.
- - - - -
SOMALIA/SECURITY - Security contracters are going to start escorting ships
for the first few days of dangerous passage. We also saw the EU say b/c of
budget cuts there would be a dearth of Military ships providing
protection. What is the future of trade transit through the areas and what
does that do for global shipping costs OS ITEMS BELOW
- - - - -- - - -
IRAQ/SECURITY - Maliki arrested some 400 people he accused of being
Baathists plotting a coup to overthrow the regime. This seems more like a
clearing house operation against the Sunnis now that the US is
withdrawing. If there was an agreement to be made with Iraqiya it would
have happened before US withdrawal. "Maliki continues to run the
ministries of defense, interior and national security himself or through
party and sectarian allies, contravening an agreement with Sunni-dominated
and Kurdish political blocs that formed the current coalition government
more than 10 months ago." OS ARTICLES BELOW
a*-c- Do we see the an increase in sectarian warfare in Iraq
a*-c- Sean: I think something it missed is how this impacts Iraqi
capabilities themselves. To generalize with the intelligence agency, INIS,
as soon as it was set up again after Saddam, it pulled in a lot of former
officers because they had expertise that could not be generated
organically. If Maliki is getting rid of all of these guys, this could
seriously hurt how well they are able to collect intelligence on insurgent
groups (and consequentially, how they will fight them). But I haven't
looked closely at this issue for at least 8 months, and it's possible a
lot has been done in the meantime to improve the capabilities of Maliki's
boys at the MNS.
POLAND/RUSSIA/GERMANY/ PGNiG filed on Monday a case for arbitration
against Gazprom's excessive pricing in its long terms gas supply deals.
Warsaw is looking for a 10% reduction in pricing and taking the case to a
Stockholm Court. The event in itself is relatively unsurprising - PGNiG is
just following the precedent set by Edison in Italy back in July, as well
as DEPA (in a hush hush deal) in early 2011. E.On (German) has planned to
do the same since August and it's most likely others will keep following.
What's interesting here is the timing of the announcement - Nord Stream is
coming online on Tuesday - directly supplying Germany with relatively
cheaper Russian gas. Meanwhile, Poland finalized an agreement last week
with Polish pipeline operator Gaz-System to import gas from Germany at a
15% discount. This gas comes from the Yamal pipeline, that also services
Poland, but German contracts are cheaper than Polish, which makes this
"reverse" deal attractive. With Nord Stream coming online (and later
expanding), Germany is going to have a surplus of natural gas on its
hands, which it seems very willing to export to Poland. Of course, Russia
can't do anything to block this deal without taking control of the
distribution or pipeline networks and thus running afoul of the EU's 3rd
Energy Directive.
Poland (for once!) has some cards stacked in its favor when it comes to
energy deals with Moscow - and will most likely be able to negotiate a
significant decrease in gas contract prices from Russia. A lot of people
are saying that Russia miscalculated the effect of NS, that instead of
allowing downstream Western consumers to be independent from Russia's
energy supply warfare in CEE this deal in fact made it clearer that Russia
can't cut supplies to CEE without angering the West and Germany in
particular. There are several things wrong with this assessment:
First, Russia is not playing these games anymore, not overtly at least.
They've moved to an asset acquisition strategy, which has much higher
political and financial returns than their previous aggressive energy
denial practices, which were based on the increasingly false premise that
they control all the gas Europe consumes (thank you LNG!).
Second point, Germany's surplus of energy is temporary. Nordstream's
supply won't be able to independently power Germany in 15-20 years, when
demand will have increased and nuclear power supplies will have all but
disappeared (aka goodbye surplus of Russian gas) The point is, Poland
can't count on Germany's backstream supply strategically - it will still
have to build LNG terminals and pray to jesus that their shale is viable.
However, Warsaw was indeed lucky with the timing of the north stream deal:
it can easily negotiate NOW for lower Russian gas prices to meet the
forecast steep increase in domestic demand in the next 20 years. Poland
basically got a discount as well as a strategic breather. A breather
they'll surely use to get their LNG online - their next big stepping
[Lauren] There is much more going on here.... and I don't agree with some
things below.... particularly how things are phrased/slanted.
1) the timing isn't as much about NS, as it is about German-Russian ng
price talks, which are also tom. Russia is starting to launch new ng neg
with many different countries. Russia has grossly over-charged on ng, and
knows it. It knew it back in the day when prices sky-rocketed and knew it
would have to come down eventually. But a) it got away with it for a few
years {tons of cash} b) in the new negotiations, Russia looks benevolent
because it is coming off its high price. Win-Win.
But Russia is negotiating with the Germans and Italians before it looks at
any other country. So the Poles were initially told to wait. They
aren't... bc... they're Polish and impatient.
Russia will come down Europe-wide, but these things take negotiations and
time, which the Poles refuse to wait their turn.
2) The Poles are using this as a symbolic and theatrical issue in which
the Russians are rolling their eyes at. a) the Poles don't take alot of
ng, so the RussiansW don't give a shit about them compared to the rest. b)
the terms would be negotiated next year if they would just wait. But the
Poles are trying to make a political point-- not a real energy point. That
is a good way to piss off Moscow.
3) Be very careful with your extreme wording below on Europe and Russian
ng... they're still dependent-- particularly CE, which is what Russia
cares about.
4) the court case is in Poland... meaning it can't effect Russia except in
Poland... a small market. Russia cares about the symbolic ramifications
more than the actual, since there are little.
5) any re-negotiation with Russia is dependent on Germans/Italians...
Poles could have gotten a sweet decrease if they hadn't thrown a
But we can chat more about this tomorrow.
PGNiG to import gas from Germany rather than straight from Russia
3rd November 2011
Will the move pressure Russia's Gazprom into lowering its prices?
Courtesy of Gazprom
Polish state-owned gas monopolist PGNiG will from Thursday import Russian
gas from Germany rather than directly from Russia, in order to pay a lower
price for the fuel. In the long-run, the move may force Russia to lower
the amount it charges PGNiG for direct supplies, Gazeta Wyborcza wrote.
PGNiG will pay about 15 percent less for the Russian gas it imports
indirectly than for the gas it imports straight from Russian state-owned
gas giant Gazprom, the newspaper wrote.
Two weeks ago the Polish company said that if Gazprom did not lower prices
of gas under a long-term contract signed between the two companies, it
would refer the matter to adjudication by arbitration in Stockholm,
Sweden. The deadline for the ultimatum to be met was Monday, but Gazprom
had not lowered its prices by then.
PGNiG's decision to import Russian gas from Germany may convince Gazprom
to lower gas prices for PGNiG without the need for arbitration, Gazeta
Wyborcza wrote.
The Polish company signed a deal with Polish state-owned gas pipeline
operator Gaz-System on Monday for the transport of gas from Germany, a
PGNiG spokeswoman told the newspaper. She did not say who the suppliers
are, but the newspaper wrote that they are likely German companies that
originally get gas from the Yamal-Europe natural gas pipeline, which
starts in Russia.
Although the Yamal pipeline supplies Poland directly, PGNiG will receive
the same Russian gas for a better price from German suppliers than it does
from Gazprom.
The German importers are charged a much lower price for the Russian gas
than PGNiG is.
RadosAA*aw DudziAA*ski, the vice president for strategy at PGNiG, told
Wyborcza, a**we are trying to optimize imported gas purchases and since a
possibility of buying cheaper gas from Germany than Russia materialized,
we took advantage of it.a**
The transaction was made possible by the so-called a**virtual reversea**
technology in the Yamal pipeline, which allows the direction of the flow
of gas to be reversed.
Poland seeks arbitration over Russian gas prices
WARSAW, Nov 7 (Reuters) - A dispute over gas import prices between Russia
and its European customers escalated on Monday as Polish gas monopoly
PGNiG filed an arbitration procedure against Gazprom to cut import prices
under a long-term supply deal.
PGNiG, which holds full control over production, transmission and
distribution of natural gas in Poland, said earlier this year it wanted at
least a 10 percent discount and would turn to arbitration if was not
"PGNiG is counting on reaching an agreement (in arbitration), which would
allow for gas purchases at prices in line with conditions that are shaping
the European gas market," the company said.
Gazprom Export, the exporting arm of Gazprom, declined to comment.
The move comes a day before Gazprom is due to open its Nord Stream
pipeline to Germany. The pipeline runs across the Baltic Sea, avoiding
transit through Ukraine and by extension through Poland.
It also comes a week after Poland signed a contract with Gaz-System, a
pipeline operator, to carry natural gas from German operators to Poland at
a 15 percent discount to Gazprom's import price.
Russia's Alfa Bank said it treated the news "as mildly negative for
Gazprom as the company's key European clients seem to be successfully
diversifying their gas importation routes".
But the bank added that Poland's heavy reliance on Russian gas also
limited its leverage.
"We believe the country's efforts to receive a gas price discount will not
significantly impact Gazprom, although a minor price decrease is
possible," Alfa Bank said.
Poland relies on natural gas for around 13 percent (14 billion cubic
metres), of its annual primary energy supply according to the Energy
The country imports around 10 bcm of gas each year, and around 90 percent,
or 9 bcm, of that comes from Russia.
Diversification of supplies has for long been high on Warsaw's agenda,
with its focus lately turning to potential shale gas exploration.
Gazprom already reduced its gas prices for Poland last year, in exchange
for exporting higher volumes.
Poland's gas monopoly follows other European gas companies in seeking a
better import price from Gazprom.
"PGNiG is just the latest of several of Gazprom's European customers to
launch or threaten arbitration over gas prices, with several having
settled out of court with a reduced price agreement," said Andrew Neff,
senior energy analyst at IHS CERA.
In August, Germany's E.On Ruhrgas (EONGn.DE) said it would seek
arbitration in a prolonged row with Gazprom over long-term gas supply
contract terms.
In an arbitration procedure, the price dispute is referred to an
independent arbitrator, nominated by the parties to review the case.
Gazprom has also made concessions to Italy's Edison SpA and Greek gas
company DEPA. (Reporting by Pawel Bernat and Adrian Krajewski in Warsaw;
Additional reporting by Vladimir Soldatkin in Moscow, and Henning
Gloystein and Oleg Vukmanovic in London, editing by Jane Baird)
- - - - -- - - - -- - --- - -
UK/EU - The UK has an interest in Europe not failing. The question is,
what happens when UK is faced with eurozone dissolution versus stronger
EU17 integration outside their influence? While they have always had an
interest in continental Europe not becoming too strong one way theyve dont
this is to maintain influence in decision making. Stronger EU 17
integration would put them outside they decision making circle, something
they have recently warned against. Right now the UK wants the ECB to step
in and save Europe, but a side effect of that could be tighter control by
Germany as condition to their doing that. And more generally speaking that
idea of EU17 and some sort of greater control there, is interesting
explained in the below reuters report
Oct 28 - Cameron said that a**London is the center of financial services
in Europe....Ita**s under constant attack through Brussels directives.
Ita**s an area of concern, ita**s a key national interest that we need to
defend. a** This weeka**s agreement to bolster the euro areaa**s defenses
against the sovereign debt crisis will lead to a**more meetings alonea**
and the prospect of a**caucusinga** among the 17 nations that share the
single currency, he said. That will increase chances that decisions taken
without Britain, may damage Londona**s standing as the continenta**s
leading financial center and benefit Paris or Frankfurt. ....
a**It is very important that the institutions of the 27 are properly
looked after and that the Commission does its job as the guardian of the
27,a** Cameron said. a**As the 27, we need to make sure that the single
market is adequately looked after.a**
Insight: Euro has new politburo but no solution yet
PARIS | Mon Nov 7, 2011 10:18am EST
(Reuters) - Europe has a new informal leadership directorate intent on
finding a solution to the euro zone's debt crisis , but it has yet to
prove its ability to come up with a lasting formula.
Forged in the fire of a bond market inferno, the shadowy so-called
Frankfurt Group has grabbed the helm of the 17-nation currency area in a
few short weeks.
The inner circle comprises the leaders of Germany and France, the
presidents of the executive European Commission and of the European
Council of EU leaders, the heads of the European Central Bank and the
International Monetary Fund, the chairman of euro zone finance ministers,
and the European Commissioner for economic and financial affairs.
Europe's new politburo met four times on the sidelines of last week's
Group of 20 summit in Cannes, i ssuing an ultimatum to Greece that it
would not get a cent more aid until it met its European commitments, and
arm-twisting Italy to carry out long delayed economic reforms and let the
IMF monitor them.
In a tell-tale recognition of the new ad hoc power center, members wore
lapel badges marked "Groupe de Francfort."
U.S. President Barack Obama attended one of the meetings, getting what he
joked was a "crash course" in the complexity of Europe's laborious
decision-making processes and institutions.
"He proved to be a quick learner," one participant said.
Two people familiar with the discussion said he argued for the euro zone
to make its financial backstop more credible by harnessing the resources
of the ECB, but German Chancellor Angela Merkel and ECB President Mario
Draghi resisted.
Obama also supported a proposal to pool euro zone countries' rights to
borrow from the IMF to help bolster a firewall against contagion from the
Greek debt crisis, but Germany's central bank opposed this too, the
sources said.
The president referred obliquely to the debate at a news conference the
next day, saying: "European leaders understand that ultimately what the
markets are looking for is a strong signal from Europe that they're
standing behind the euro."
Hours earlier, a television camera in the Cannes summit conference room
caught Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron discussing the issue
while waiting for the start of the final working session.
Cameron, whose country is not in the euro, has called publicly for the ECB
to act as the lender of last resort for the euro zone, as the Federal
Reserve does for the United States, and the Bank of England for Britain.
When Merkel entered the room, Obama pulled her aside for a private
conversation. An open microphone caught his opening words: "I guess you
guys have to be creative here."
The Frankfurt Group came about on the hoof to try to fashion a crisis
response in something closer to the short timespan of frantic financial
It seems destined to endure, not least because the growing imbalance
between a stronger Germany and a weaker France means other players are
needed to broker decisions.
Crucially, it aims to bridge the ideological gulf between northern and
southern Europe, and between supporters of the orthodox German focus on
fiscal discipline and an independent central bank with the sole task of
fighting inflation, and advocates of a more integrated and expansive
economic and monetary union.
The presence of IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde gives the group
greater credibility in the markets, as well as providing a reality check
on what international lenders expect and the limits to their willingness
to support the euro zone.
It all began with a blazing row at the Old Opera House in Frankfurt on
October 19 that spoiled Jean-Claude Trichet's farewell party after eight
years as president of the ECB.
As the fallout from Greece's debt crisis singed European banks and panicky
investors dumped euro zone government bonds, French President Nicolas
Sarkozy, who had snubbed the ceremony in honor of Trichet, flew in at the
last minute to meet a visibly irritated Merkel.
Sarkozy himself said that day that France and Germany were at odds over
how to leverage the euro zone's financial rescue fund. The French wanted
to let the European Financial Stability Facility operate as a bank and
borrow money from the ECB.
"In Germany, the coalition is divided on this issue. It is not just Angela
Merkel whom we need to convince," Sarkozy told lawmakers, according to
Charles de Courson, who was present.
At the Frankfurt meeting, described by one participant as "explosive,"
Merkel and Trichet firmly opposed the idea, which they said would violate
the European Union's treaty prohibition on the central bank financing
Germany insisted on that clause when the ECB was created because of its
own history of fiscal abuse of the central bank that fueled hyperinflation
in the 1920s and funded the Nazis' massive rearmament in the run up to
World War Two.
As French officials tell it, Merkel is not so hostile to the proposal as
her finance minister, Wolfgang Schaeuble, and the head of the German
Bundesbank, Jens Weidmann.
The French are convinced that Merkel understands the ECB will have to be
more centrally involved in fighting bond market contagion, but she cannot
get it through her divided coalition for now. They see the ECB as the main
center of resistance.
After hearing a chorus of Obama, Cameron and the leaders of India, Canada
and Australia at the G20, Merkel acknowledged that the rest of the world
found it hard to understand that the ECB was not allowed to play the role
of lender of last resort.
But the crisis may have to get still worse before the Germans and the ECB
relent, if they ever do.
The Frankfurt Group has already had an impact in euro zone crisis
management but like all informal core groups it has begun to stir
resentment among those who are excluded, and it has yet to prove its
ability to craft a convincing longer-term solution.
North European creditor countries such as the Netherlands, Slovakia and
Finland, where public hostility to further euro zone bailouts is fierce,
are already grumbling about decisions being taken behind their backs.
In Greece and Italy, there has been strong criticism of the perceived
arrogance of "Merkozy," as the Franco-German duumvirate are increasingly
nicknamed, in summoning their prime ministers to receive ultimatums.
German and French officials shrug off such complaints as inevitable,
noting that EU partners are even more unhappy when France and Germany do
not agree, since that paralyses Europe.
"There is always a trade-off between legitimacy and efficacy," said an EU
official involved in the Frankfurt Group. "The euro area institutions were
not designed for crisis management so we need innovative solutions.
"In an emergency like this, we have to have a structure that works," he
said, adding that the presence of the European Commission and of European
Council President Herman Van Rompuy guaranteed that the interests of
smaller member states would be taken into account.
EU officials had held conference calls with the 15 other euro zone states
during the Cannes summit "to keep them in the loop." The head of the EFSF,
Klaus Regling, was secretly flown to Cannes to brief the leaders on the
state of accelerated preparations to leverage the rescue fund, one source
Merkel long resisted French pressure to create more of an "economic
government" in the euro zone, not least because she did not want Germany
to be in a minority on issues such as bailouts, free trade or the EU
She also did not want to alienate German allies and neighbors such as
Denmark, Poland and the Czech Republic, which are not in the euro zone.
But recent problems in smaller countries that aggravated market turmoil --
Finland's demand for collateral on loans to Greece and Slovakia's
parliamentary wrangling over increasing the EFSF's powers -- convinced her
of the need for stronger leadership to impose order.
Whether the Frankfurt Group will be the forum that finally convinces
Germany to accept a bigger crisis-fighting role for the ECB, or the
creation of jointly issued euro zone bonds, remains to be seen.
Economic governance: Council adopts legal texts
Brussels, 8 November 2011 16446/11 PRESSE 413
The Council today1 adopted a package of six legislative proposals aimed at
strengthening economic governance in the EU a** and more specifically in
the euro area a** as part of the EU's response to the current turmoil on
sovereign debt markets (PE-CONS 28/11, 29/11, 30/11, 31/11, 14615/11,
Adoption of the so-called "six-pack" of governance measures follows a
political agreement at the Council's meeting on 4 October on the basis of
a compromise reached with the European Parliament. The texts were approved
by the Parliament on 28 September.
The measures set out to ensure the degree of coordination necessary to
avoid the accumulation of excessive imbalances and to ensure sustainable
public finances. This will help enable the EU's monetary union to function
properly in the long term.
They consist of:
a** a regulation amending regulation 1466/97 on the surveillance of member
states budgetary and economic policies;
a** a regulation amending regulation 1467/97 on the EU's excessive deficit
procedure; a** a regulation on the enforcement of budgetary surveillance
in the euro area;
a regulation on the prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances;
a regulation on enforcement measures to correct excessive macroeconomic
imbalances in the euro area;
a directive on requirements for the member states' budgetary frameworks.
More specifically, the measures set out to:
a*-c- enhance budgetary discipline under the EU's Stability and Growth
Pact, in order to
ensure a satisfactory decline of public debt in the member states, as well
as a decrease of high deficits to be followed by achieving ambitious,
country-specific medium-term budgetary objectives (four proposals). This
involves enhancing the surveillance of budgetary policies, introducing
provisions on national fiscal frameworks, and applying enforcement for
non-compliant euro area member states more consistently and at an earlier
a*-c- broaden the surveillance of the member states' economic policies, so
as to cater adequately for macroeconomic imbalances (two proposals). An
alert mechanism is introduced for the early detection of imbalances, to be
assessed using a "scoreboard" of economic indicators. An "excessive
imbalance procedure" is also introduced, with enforcement for
non-compliant member states.
Reform of the Stability and Growth Pact
The Stability and Growth Pact was adopted in 1997, prior to the creation
of the euro, in order to ensure that fiscal discipline is maintained in
the member states. It is aimed at ensuring that member states respect
specified criteria for their annual budget deficits and public debt, for
which the following reference values are set:
a*-c- 3% of GDP for annual budget deficits; a*-c- 60% of GDP for public
The new solutions are aimed at strengthening the provisions set for
ensuring the respect of those criteria. They affect both the preventive
arm of the pact, namely the procedures that are followed to ensure that
excessive deficits are avoided, and the corrective arm of the pact, i.e.
the procedure followed for the correction of excessive deficits. At the
same time, the reform introduces new provisions with regard to the debt
criterion of the pact.
16446/11 2
a** Preventive arm of the pact
To promote attainment by the member states of their medium term budgetary
objectives (MTOs), the reform introduces an expenditure benchmark, which
implies that annual expenditure growth should not exceed a reference
medium-term rate of GDP growth. This is meant to ensure that revenue
windfalls are not spent but instead allocated to debt reduction. If a euro
area member state has not reached its MTO, a significant deviation in
expenditure development from its reference expenditure growth path could
eventually lead to sanctions in the form of interest-bearing deposits
amounting to 0.2% of GDP.
a** Corrective arm of the pact (excessive deficit procedure)
Greater emphasis is be placed on the debt criterion of the Stability and
Growth Pact, with member states whose debt exceeds 60% of GDP (the EU's
reference value for debt) required to take steps to reduce their debt at a
pre-defined pace, even if their deficit is below 3% of GDP (the EU's
deficit reference value).
To determine whether the debt ratio is sufficiently diminishing toward the
60% of GDP threshold, a numerical benchmark is introduced. A debt-to-GDP
ratio above 60% will thus be considered to be sufficiently diminishing if
its distance with respect to the 60% reference value has decreased over
the previous three years at an annual rate of one- twentieth. However, a
decision to subject a country to the excessive deficit procedure will not
only be based on the numerical benchmark, but will also take into account
other relevant factors.
To strengthen the corrective arm of the Stability and Growth Pact, a new
set of financial sanctions are introduced for euro-area member states;
these will apply earlier on in the excessive deficit procedure, and using
a graduated approach. A non-interest-bearing deposit amounting to 0.2% of
GDP will apply once a decision has been taken to subject a country to the
excessive deficit procedure, if an interest-bearing deposit has already
been imposed under the preventive arm of the pact or if serious
non-compliance is identified.
The deposit will be converted into a fine of 0.2% of GDP if the Council's
initial recommendation for correcting the deficit has not been followed.
Further non-compliance will result in the sanction being stepped up, in
line with the existing provisions of article 126(11) of the EU treaty
(maximum fine: 0.5% of GDP).
To trigger the sanctions more automatically than at present, a so-called
reverse majority rule is introduced, whereby the Commission's proposal for
imposing sanctions related to non-compliance with the Pact will be
considered adopted unless the Council turns it down by qualified majority.
16446/11 3
a** Budgetary frameworks at national level
Alongside the reform of the Stability and Growth Pact, a draft directive
sets out to ensure that the objectives of EU budgetary coordination are
reflected in the member states' budgetary frameworks. Accounting,
statistical and forecasting practices are brought into line with EU
standards. Member states must adopt multi-annual fiscal planning to ensure
that medium-term budgetary objectives set at EU level are achieved. They
must also introduce rules to promote compliance with the deficit and debt
Surveillance of economic policies
Beyond budgetary surveillance, the legislative package is aimed at
broadening the surveillance of the member states' economic policies.
It establishes a mechanism for the prevention and correction of excessive
macroeconomic imbalances, made up of two regulations which outline an
"excessive imbalance procedure" and introduce the possibility of fines
being imposed on member states found to be in an "excessive imbalance
position" and repeatedly failing to comply with recommendations.
The starting point of the new framework is an alert mechanism for the
early detection of imbalances, which will be assessed using a "scoreboard"
of economic indicators. This will be followed by country-specific
qualitative expert analysis.
If the imbalance is considered to be excessive, the member state concerned
could be subject to an "excessive imbalance procedure", and would be
called on to adopt a corrective action plan within a specific timeframe.
The procedure gives the Council more flexibility in setting deadlines than
the excessive deficit procedure in order to account for the less direct
influence of government policies in addressing imbalances.
If the Council decides that the member state concerned has taken
appropriate action, the procedure will be held in abeyance, and can be
closed if the Council concludes that the imbalance is no longer considered
to be excessive.
On the other hand, repeated non-compliance with the recommendations can in
the case of euro area member states eventually lead to sanctions.
Specifically, a decision to impose a yearly fine equal to 0.1% of the
member state's GDP will be adopted through the "reverse majority" rule
described above.
- - - -
Margelov yesterday has said that diplomacy is the way to deal with the
Iran issue, the standard Russian line. However in the process of saying
this he also issued somewhat of a warning to Iran. He said that Russia is
watching closely what Iran is doing in the FSU countries, particularly
Armenia, that Russia notes that Russian aircraft are restricted in flying
in Iranian airspace and that Iran has shelled Russian fishing boats in the
Caspian Sea.
This may be standard behaviour for this relationship and it's the first
time that I'm picking up on it. I bring it up because it seems a little
out of place after we recently saw Russia move closer to Iran as Moscow
creates a bargaining position vis a vis the US.
Iranian problems must have political, not military, solution - Russian
Chairman of the Federation Council International Affairs Committee Mikhail
Margelov has urged to exercise caution with respect to the current
situation around Iran and said that all problems related to this country
should have a political solution only. Margelov said this during his
speech at the Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars in
Washington on 7 November, as reported by Russian news agency on the same
"We should be very cautious when dealing with Iranians. One should play
chess and not rugby when dealing with the eastern countries," Margelov
said when asked to comment on mounting tension around the Iranian nuclear
problem. "Iran is our neighbour, we have a common border. Iran is a strong
regional player and we are carefully watching its growing economic
activities in the countries of the former Soviet Union, particluarly in
Armenia," Margelov was quoted as saying.
" We did not turn a blind eye to the fact that Iran restricted our
aircraft to fly through its airspace. We did not turn a blind eye to the
shelling of our fishermen by Iranian coastal guards on the Caspian Sea. We
see and count up everything, however we seriously believe that the
problems around Iran should be solved with political rather than military
methods," he said.
Source: Interfax news agency, Moscow, in Russian 2226 gmt 7 Nov 11
BBC Mon FS1 MCU ME1 MEPol 081111 et
A(c) Copyright British Broadcasting Corporation 2011
- - -
IRAQ/SECURITY - Maliki arrested some 400 people he accused of being
Baathists plotting a coup to overthrow the regime. This seems more like a
clearing house operation against the Sunnis now that the US is
withdrawing. If there was an agreement to be made with Iraqiya it would
have happened before US withdrawal. "Maliki continues to run the
ministries of defense, interior and national security himself or through
party and sectarian allies, contravening an agreement with Sunni-dominated
and Kurdish political blocs that formed the current coalition government
more than 10 months ago."
a*-c- Do we see the an increase in sectarian warfare in Iraq
a*-c- Sean: I think something it missed is how this impacts Iraqi
capabilities themselves. To generalize with the intelligence agency, INIS,
as soon as it was set up again after Saddam, it pulled in a lot of former
officers because they had expertise that could not be generated
organically. If Maliki is getting rid of all of these guys, this could
seriously hurt how well they are able to collect intelligence on insurgent
groups (and consequentially, how they will fight them). But I haven't
looked closely at this issue for at least 8 months, and it's possible a
lot has been done in the meantime to improve the capabilities of Maliki's
boys at the MNS.
Iraq Factions Spar Over Security Force
By SAM DAGHER
BAGHDADa** A struggle between Iraq's political factions is sowing
divisions in the country's security forces just weeks before the last U.S.
troops depart, as Iraqis rely on a unified force to hold the country
together and suppress extremist violence.
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a member of the majority Shiite sect, has
in recent weeks accelerated measures to purge the Iraqi forces of anyone
who served in the intelligence and security services of the former
Sunni-led regime of Saddam Hussein.
Dozens of Sunni officers were expelled last month and more dismissals are
planned, according to interviews with officers and copies of decrees
viewed by The Wall Street Journal and confirmed by the Interior Ministry.
While some of the Sunni officers were accused of serving in Hussein's
"repressive apparatuses," some were simply called on for "early
retirement," and others were dismissed under vague accusations of
associating with terrorists.
In another move that shook the Iraqi security services, Mr. Malikia**the
acting interior ministera**ordered the arrests on Oct. 23 of what he said
were "many" army and police officers among more than 600 people accused of
plotting to overthrow his government.
At the same time, Mr. Maliki is delaying appointments to top posts that
oversee the security forces, now almost one-million strong including the
army and police. Mr. Maliki continues to run the ministries of defense,
interior and national security himself or through party and sectarian
allies, contravening an agreement with Sunni-dominated and Kurdish
political blocs that formed the current coalition government more than 10
months ago.
With the U.S. departure imminent, any new fissures in the security
services will make it harder for Iraq's army and police to keep the peace
and defend the country's borders.
Yet the prime minister's moves have triggered countermoves by his Sunni
political rivals that are threatening to further fragment the country. The
leaders of Salahuddin Province, a predominantly Sunni area north of
Baghdad, said last month they would begin the process of becoming a
semiautonomous regiona**complaining that, among other things, they wanted
to be better represented in the security services, both in rank and file
and executive positions.
Sunni Arab politicians and tribal leaders from several provinces,
including Salahuddin, met at parliament in Baghdad on Wednesday to air
grievances that included what they see as inadequate representation in
senior posts in the security forces.
In a statement issued at the meeting's end, they referred to a "dangerous
structural flaw" in relations between the provinces and the central
government. Parliament Speaker Osama al-Nujaifi, a Sunni Arab, warned
about "using the army as a tool in the hands of some politicians."
The ethnic and sectarian polarization of Iraqi politics puts immense
pressure on security forces that, in the years after Hussein's fall,
endured a civil war that transformed elements of their ranks into
sectarian death squads in the service of politicized militias.
The U.S. military presence has served as a buffer against Iraqi
politicians who may seek to control elements of the security services to
give muscle to their own factions. "We remain split over the country's
most fundamental issues," said a general in the country's federal police
based in Baghdad. "The Americans are a balancing factor."
Unifying the services' disparate units and ragtag brigades into a coherent
security force remains very much a work in progress. The U.S. military has
led this process in the aftermath of Washington's decision to disband the
Iraqi army in 2003a**now widely recognized as an ill-fated move that
helped fuel the insurgency.
Yet many of the targets of the effort to purge the army and police of
former Hussein loyalists are people who had been reintegrated into the
services as part of a U.S.-backed program to foster national
reconciliation and weaken the Sunni insurgency, according to Deputy
Interior Minister Hussein Kamal.
But the unifying role of the U.S. is fast coming to an end. As of Friday,
about 32,000 American forces remained in Iraqa**compared to 171,000 at the
height of the war in 2007a**all of them set to leave by Dec. 31.
Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Buchanan, spokesman for U.S. troops in Iraq expressed
confidence in the Iraqi forces' ability to maintain security. "They have
not stepped away from any challenge or any fight since taking over
security throughout the nation, ensuring every incident they're presented
with is quickly contained," he said. He deferred questions about the
polarization of the forces to the Iraqi government.
Mr. Maliki's aides said the prime minister has delayed doling out top
ministry posts because of fears of a coup attempt arising from the
security services. "It's impossible for the prime minister to accept
anyone he does not trust," said his media adviser Ali al-Mussawi.
In Diyala Province, a highly volatile area near Baghdad, the Interior
Ministry issued an order to dismiss 32 Sunni officers from the police
force on grounds including allegedly collaborating with terrorists and
having a role in one of Hussein's paramilitary forces. The order was
implemented last month, around the same time that the last U.S. soldiers
in Diyala left the province.
Mr. Kamal, the deputy interior minister, described the order as a routine
administrative matter that had nothing to do with the U.S. departure or
Iraqi politics. But the timing hasn't been lost on the Sunni officers.
"This order was issued after the U.S. pullout [from the province] to gauge
reaction" by Sunnis, said Maj. Abbas Ghaidan Khalaf, one of the dismissed
officers. "If there's no reaction, then you'll see more marginalization of
[Sunnis] until there are not even street sweepers from this sect."
There has been ample reaction. Adnan al-Karkhi, a member of the Diyala
provincial council, warned after the dismissals, "The lack of balance [in
the security forces] will keep the province in the vicious circle of
violence and instability."
The dismissal order says Maj. Khalaf and two others were fired "because
their brothers are terrorists," without providing evidence.
Maj. Khalaf said two of his siblings are active duty police officers, one
of whom survived several suicide bombings. A third sibling is a local
government employee. The fourth, a lieutenant in the Interior ministry's
intelligence unit, was assassinated two weeks ago.
Another incident in Diyala in October also offered a reminder of the
country's political divisions, this one related to Kurds serving in the
security forces. Kurdish recruits report to, and are paid by, the central
government, of which Kurds are a part. But their ultimate loyalty is to
the political leadership of the semiautonomous region of Kurdistan in the
north, which keeps its own security force.
An order from the central government to remove Kurdish flags from public
buildings in the town of Khanaqin, one of several disputed territories in
northern Iraq claimed by both Kurds and Arabs, was challenged by the
predominantly Kurdish local police. Baghdad backed down, but tensions
U.S. forces have played a critical role in tamping down such tensions in
these contested areas and fostering collaboration between Arabs and Kurds.
The Kurdistan region's President Masoud Barzani warned in a recent
interview with Dubai-based al-Arabiya channel that the U.S. withdrawal at
year's end might give way to an "open-ended civil war," with nobody there
to stop it.
Parliament Committee recommends reformation of pro-govt militias to
maintain security
07/11/2011 13:28
Baghdad, Nov. 7 (AKnews) a** Iraq parliamenta**s security and defense
committee recommends the reformation of pro-government militias to
maintain security and fight local insurgent groups, says Kurdish member of
the committee Shwan Mohammed Taha.
The recommendation comes as the country is witnessing a surge in the armed
actions in the capital Baghdad and several other provinces.
a**The Awakening Council forces had a great role in facing the armed
groups and contributed to maintaining security throughout Iraq.a** Says
Taha, a**We support the reformation of these forcesa*| as the security
situation is seeing deteriorationa**
The Awakening Councils were formerly Sunni tribal insurgents who turned
against al-Qaeda militants in 2006 after they were organized by major
sheikhs and chieftains into the Councils. They were later recruited in the
Iraqi army and police. The recruitment is still in progress.
The committee has, according to Taha, sent letters to Prime Minister Nuri
I al-Maliki to reconsider the structure of the security forces as the
country is nearing the end of the year when the US forces in Iraq are
expected to withdraw from the country. The US currently keep some 39,000
troops in Iraq.
Baghdad and several other province witnessed a series of bombings, IED
explosions and assassinations targeting security forces, government
employees and civilians.
Maliki orders to end mission of Iraq Justice and Accountability Commission
Monday, October 24, 2011 16:07 GMT
Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Saleh Al Motlaq revealed, on Sunday, that
Prime Minister Nuri Al Maliki ordered to end the mission of Justice and
Accountability Commission and suspend its authorities.
Heads of political parties agreed not to abide by the present
commissiona**s measures until a new commission is formed, Motlaq pointed
out. While the Justice and Accountability Commission was subject to
politicization, Iraq got deprived from essential competencies.
a**Iraqi Prime Minister has addressed at least two letters to the Justice
and Accountability Commission declaring the end of its commission and
stressing that it is no longer entitled to take measures until a new
commission is formed,a** Motlaq told a press conference attended by
a**The new commission has not been formed yet, given that it should be
elected by the Parliament which has still not received the membersa**
namesa**,a** he noted.
a**All political blocs leaders agreed to disregard the measures of the
Justice and Accountability Commission until a new commission is formed,a**
Motlaq added. a**The new commission will reconsider old cases against
potentially innocent people,a** he indicated.
a**Politicizing the Justice and Accountability Commission has harmed
Iraqis for long and deprived Iraq from essential competencies that would
contribute to the countrya**s reconstruction,a** Deputy Prime Minister
argued. a**The present political blocs have served their parties and
relatives not their confessions,a** he revealed.
Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research had decided, early
October, to execute the Justice and Accountability Commission measures and
discharge 140 teachers and employees from Tikrit University. Tikrit
Universitya**s President, for his part, resigned in objection to these
Over 170 arrested in Iraq for alleged Baath party links
Oct 23, 2011, 12:03 GMT
Baghdad - More than 170 Iraqis were arrested Sunday for allegedly
belonging to Saddam Hussein's now-outlawed Baath party, security sources
told dpa.
More than 100 people were arrested in raids in the southern city of Kut,
following orders from high-level officials in Baghdad, the sources said.
Forty former Baath party members and former army officers who worked
during Saddam Hussein's rule were detained in Tikrit, 170 kilometres north
of Baghdad.
In Baquba, north-east of Baghdad, 36 people were arrested.
The mass arrests come two days after Iraq and the United States agreed
that all US troops will leave the country by the end of 2011.
The Iraqi government has blamed al-Qaeda-linked groups as well as
Baathists for bombings and attacks in the country.
In 2009, hundreds of Baath party members were banned from running for
parliamentary elections. The ban was lifted a month before the March 2010
Talks between Washington and Baghdad on keeping some soldiers in the
country longer failed over the Iraqi government's reluctance to grant
legal immunity to troops who would have remained after December.
Less than 50,000 US soldiers are still in the country, under a 2008
The withdrawal highlights the security challenges facing Iraqi security
forces, as near-daily bombings continue.
An Iraqi teacher was killed on Sunday when gunmen attacked his house in
the city of Samaraa, some 112 kilometres north of Baghdad. His wife was
injured in the attack.
Meanwhile, a member of the parliament's Security and Defence Committee,
Qassem al-Araji, told the government daily Al Sabah that six countries
were chosen to provide the military with weapons.
'A team will be formed to visit these countries to know firsthand the arms
they can offer to Iraq,' al-Araji said, without naming the countries.
'The US troops are to blame for delay in arming the Iraqi army on
different pretexts,' added al-Araji.
The committee has suggested diversifying the arms suppliers. 'We should
not limit ourselves to one supplier, who can turn into a tool of pressure
on Iraq in the future,' said al-Araji.
IRAN/SYRIA/WEST - We have seen the reports indicating a diplomatic
escalation from US, Israel, UK and the west in general on Iran (both
threats of attack and the IAEA report). Who is driving this escalation?
Israel? US? What's actually changed that could impact our standing
assessment on an attack scenario on Iran?
We have also seen the Arab League deal with Syria which seems doomed to
fail, followed by reports of Turkey and/or KSA escalating matters. We have
basically dismissed Syrians cooperation with the Arab league as just
political appearances, but what if thats exactly what the west wanted.
They wanted Syria to fail so they could escalate matters diplomatically?
Generally starts chronologically at the bottom and goes up. Ive repasted
at the top a translation of the original article that set this whole thing
off (its also at the bottom in order).
It was an Op-Ed in Hebrew Yediot Aharonot by Nahum Barnea
- - - - -
Will Barak and Netanyahu Attack Iran Before Winter? MW: Note this is a
translation of the original YNET article that started it all off. From
Friday Oct 28. Cant find original in Hebrew
Yediot Ahronot - Nahum Barnea
Have the prime minister and defense minister settled on a decision, just
between the two of them, to launch a military attack on the nuclear
facilities in Iran? This question preoccupies many people in the defense
establishment and high circles of government. It distresses foreign
governments, which find it difficult to understand what is happening here:
On one hand, there are mounting rumors of an "Israeli" move that will
change the face of the Middle East and possibly seal "Israel's" fate for
generations to come; on the other hand, there is a total absence of any
public debate. The issue of whether to attack Iran is at the bottom of the
"Israeli" agenda.
It's true that the agenda is loaded with heavy issues: protests are trying
to rise again; electricity bills are high; pre-meds are struggling for
their right to be independent; Gilad Shalit is out of his house; Ilan
Grapel is back - Ouda Trabin is not; a Grad missile is fired on Rishon
Lezion: Ahmed El Gaabari and his fellows are our new Palestinian friends,
they want to prove for the world and themselves that the aura of glory
didn't concern them in the first place: In Gaza they have holidays and
what's beyond holidays. All of these issues are substantial and
influential but none is pivotal, perhaps that's why it's easy for everyone
to be occupied by these issues instead of worrying about confronting the
Iranian nuclear weapons. It is easy to understand the difficulties. First
and foremost, here are the facts: he who wants to delve into the problem
will drown in a sea of technical data only experts understand.
Behind any report about centrifuges, there's a viewer who changed the
channel or a reader who preferred playing Sudoku. Second, out of secrecy,
the forthcoming information is partial for the sake of who's relating
them. Third, out of habit, the audience wasn't allowed to participate in
Menachem Begin's decision to hit the nuclear facility in Iraq, as no one
has participated in Ihud Olmert's decision (according to foreign sources)
to attack the facilities of Syria. Because both attacks were a success, no
one complained.
Both attacks involved enormous risks: pilots could have failed to
accomplish the mission, could have been captivated and could have caused
mass murder; Saddam's regime or Assad's regime could have militarily
responded through terrorist attacks or firing missiles; foreign countries
like the U.S. could have provoked a crisis. It was very heartening that
opponents' disastrous predictions didn't come true, and the attacks were a
complete success with no injuries or damages to our groups.
But will it succeed a third time? Yes, say military operation proponents,
while opponents say "absolutely not". Iran is a totally different matter;
it is state of a different region, regime, culture, atomic project, and of
a different risk level.
The political and security commands are divided into different blocs,
first one state that the advantages of this military operation are very
limited and taking the risk is insane. Iranians will bombard Israel with
deadly missiles from Iran, from Lebanon via Hizbullah and from Gaza via
Hamas. A regional war will be set off and it will destroy the state of
"Israel". It's better for "Israel" to focus on the international group
sanctions and hope for the best. Had Iran acquired nuclear weapons, it
won't be the end of the world, while an "Israeli" attack just might be.
The second bloc says there's no rush.
They claim that Iranians need at least 2 more years, or two and half to
have the project fully developed. Then they will encounter many obstacles.
New presidential elections will be taking place in two years, so whether
Obama in his second term or a republican in his first term, they will be
solely held responsible for the attack of Iran. The regime may change in
Iran. Many things can happen in two years.
This week during my stay in Europe, I visited one of the senior U.S.
diplomats of a former administration. He said that "Israel" should back
renewed negotiations on international inspections as proposed by. But the
Iranians are bluffing; all they want is to gain more time. It's clear, he
said, but it will be easier for the U.S. and "Israel" to do business when
the entire international group publically confesses that the Iranians are
deceitful. Some cabinet "Israeli" ministers subscribe to this perception,
and they second a military operation as a last resort. They suspect that
the growing pressure for an immediate attack stems from "outside motives,
whether personal or political." More on that later.
The third bloc includes heads of the armed forces - IDF chief of staff,
military intelligence chief, Mossad chief and Shin Bet chief. When the
military operation issue was raised in a previous round, people who had
occupied these positions respectively were: Gabi Ashkenazi, Meir Dagan,
Amos Yadlin and Yuval Diskin. These four strongly refused the military
operation. Those who occupy their positions now are: Benny Gantz, Tamir
Brdo, Aviv Kochavi and Yoram Cohen. This replacement may have a long-term
explanation, and Shalit's deal is an example that draws the attention:
Diskin and Dagan both opposed the swap deal; their opposition made the
government's positions more radical; while Choen and Brdo approved, and
their approval permitted the swap.
But as we know, when it comes to Iran, they share the opinion of their
predecessors and are opposed to taking action against Iran at this time.
The difference lies in the preparation of the struggle: the predecessors
reached negotiations after years of success, and each at his organization
enjoyed a firm public status. They looked steadfast and confident. The new
ones are less famous, less stern and less experienced.
The way security decisions are made is clear: politician ranks decide and
executive ones apply. Refusing orders in not an option neither are the
secret gangs. But the procedure is much more complicated than what you
learn in civics: the executive rank is an equal partner during the
negotiations. It doesn't express his opinions in matters only related to
its specialty, but in all the matters. No lines separating both ranks.
Actually, the prime minister cannot take a precarious decision if it was
objected by the minister of defense, chief of staff, chief of Mossad, and
chief of Shin Bet, together or by most of them. He won't dare to, even if
he had the support of the mini cabinet majority. He also takes into
account that if the operation was a failure, he may be brought before the
commission of inquiry, exposed and unprotected, with no document to prove
that he had the authorized rank's full support.
That's why it is very important to know how the authorized rank expresses
his opinion - does he pound on the table like Maer Dadan used to do or he
kindly and calmly restrains; is he an active player in the decision-making
process or a puppet serving his superiors. This leads us to the forth bloc
- to Benyamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak, the Siamese twin of Iran's case. A
rare phenomenon occurs here in the concepts of "Israeli" politics, where
the Prime Minister and Minister of Defense work as one Body for one
purpose with mutual support and mutual eulogies. This harmony has been
made only when one person took both positions. If we insist to dig into
history we can cite the rich cooperation between the Prime Minister Shamir
and Defense Minister Rabin. And what united them is their despise of
Both Netanyahu and Barak are being depicted as proponents of the military
operation. Netanyahu's thinking, since the beginning of his term, goes
like this: "Ahmadinejad is Hitler; if he isn't stopped in time, there will
be another Holocaust. There are those who describe Netanyahu's attitude on
the matter as an obsession: All his life he dreamed of being Churchill;
Iran gives him the opportunity. The popularity he gained as a result of
the Shalit deal didn't pacify him: the opposite, it gave him a sense of
Barak's motivations are more prosaic and to-the-point: He thinks that just
as Israel knocked out the Iraqi and Syrian nuclear facilities in the past,
so it must knock out Iran's now: "That's the strategy; that's the
He figures Dagan's opposition stems from psychological motives: As head of
the Mossad, Dagan was credited with extraordinary achievements in jamming
up Iran's nuclear project. A military operation so soon after the end of
his tenure would diminish the significance of those achievements
Moreover, some cabinet ministers suspect Barak is driven at least partly
by personal motives: with no party or constituency behind him. Attacking
Iran will be the big bang that will enable Netanyahu to put Barak among
the 10 candidates of Likud in the next elections. Thus, he will maintain
his position in the ministry of defense. This seems as exaggerated doubt,
for Barak doesn't need Ayatollah Khomeini to join Likud, Shalom Samhoun
can arrange this in a very peaceful way.
Now of all times, when the sense abroad is that Iran's nuclear progress is
slowing, the rumors tell of pressure [in Israel] to act. One of the
factors is the weather: Winter is coming, and in winter there are
limitations. Others look further ahead: They say that after winter comes
spring, and then summer.
Source: Hebrew Press, translated by moqawama.org
- - - - -- - - - -- - - - - - - - - -
US: Not looking for Iran confrontation
US state Department Spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said that the Obama
administration was working to solve the Iranian nuclear crisis through
"tough diplomacy".
The US is looking forward to the IAEA report on Iran's nuclear progress
and hope that it will lead to a hardening of the international position
towards the Islamic Republic. She noted that the US has said time after
time that it isn't seeking a military confrontation with Iran and that it
remains the US position.
Barak meets British foreign secretary to discuss Iran
Defense Minister Ehud Barak has met with British Foreign Secretary William
Hague to discuss the Iranian nuclear program, among other hot button
regional issues. The two also conferred about the crisis in Syria, the
strained ties between Israel and Turkey and ways to renew the peace talks
with the Palestinians.
Various reports have surfaced recently over a possible Israeli attack on
the Iranian nuclear facilities, while others have alleged that the UK has
began preparing for its own strike on the Islamic Republic.
Barak talks peace process, Iran with UK's Hague
By JPOST.COM STAFF
11/03/2011 14:55
Defense Minister Ehud Barak held a meeting with UK Foreign Secretary
William Hague in London on Thursday, in which the two discussed a range of
issues including restarting the peace process with the Palestinians and
strengthening Israel in the international community. The two also spoke
about wide-ranging challenges faced by Israel, such as recent events in
the Gaza Strip, Hezbollah and the Iranian nuclear program.
Following the meeting, Barak said that "relations between Britain and
Israel are very important for the security of Israel and in international
struggles considering the special standing Britain holds in the Middle
East and in Europe."
The defense minister was scheduled to meet with his British counterpart
Philip Hammond later Thursday.
NATO leader says alliance has no intention of intervening in Iran
By Associated Press, Thursday, November 3, 9:26 AM
BRUSSELS a** NATO has a**no intention whatsoevera** of intervening in
Iran, the alliancea**s top official said in response to reports that some
governments may be planning a military strike against Tehrana**s nuclear
The U.S. and other leading Western governments believe that Iran is
intending to develop a nuclear arsenal, and Tehrana**s failure to suspend
its nuclear activities has already led to several sets of U.N. sanctions.
But Iran maintains its nuclear program is exclusively civilian, aimed only
at producing electricity.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is reportedly trying to persuade
his Cabinet to authorize a strike. Israel, which considers Tehran its
biggest threat, has successfully tested a missile believed capable of
carrying a nuclear warhead to Iran.
Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said NATO supports political and
diplomatic efforts to resolve the nuclear issue and urged Iran to comply
with U.N. resolutions and stop its uranium enrichment programs.
a**Let me stress that NATO has no intention whatsoever to intervene in
Iran, and NATO is not engaged as an alliance in the Iran question,a** he
However, Fogh Rasmussen declined to comment on reports that Israeli air
force jets conducted drills last week at a NATO air base in Italy. They
were said to be practicing long-range sorties from the Decimomannu base on
the Sardinia island and included combat aircraft, aerial refueling tankers
and electronic warfare and control planes.
Later Thursday, Italian Defense Ministry spokesman Capt. Emiliano Biasco
confirmed that an exercise involving Israel and other countries was held
at Decimomannu in late October. He declined to give more details.
NATO cooperates closely with Israel as part of a group of friendly nations
in the region, known as the Mediterranean Dialogue. Israeli warships have
participated in exercises with NATO ships in the eastern Mediterranean.
Fogh Rasmussen visited the Jewish state earlier this year.
Tensions in the Middle East have peaked just after Turkey a** a NATO
member and Irana**s neighbor a** agreed in September to host an early
warning radar as part of a planned NATO missile defense system aimed at
countering a possible threat from Iranian missiles.
Iran has blamed Israel and the United States for disruptions in its
nuclear program, including the mysterious assassinations of a string of
Iranian nuclear scientists and a computer virus that wiped out some of
Irana**s nuclear centrifuges.
Tehran has also insisted that the international community deal with the
issue of Israela**s own nuclear weapons. The Jewish state is widely
believed to have accumulated a sizable arsenal, although it has never
officially acknowledged possession of such weapons.
'Barak compromised state security'
Senior state official says defense minister isn't interested in attacking
Iran, but forcing issue onto public agenda to justify his gov't role
A senior state official accused Defense Minister Ehud Barak of
compromising state security by pushing a possible Israeli strike on Iran
onto the public agenda.
"It was a cynical and irresponsible move that compromises the security of
the State of Israel," the source told Ynet.
"(Barak) has briefed quite a few senior reporters lately in an attempt to
convince them that an attack on Iran is the right decision," the official
added. "This is how he brought the issue onto the agenda in an unusual and
irresponsible manner."
According to the official, the defense minister's pursuit of the issue has
steered the state "into a system-wide delirium of unprecedented
proportions and severity, which might draw in the entire Middle East."
'Barak not interested in attack'
The top official suggested that Barak might not be interested in military
action against Iran, "but is playing this card in order to manipulate the
prime minister and his advisors, thus justifying his role in the
"Without the Iranian issue, he has no right to exist in the government,"
the official claimed.
If Barak was sincere in his support of the attack, the official asserted,
he wouldn't be briefing reporters or "generating spin" over the sensitive
"Such issues are considered a top secret that few are privy to," the
official explained. "This why it isn't logical and isn't' responsible for
an Israeli defense minister to involve reporters or other people in the
issue, while also supporting military action."
While the public discourse on the possible strike on Iran gained momentum,
IAF fighter jets conducted a lengthy exercise in Sardinia, Italy, Ynet
learned, a drill that was completed recently.
On Wednesday, the defense establishment tested its ballistic missile
propulsion system out of the Palmachim Airbase, and Home front Command
conducted a drill that simulated rocket attacks. The drill was expected to
continue into Thursday.
Also on Wednesday, Iran's Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Hassan
Fairouz Abadi responded to the alleged Israeli threat, warning that Tehran
would retaliate with a "surprising punishment" if Israel decided to pursue
such a "mistake."
UK military steps up plans for Iran attack amid fresh nuclear fears
British officials consider contingency options to back up a possible US
action as fears mount over Tehran's capability
Nick Hopkins
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 2 November 2011 15.21 GMT
Britain's armed forces are stepping up their contingency planning for
potential military action against Iran amid mounting concern over Tehran's
nuclear enrichment programme, the Guardian has learned.
The Ministry of Defence believes the US may decide to fast-forward plans
for targeted missile strikes at some key Iranian facilities. British
officials say that if Washington presses ahead it will seek, and receive,
UK military help for any mission, despite some deep reservations within
the coalition government.
In anticipation of a potential attack, British military planners are
examining where best to deploy Royal Navy ships and submarines equipped
with Tomahawk cruise missiles over the coming months as part of what would
be an air- and sea-launched campaign.
The Guardian has spoken to a number of Whitehall and defence officials
over recent weeks who said Iran was once again becoming the focus of
diplomatic concern after the revolution in Libya.
They made clear the US president, Barack Obama, has no wish to embark on a
new and provocative military venture before next November's US election.
But they warned the calculus could change because of mounting anxiety over
intelligence gathered by western agencies, and the more belligerent
posture that Iran appears to have been taking.
One senior Whitehall official said the regime had proved "surprisingly
resilient" in the face of sanctions, and sophisticated attempts by the
west to cripple its nuclear enrichment programme had been less successful
than first thought.
He said Iran appeared to be "newly aggressive a** and we are not quite
sure why", citing three recent assassination plots on foreign soil that
the intelligence agencies say were co-ordinated by elements in Tehran.
On top of that, the agencies now believe Iran has restored all the
capability it lost in a sophisticated cyber-attack last year.
The Stuxnet computer worm, thought to have been engineered by the
Americans and Israelis, sabotaged many of the centrifuges the Iranians
were using to enrich uranium.
Up to half of Iran's centrifuges were disabled by Stuxnet or were thought
too unreliable to work, but diplomats believe this capability has now been
recovered, and the International Atomic Energy Authority believes it may
even be increasing.
Ministers have also been told that the Iranians have been moving some new,
more efficient centrifuges into the heavily fortified military base dug
beneath a mountain at the city of Qom.
The concern is that the centrifuges, which can be used to enrich uranium
for use in weapons, are now so well protected within the site that missile
strikes may not be able to reach them. The senior Whitehall source said
the Iranians appeared to be shielding "material and capability" inside the
Another Whitehall official, with knowledge of Britain's military planning,
said that within the next 12 months Iran may have hidden all the material
it needs to continue a covert weapons programme inside fortified bunkers.
He said this had necessitated the UK's planning being taken to a new
"Beyond [12 months], we couldn't be sure our missiles could reach them,"
the source said. "So the window is closing, and the UK needs to do some
sensible forward planning. The US could do this on their own but they
won't. So we need to anticipate being asked to contribute. We had thought
this would wait until after the US election next year, but now we are not
so sure. President Obama has a big decision to make in the coming months
because he won't want to do anything just before an election."
Another source added there was "no acceleration towards military action by
the US, but that could change". Next spring could be a key decision-making
period, the source said.
The MoD has a specific team considering the military options against Iran.
The Guardian has been told that planners expect any campaign to be
predominantly waged from the air, with some naval involvement, using
missiles such as the Tomahawks, which have a range of 800 miles. There are
no plans for a ground invasion, but "a small number of special forces" may
be needed on the ground, too.
The RAF could also provide air-to-air refuelling and some surveillance
capability, should it be required. British officials say any assistance
would be cosmetic: the US could act on its own but would prefer not to.
An MoD spokesman said: "The British government believes that a dual track
strategy of pressure and engagement is the best approach to address the
threat from Iran's nuclear programme and avoid regional conflict. We want
negotiated solution - but all options should be kept on the table."
The MoD says there are no hard-and-fast blueprints for conflict but
insiders concede that preparations at headquarters and at the Foreign
Office have been under way for some time.
One official said: "I think that it is fair to say that the MoD is
constantly making plans for all manner of international situations. Some
areas are of more concern than others.
"It is not beyond the realms of possibility that people at the MoD are
thinking about what we might do should something happen on Iran. It is
quite likely that there will be people in the building who have thought
about what we would do if commanders came to us and asked us if we could
support the US. The context for that is straightforward contingency
Washington has been warned by Israel against leaving any military action
until it is too late. Western intelligence agencies say Israel will demand
that the US act if Jerusalem believes its own military cannot launch
successful attacks to stall Iran's nuclear programme. A source said the
"Israelis want to believe that they can take this stuff out", and will
continue to agitate for military action if Iran continues to play hide and
It is estimated that Iran, which has consistently said it is interested
only in developing a civilian nuclear energy programme, already has enough
enriched uranium for between two and four nuclear weapons.
Experts believe it could be another two years before Tehran has a
ballistic missile delivery system. British officials admit to being
perplexed by what they regard as Iran's new aggressiveness, saying that
they have been shown convincing evidence that Iran was behind the murder
of a Saudi diplomat in Karachi in May, as well as the audacious plot to
assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington, which was uncovered last
month. "There is a clear dotted line from Tehran to the plot in
Washington," said one.
The International Atomic Energy Authority is due to publish its latest
report on Iran this month. Earlier this year, it reported that it had
evidence Tehran had conducted work on a highly sophisticated nuclear
triggering technology that could only be used for setting off a nuclear
device. It also said it was "increasingly concerned about the possible
existence in Iran of past or current undisclosed nuclear-related
activities involving military-related organisations, including activities
related to the development of a nuclear payload for a missile."
Last year, the UN security council imposed a fourth round of sanctions on
Iran to try to deter Tehran from pursuing any nuclear ambitions.
Last weekend, the New York Times reported that the US was looking to build
up its military presence in the region, with one eye on Iran. According to
the paper, the US is considering sending more naval warships to the area,
and is seeking to expand military ties with the six nations in the Gulf
Co-operation Council: Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United
Arab Emirates and Oman.
Lieberman: Iran poses most dangerous threat to world order
Published 10:40 02.11.11
Latest update 10:40 02.11.11
FM responds to recent reports that Netanyahu is trying to gain cabinet
support to attack Iran, says international community must prove its
resolve against the regime in Tehran.
By Haaretz
Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said Wednesday that Iran poses the
largest, most dangerous threat to the current world order, adding that
Israel expects that the international community will step up efforts to
act against it.
Speaking to Israel Radio following recent reports that Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minsiter Ehud Barak are pushing the cabinet
to support an attack on Iran's nuclear sites, Lieberman rejected the
public discussion on the subject.
"99% of all the reports have no connection to reality," he told Israel
Radio, but added that there is much that must be done regarding the
Iranian issue.
"The international community must prove its ability to make decisions and
enforce tough sanctions on Iran's central bank as well as halt the
purchasing of oil."
Haaretz reported on Wednesday that Netanyahu and Barak recently persuaded
Lieberman, who previously objected to attacking Iran, to support such a
Senior ministers and diplomats said the International Atomic Energy
Agency's report, due to be released on November 8, will have a decisive
effect on the decisions Israel makes.
The commotion regarding Iran was sparked by journalist Nahum Barnea's
column in Yedioth Ahronoth last Friday. Barnea's concerned tone and his
editors' decision to run the column under the main headline ("Atomic
Pressure" ) repositioned the debate on Iran from closed rooms to the
media's front pages.
Reporters could suddenly ask the prime minister and defense minister
whether they intend to attack Iran in the near future and the political
scene went haywire.
Western intelligence officials agree that Iran is forging ahead with its
nuclear program. Intelligence services now say it will take Iran two or
three years to get the bomb once it decides to (it hasn't made the
decision yet ).
According to Western experts' analyses, an attack on Iran in winter is
almost impossible, because the thick clouds would obstruct the Israel Air
Force's performance.
Israel test-fires ballistic missile: Israel Radio
JERUSALEM | Wed Nov 2, 2011 4:33am EDT
(Reuters) - Israel test-fired a ballistic missile from a military base in
central Israel Wednesday, Israel Radio said.
The report said the launch was carried out from the Palmachim facility. It
quoted a Defense Ministry statement as saying the launch was aimed at
testing the missile's propulsion system. Israel has Jericho missiles
widely believed to be capable of carrying nuclear warheads.
Netanyahu trying to persuade cabinet to support attack on Iran
Published 00:51 02.11.11
Latest update 00:51 02.11.11
Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, who previously objected to attacking
Iran, was recently persuaded by Netanyahu and Barak to support such a
By Barak Ravid, Amos Harel, Zvi Zrahiya and Jonathan Lis
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak are
trying to muster a majority in the cabinet in favor of military action
against Iran, a senior Israeli official has said. According to the
official, there is a "small advantage" in the cabinet for the opponents of
such an attack.
Netanyahu and Barak recently persuaded Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman,
who previously objected to attacking Iran, to support such a move.
Although more than a million Israelis have had to seek shelter during a
week of rockets raining down on the south, political leaders have diverted
their attention to arguing over a possible war with Iran. Leading
ministers were publicly dropping hints on Tuesday that Israeli could
attack Iran, although a member of the forum of eight senior ministers said
no such decision had been taken.
Senior ministers and diplomats said the International Atomic Energy
Agency's report, due to be released on November 8, will have a decisive
effect on the decisions Israel makes.
The commotion regarding Iran was sparked by journalist Nahum Barnea's
column in Yedioth Ahronoth last Friday. Barnea's concerned tone and his
editors' decision to run the column under the main headline ("Atomic
Pressure" ) repositioned the debate on Iran from closed rooms to the
media's front pages.
Reporters could suddenly ask the prime minister and defense minister
whether they intend to attack Iran in the near future and the political
scene went haywire.
Western intelligence officials agree that Iran is forging ahead with its
nuclear program. Intelligence services now say it will take Iran two or
three years to get the bomb once it decides to (it hasn't made the
decision yet ).
According to Western experts' analyses, an attack on Iran in winter is
almost impossible, because the thick clouds would obstruct the Israel Air
Force's performance.
Netanyahu did not rule out the possibility of the need for a military
action on Iran this week. During his Knesset address on Monday, Netanyahu
warned of Iran's increased power and influence. "One of those regional
powers is Iran, which is continuing its efforts to obtain nuclear weapons.
A nuclear Iran would constitute a grave threat to the Middle East and the
entire world, and of course it is a direct and grave threat on us," he
Barak said Israel should not be intimidated but did not rule out the
possibility that Israel would launch a military attack on Iran's nuclear
facilities. "I object to intimidation and saying Israel could be destroyed
by Iran," he said.
"We're not hiding our thoughts. However there are issues we don't discuss
in public ... We have to act in every way possible and no options should
be taken off the table ... I believe diplomatic pressure and sanctions
must be brought to bear against Iran," he said.
Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya'alon said he preferred an American
military attack on Iran to an Israeli one. "A military move is the last
resort," he said.
Interior Minister Eli Yishai has not made his mind up yet on the issue. In
a speech to Shas activists in the north on Monday Yishai said "this is a
complicated time and it's better not to talk about how complicated it is.
This possible action is keeping me awake at night. Imagine we're
[attacked] from the north, south and center. They have short-range and
long-range missiles - we believe they have about 100,000 rockets and
Intelligence and Atomic Energy Minister Dan Meridor said he supports an
American move against Iran. In an interview to the Walla! website some two
weeks ago Meridor said "It's clear to all that a nuclear Iran is a grave
danger and the whole world, led by the United States, must make constant
efforts to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. The Iranians already
have more than four tons of 3-4 percent enriched uranium and 70 kgs. of 20
percent enriched uranium. It's clear to us they are continuing to make
missiles. Iran's nuclearization is not only a threat to Israel but to
several other Western states, and the international interest must unite
Former Defense Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer said he feared a "horror
scenario" in which Netanyahu and Barak decide to attack Iran. He warned of
a "rash act" and said he hoped "common sense will prevail."
On Tuesday, Barak said at the Knesset's Finance Committee that the state
budget must be increased by NIS 7-8 a year for five years to fulfill
Israel's security needs and answer the social protest. "The situation
requires expanding the budget to enable us to act in a responsible way
regarding the defense budget considering the challenges, as well as
fulfill some of the demands coming from the Trajtenberg committee," he
Israel warns West: Window of opportunity to thwart Iran nuclear program is
Published 01:06 01.11.11
Latest update 01:06 01.11.11
Envoys renew diplomatic push to counter Tehran's nuclear ambitions in
Foreign Ministry lobbying drive that began in mid-September.
By Barak Ravid
Israeli ambassadors in Western countries have been instructed to inform
high-ranking politicians that the window of opportunity for imposing
effective sanctions on Iran is closing, as part of a renewed diplomatic
offensive aimed at using new sanctions to stop Tehran from developing a
nuclear bomb.
The Foreign Ministry campaign, which began in mid-September, seeks to
convince the United States, European Union member states and other Western
countries to impose the sanctions immediately because Iran is continuing
to develop its nuclear program.
"The significant progress that has taken place on all the components of
the Iranian nuclear program should be emphasized, especially uranium
enrichment," said a classified cable sent to Israeli ambassadors in
several dozen countries. "The Iranian program is military, and in light of
International Atomic Energy Agency reports, there is an increased fear
that the Iranians are developing a nuclear warhead for ballistic
The ambassadors were asked to tell the equivalent of the foreign
ministries and prime minister's offices in the countries where they are
serving that there isn't much time left to stop the nuclear program
through diplomatic means.
The sanctions campaign comes ahead of the planned November 8 release of an
IAEA report, which is expected to reveal new details about the scope of
Iran's nuclear program. The IAEA is reportedly preparing to bring proof
that Iran is attempting to build a nuclear bomb.
Israel and the U.S. are planning to use the report in a worldwide campaign
to push for isolating Iran. Sanctions suggested by Israeli representatives
in recent talks with the U.S., France, Britain and Germany include banning
contact with Iran's central bank and banning the purchase of Iranian crude
oil. Israeli officials also suggested imposing additional sanctions on
Iranian airlines and ships.
Israeli officials noticed last month that international interest in
stopping Iran was flagging, said a senior Foreign Ministry official.
"International and Israeli attention was focused on the Arab Spring, on
flotillas to Gaza and on the Palestinian move in the UN," he said.
Foreign Ministry officials were concerned that the reduced attention Iran
was receiving made its pursuit of a nuclear program seem less urgent.
"There's a feeling that even though the sanctions are harming Iran, the
technological timetable is faster than the diplomatic timetable," said
another Foreign Ministry official. "Now is the time to intensify the steps
against Iran. The pressure influences Iran, and the present circumstances
require us to increase that pressure. The Iranians are preparing a
technological infrastructure that will enable them to have a breakthrough
as they head for nuclear weapons within a short time span. If Iran passes
this technological threshold, the ramifications will be severe -
especially in light of the weakening of regional stability following the
Arab Spring."
A few days ago, the ambassadors received another cable, directing them to
highlight the alleged Iranian plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to
Washington. "You should emphasize that this incident indicates the need to
isolate Iran," the cable said.
The Israeli ambassadors were also informed that Iran is boosting arms
smuggling to Syria, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah.
According to Israeli intelligence information, Iran has been carrying out
low-level uranium enrichment at a stable pace, despite the existing
sanctions. Iranian officials have been outspoken about their interest in
tripling the pace of producing uranium enriched to 20 percent, moving the
centrifuges from a non-reinforced facility in the central Iranian city of
Natanz to an underground enrichment facility in Qom. At the same time,
Iran is continuing to build a heavy water reactor in Arak, which would
enable them to produce the plutonium needed for a nuclear bomb.
One of the Foreign Ministry officials said Israel wants Western countries
to impose the sanctions on their own because domestic politics and
leadership changeovers in Russia and China in 2012, along with the U.S.
and French presidential elections, will make it impossible to secure
another UN Security Council resolution approving sanctions.
Although Israel's latest push for sanctions is new, diplomatic efforts to
thwart the Iranian nuclear program are ongoing, one of the Foreign
Ministry officials said. An interministerial task force headed by Yaakov
Amidror, the national security adviser, meets every few weeks to
coordinate the diplomatic efforts. Other members of the task force include
representatives of the foreign and defense ministries, the IDF and the
Iran to negotiate resumption of nuclear talks with 5+1 group- official
Iran's foreign ministry spokesperson has said that EU High Representative
Catherine Ashton's letter to Iranian officials regarding the resumption of
nuclear talks is being examined by the Iranian authorities and that the
date and venue of future negotiations would be announced later.
Speaking at a weekly news conference, which was broadcast live by IRINN
state-run TV channel on 1 November, Ramin Mehmanparast said: "The issue of
negotiations with the 5+1 group and Ms Ashton's letter is being examined
by the Iranian negotiating delegation under the supervision of Dr [Sa'id]
Jalili [Secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council ]".
He said that the two sides would exchange views on the content, date and
venue of negotiations.
Source: Islamic Republic of Iran News Network, Tehran, in Persian 0654gmt
01 Nov 11
BBC Mon Alert TCU ME1 MEPol ec
A(c) Copyright British Broadcasting Corporation 2011
Israel plays "minor" role in pressure on Iran - diplomatic sources
Text of report by Israeli public radio station Voice of Israel Network B
on 1 November
Senior diplomatic sources in Jerusalem said that Israel plays a minor role
in the pressure being placed on Iran, and that the leaders in this case
are the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, and France. The
sources said that Israel is working to persuade Washington and other
countries to up economic sanctions on Tehran by means of high-level
political talks between the bureaus of the prime minister and the foreign
minister, and world leaders.
Foreign Minister Lieberman said economic pressure on Iran would be
effective only if it includes sanctions on Iran's energy industry and on
its central bank. This was reported by our political correspondent Shmu'el
Source: Voice of Israel, Jerusalem, in Hebrew 0500 gmt 1 Nov 11
BBC Mon ME1 MEEauosc 011111 jn
Iran to negotiate resumption of nuclear talks with 5+1 group- official
Iran's foreign ministry spokesperson has said that EU High Representative
Catherine Ashton's letter to Iranian officials regarding the resumption of
nuclear talks is being examined by the Iranian authorities and that the
date and venue of future negotiations would be announced later.
Speaking at a weekly news conference, which was broadcast live by IRINN
state-run TV channel on 1 November, Ramin Mehmanparast said: "The issue of
negotiations with the 5+1 group and Ms Ashton's letter is being examined
by the Iranian negotiating delegation under the supervision of Dr [Sa'id]
Jalili [Secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council ]".
He said that the two sides would exchange views on the content, date and
venue of negotiations.
Source: Islamic Republic of Iran News Network, Tehran, in Persian 0654gmt
01 Nov 11
BBC Mon Alert TCU ME1 MEPol ec
US fears uncoordinated Israeli strike on Iran
Washington concerned Israel will mount military operation against Islamic
Republic, State Department official says. US consequently putting greater
pressure on Security Council to impose harsher sanctions on Iran
Alex Fishman
Published: 10.31.11, 10:24 / Israel News
Fearing an uncoordinated Israeli attack against Iran, the United States is
working on several levels to pressure the UN's Security Council into
imposing harsher sanctions on Iran, Yedioth Ahronoth reported Monday.
A senior US State Department official said there was growing concern among
Obama administration officials ahead of an IAEA report set to be published
in November indicating considerable progress in Tehran's development of
its military nuclear program.
The US is concerned that the report may trigger Israeli actions against
the Islamic Republic which may not necessarily be in line with US
interests in the region.
The official said that Washington's reevaluation of an Israeli strike in
Iran is based on various maneuvers Israel has performed in the past few
The US administration is now bent on exercising more pressure on Tehran in
order to dissuade Israel from this path, the source said.
Washington is therefore pressing China and Russia who are currently
opposed to the publication of the IAEA report. The report may cause
embarrassment to both countries who are strongly against harsher sanctions
on Iran.
According to the US official, it is possible that the report, coupled with
the exposure of the US evaluation of Israeli potential to strike Iran,
will encourage Russia and China to support the US initiative to aggravate
penal measures against Tehran.
Pressing UN
US concern over an Israeli move is so great, the official said, that
Washington is working on several levels to pressure the Security Council.
This includes appealing to the Security Council to condemn Iran for its
attempt to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to Washington.
Last week, it was reported that many Israelis are concerned that Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak decided on an
attack on Iran's nuclear reactors. The US is naturally also concerned over
such plans which may send the entire region into a whirlwind.
On Saturday, the New York Times reported that the United States plans to
bolster its military presence in the Gulf after the withdrawal of its
troops from Iraq.
Citing unnamed officials and diplomats, the newspaper said the
repositioning could include new combat forces in Kuwait able to respond to
a collapse of security in Iraq or a military confrontation with Iran.
Orly Azoulay and AFP contributed to this report
Barak: Israel has not already decided to strike Iran
Latest update 10:49 31.10.11
Defense Minister Ehud Barak tells Army Radio that all options are on the
table in terms of dealing with Iran; says that Israelis should not fear
the Iranian threat.
By Haaretz
Amidst a flurry of recent reports regarding a possible Israeli attack
against Iran, Defense Minister Ehud Barak said on Monday that he and Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have not already decided that Israel will
conduct such a strike.
"It does not take a genius to understand that in Israel in 2011 two people
cannot decide to do something on their own," Barak said in an interview on
Army Radio. "That may have been appropriate in Israel in 2006. In the
Defense Ministry, there are thousands of pages of discussion on this
subject, in the presence of dozens of ministers, military personnel and
Regarding the question as to why there was no public debate on a matter so
fateful to Israel, Barak said, "the Iranian nuclear program has been
publicly debated for years in Israel. There are countless interviews and
public debates. We do not conceal our thoughts. However, there are
operational matters that we do not discuss publicly, as that would make
them impossible to carry out."
Barak reiterated that Iran poses a threat to stability in the Middle East
and the world. He said that all options are on the table in terms of
dealing with Iran.
"I think that one has to use diplomatic pressure and sanctions on Iran,"
Barak said.
He added that Iran has been a central issue that Israeli leaders have
discussed with other world leaders in recent years.
"There is great convergence between us and the Americans regarding the
diagnosis and the characterization of the operation in Iran," Barak said.
"We know the Iranian leadership's goals, its determination and how it
evades the world. We know what happened in Pakistan, we know what happened
in North Korea and we see the immunity they have because of it. One should
ask: Would Europe have intervened in Libya if Gadhafi had possessed
nuclear weapons? Would the U.S. have toppled Saddam Hussein if he had
nuclear weapons?"
Barak said that the Israeli public should not be concerned about the
Iranian threat.
"I refuse to be intimidated, as if Iran could destroy Israel, " Barak
said. "Israel is the most powerful country, from Tripoli to Tehran. There
is no reason to be afraid of anything."
Also in the interview, Barak denied that Israel had negotiated a
cease-fire with Islamic Jihad following the violence in southern Israel
[Message truncated]

subset: commoncrawl