Deputy Israeli PM Dan Meridor confirmed on Saturday that PM Binyamin Netanyahu had visited Russia. Israeli website Ynetnews.com reports that Meridor declined to elaborate on the affair, which has triggered media accusations of official disinformation.
Posts Tagged ‘Dan Meridor’
US threatens Iran ‘defence umbrella’
Clinton outlines policy of containment if Tehran cannot be stopped from constructing warheads
Hillary Clinton today outlined how the US may go about containing a nuclear-armed Iran by extending a “defence umbrella” to US allies in the region.
The US secretary of state, speaking on the way to a security summit in Thailand, later said she was not suggesting a new policy. But her comments marked the first time a senior US official has publicly contemplated the option of containment in the event of Iran’s succeeding in building a nuclear weapon.
Until today such an option was a taboo subject among US government officials and their British counterparts, who have insisted Iran would be ultimately stopped from constructing a warhead.
Iran says its nuclear programme is not for military purposes, and refuses to comply with UN security council resolutions calling on Tehran to suspend the enrichment of uranium. The impasse has grown into a crisis as the enrichment programme has expanded over the past few years.
“We will still hold the door open [for negotiations], but we also have made it clear that we will take actions, as I have said time and time again, crippling action working to upgrade the defences of our partners in the region,” Clinton told Thai television.
“We want Iran to calculate what I think is a fair assessment: that if the United States extends a defence umbrella over the region, if we do even more to develop the military capacity of those [allies] in the Gulf, it is unlikely that Iran will be any stronger or safer because they won’t be able to intimidate and dominate as they apparently believe they can once they have a nuclear weapon.”
Sir Richard Dalton, a former British ambassador to Tehran, said: “She’s implying that, if Iran became a nuclear weapon state, then the US would develop their existing defence commitments and that the US would contemplate nuclear deterrence to protect Persian Gulf states.”
Clinton’s remarks appeared to be aimed at influencing the decisions being made in Tehran. She was also seeking to fend off an arms race in the Middle East, where America’s Arab allies are nervous about the rise of a nuclear Iran, and considering their own nuclear options.
But her comments angered America’s closest ally in the region, Israel, and drew an immediate riposte from minister of intelligence and atomic energy, Dan Meridor.
“I was not thrilled to hear the American statement … that they will protect their allies with a nuclear umbrella, as if they have already come to terms with a nuclear Iran. I think that’s a mistake,” Meridor said on Army Radio.
Asked for clarification at press conference, Clinton said: “I was simply pointing out that Iran needs to understand that its pursuit of nuclear weapons will not advance its security or achieve its goals of enhancing its power both regionally and globally.
“The focus that Iran must have is that it faces the prospect if it pursues nuclear weapons of sparking an arms race in the region. That should affect the calculation of what Iran intends to do and what it believes is in its national security interest because it may render Iran less secure, not more secure.”
The remarks appear to reflect deepening US pessimism on Iran following the June presidential elections, which brought an entrenchment by hardliners in Tehran.
Hopes had been raised in Washington that Barack Obama’s warm overtures to the Iranian people and the offer of talks without preconditions would break the long-running impasse over uranium enrichment.
Iran has so far not replied to the latest offer from six major powers – the US, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China – to provide economic help and technical assistance in building a nuclear power industry, if Iran suspends enrichment. Little hope is left in Washington or other western capitals that any response now will be positive.
The outgoing director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, said recently he thought Iran was developing a breakout capacity to build nuclear weapons, as an “insurance policy” against perceived foreign threats.
The containment option is boosted by the belief that Iran is running out of uranium ore to convert and enrich. The US thinks the supply will run out by next year and is urging all uranium-producing countries to tighten control over their exports, to ensure Iran does not get hold of any more.
If that effort is successful, it would limit the size of arsenals Iran is able to build. That is the theory at least. It is very much plan B as far as the west is concerned, but it is a bow to new realities.
Clinton: “Irreversible Denuclearization” Only Option For North Korea
PHUKET, Thailand – U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton says “irreversible denuclearization” is the only viable option for North Korea.
Attending an Asian security conference, Clinton said China, Japan, Russia and South Korea were a…
US threatens to ‘cripple’ nuclear Iran
Secretary of state pledges to protect Gulf allies if Tehran attempts to intimidate neighbours
Hillary Clinton today signalled a significant shift in US foreign policy by discussing publicly how a nuclear-armed Iran could be contained in the Middle East.
Until today, the shared position of the US, Britain and France was that Iran would not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons, and no senior official from any of the three countries would discuss the option of containment.
However, Clinton broke that taboo during a visit to Thailand, when she pledged enhanced US protection for Washington’s Gulf allies, implying nuclear protection, if Iran succeeded in building a bomb.
“We… have made it clear that we’ll take actions, as I’ve said time and time again, crippling action working to upgrade the defences of our partners in the region,” Clinton told Thai television.
“We want Iran to calculate what I think is a fair assessment: that if the United States extends a defence umbrella over the region, if we do even more to develop the military capacity of those (allies) in the Gulf, it is unlikely that Iran will be any stronger or safer because they won’t be able to intimidate and dominate as they apparently believe they can once they have a nuclear weapon.”
Sir Richard Dalton, a former British ambassador to Tehran said: “She’s implying that, if Iran became a nuclear weapon state, then the US would develop their existing defence commitments and that the US would contemplate nuclear deterrence to protect Persian Gulf states.”
The remarks appeared to be aimed at reassuring Arab allies uneasy about the rise of a nuclear Iran, and considering their own nuclear options. It also seeks to influence the decisions being made in Tehran. But it drew an immediate riposte from Israel’s minister of intelligence and atomic energy, Dan Meridor.
“I was not thrilled to hear the American statement…that they will protect their allies with a nuclear umbrella, as if they have already come to terms with a nuclear Iran. I think that’s a mistake,” Meridor said.
Clinton’s comments appear to reflect a new US pessimism on Iran following the June presidential elections, that brought an entrenchment by hardliners in Tehran.
There had been hope in Washington that Barack Obama’s warm overtures to the Iranian people and the offer of talks with Iran without preconditions would break the long-running impasse over Iranian enrichment of uranium.
Iran insists the uranium is intended for peaceful power generation, but the UN security council has called for it to be suspended, at least until doubts over Tehran’s intentions are resolved.
Iran had put off, until after the recent election, a response to the latest offer from six major powers – the US, Britain, France Germany, Russia and China – to offer economic help and technical assistance in building a nuclear power industry, if Iran suspends enrichment. There is little hope left in Washington or other western capitals that any response now will be positive.
The outgoing director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, said recently he thought Iran was developing a breakout capacity to build nuclear weapons, so that it would have all the components in place to build a warhead at short notice.
The containment option is boosted by the belief that Iran is running out of uranium ore to convert and enrich. The US thinks the supply will run out by next year and is urging all uranium-producing countries to tighten control over their exports, to ensure Iran does not get hold of any more.
If that effort is successful, it would severely limit the size of arsenals Iran is able to build. That is the theory at least. It is very much “plan b” as far as the west is concerned, but it is a bow to new realities.
Israel to demolish 23 illegal settlements
Israel is planning to remove 23 “illegal outposts” from the West Bank in the course of a single day in response to mounting US demands that it halt all settlement activity, it was reported today.
These outposts are defined as “illegal” by the Israeli government because they have not received planning permission. But under international law all settlements built on occupied territory are illegal. According to the Ha’aretz newspaper the outposts, housing 1,200 people, will all be evacuated and dismantled simultaneously following a decision by the Likud prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.
The Israeli army later denied receiving any orders for a “lightning evacuation.” Settler spokesmen warned of a furious response if any such move took place.
Israel has only twice evacuated Jewish settlements since the 1967 war: in 1981 when the Sinai desert was returned to Egypt, and in 2005, when Israel unilaterally withdrew troops and settlers from the Gaza Strip. Removing settlers from the West Bank will be far more controversial.
Israel has told the US it would remove “illegal” outposts built after March 2001. The current activity is in response to unprecedented pressure from Washington, where President Obama has departed sharply from the informal acquiescence of the Bush administration.
Dan Meridor, a deputy prime minister with a reputation for moderation, insisted that tacit “understandings” with Bush still bound the Obama administration.
Netanyahu has insisted that construction must be permitted in existing settlements to accommodate what he calls “natural growth” in their populations. In all, nearly 500,000 Israelis now live in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, both claimed by the Palestinians as part of their future independent state.
Tensions have flared in recent days since Netanyahu said the US had no right to demand that Israel halt plans to develop 20 apartments in the East Jerusalem neighbourhood of Sheikh Jarrah. On Monday, campaigners protesting at the planned eviction of Palestinian families to make way for it appealed to Obama to stop the settlement.
Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, said today: “What is required from Israel is to freeze all settlement activity. When Israel meets these demands, we will be ready to go to the final negotiations.”
France’s foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner, meanwhile summoned the Israeli ambassador to Paris to complain about Jewish settlements. “These activities must be stopped,” warned Kouchner, “otherwise there will be no chance to found an independent Palestinian state that administers itself and also guarantees Israel’s security.”
Britain’s foreign office minister, Ivan Lewis, told MPs: “Israel should freeze all settlement activity, including the natural growth of existing settlements, and dismantle all outposts erected since March 2001.”
Sweden, current president of the EU, also urged Israel “to refrain from provocative actions in East Jerusalem, including home demolitions and evictions.” It added: “Such actions are illegal under international law.”



