Persian Gulf & Middle East Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

PARIS — France will discuss creating protected humanitarian corridors in Syria with its EU and Arab allies, Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said Thursday, after meeting the exiled Syrian opposition leader.

Juppe said France considers Burhan Ghaliun’s Syrian National Council a “legitimate interlocutor” and said he would take to Brussels the idea of escape routes for Syrian civilians fleeing Bashar al-Assad’s forces.

“We examined the question of humanitarian corridors and I will ask the next meeting of the European Council to put this point on its agenda,” Juppe said.

“If there could be a humanitarian dimension to the zones, which could be secured, to protect the population, that’s a question that must be studied with the European Union and the Arab League.”

There have been reports that Turkey and NATO allies such as France are considering imposing a no-fly zone and a buffer zone on Syrian territory to give the opposition breathing space while it organises its revolt.

Click to expand...

CAIRO/PARIS (Reuters) - France will seek Arab support on Thursday for a humanitarian corridor in Syria, the first time a major power has swung behind international intervention in the eight-month uprising against President Bashar al-Assad.

Click to expand...

Mysterious explosions pose dilemma for Iranian leaders
By Thomas Erdbrink, Published: November 25

TEHRAN — A massive blast at a missile base operated by Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps nearly two weeks ago was the latest in a series of mysterious incidents involving explosions at natural gas transport facilities, oil refineries and military bases — blasts that have caused dozens of deaths and damage to key infrastructure in the past two years.

Iranian officials said the Nov. 12 blast at the missile base was an “accident,” and they ruled out any sabotage organized by the United States and its regional allies. The explosion on the Shahid Modarres base near the city of Malard was so powerful that it shook the capital, Tehran, about 30 miles to the east.

Despite the official denial of foreign involvement in the latest blast, suspicions have been raised in Iran by what industry experts say is a fivefold increase in explosions at refineries and gas pipelines since 2010.

Explaining the increased number of industrial incidents is proving to be a predicament for Iranian leaders, who do not want to appear vulnerable at a time when Israeli leaders have been debating military intervention against Iran over its controversial nuclear program.

Officials have blamed industrial accidents for most the blasts, saying they were caused by such deficiencies as “bad welding” or “substandard manufacturing.” But media restrictions and the lack of independent investigations have made it hard to verify the claims.

One oil expert said that increasingly strict sanctions prohibiting Western companies from maintaining key installations in Iran could also be to blame.

“Now, many projects are finished by Iranian companies without observing safety standards,” said Reza Zandi, an Iranian journalist who specializes in energy issues.

“There is clearly an increase in incidents in recent years,” said Mohammad Abumohsen, an inspector of oil and gas pipelines.

At least 17 gas pipeline explosions have been reported since last year, compared with three in 2008 and 2009. At the same time, nearly a dozen major explosions have damaged refineries since 2010, but experts say it is complicated to determine the cause of such incidents.

In the United States, Republican presidential contenders have called for President Obama to start covert action against Iran because of its refusal to stop its uranium-enrichment program. U.S. officials suspect the program is aimed at producing fissile material for nuclear weapons. Iran insists that it wants only to make its own fuel for nuclear power plants.

Suspicions that covert action might already be underway were raised when four key gas pipelines exploded simultaneously in different locations in Qom Province in April. Lawmaker Parviz Sorouri told the semiofficial Mehr News Agency that the blasts were the work of “terrorists” and were “organized by the enemies of the Islamic Republic.”

Iran in recent years has improved its ability to hunt spies, using reviews of travel and expense records to round up Iranians suspected of selling information to U.S., British and Israeli intelligence services, the Associated Press reported Monday.

In May, Intelligence Minister Heidar Moslehi announced the arrest of 30 “CIA spies” who he said had been recruited to map out Iran’s energy infrastructure.

“One of their main objectives was carrying out sabotage activities,” Moslehi said, according to the semiofficial Fars News Agency.

Iran’s parliament launched an investigation into the blast at the missile site but did not issue any findings this week as promised. One lawmaker, Mohammad Kazem Hejazi, said revealing such information might give away secrets to the “enemy,” the Iranian Labor News Agency reported Tuesday.

“We are not ruling out sabotage in the Malard missile base,” said one source close to the Revolutionary Guards, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject. “It is not impossible to bribe a single person into doing something bad.”

On Wednesday, an explosion rocked a stronghold in southern Lebanon of Iran’s regional ally, Hezbollah, which is widely believed to be supplied with Iranian missiles capable of hitting major urban centers in Israel. Hezbollah did not comment on the cause of the blast but denied that it occurred at one of the group’s arms depots, Beirut’s Daily Star newspaper reported.

Iran has accused the United States and Israel of organizing the assassinations of three nuclear scientists in Tehran since 2010. The government has also blamed both countries for a computer virus called “Stuxnet,” which President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad acknowledged had disabled centrifuges used to enrich uranium.

In a sign that relations between Iran and the West are further deteriorating, Iran’s parliament voted Wednesday to consider expelling the British ambassador to Tehran. The preliminary vote came after Britain on Tuesday joined the United States and Canada in adopting new financial sanctions against the Islamic Republic. If carried out, an expulsion could prompt other European countries to withdraw their ambassadors, diplomatic sources said.

Click to expand...

Tehran invokes revolutionary fervor
By M K Bhadrakumar

On Monday, Iran's powerful Guardian Council endorsed the Majlis' resolution adopted the previous day to downgrade the country's ties with Britain. The speed with which the process gathered momentum conveys the message that it carries the stamp of a decision at the highest levels of the Iranian leadership.

That and the overwhelming mood of support for the move within the Majlis also indicate that the locus of power in Iran is shifting to a hard line.

The move includes expelling the British ambassador in Tehran and downgrading the representation to the level of charge d'affaires. By Tuesday afternoon, dozens of Iranian protesters forced their way into the British compound in Tehran, tearing down the Union Flag and throwing documents from windows. A signpost has been put up in Tehran that can be ignored only at some peril.

The protesters raised three main slogans: "Down with Britain", "Down with America", and "Down with Israel". They carried photographs of Iranian scientist Majid Shahriari and the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps commander Major-General Qassem Soleimani. Tuesday was also the first anniversary of Shahriari's murder, which was believed to have been carried out by Israel's Mossad with the support of Britain's Secret Intelligence Service, MI6.
Asymmetrical response
But the tipping point must be London's steps toward removing the Mojahedin-e Khalq (MKO) from the list of terrorist organizations. The MKO has been responsible for some of the most devastating terrorist attacks in the history of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Tehran holds the MKO responsible for more than 17,000 killings over the years. The most "celebrated" were of course those of Ayatollah Muhammad Behesti (who was next only to Imam Ruhollah Khomeini in the pantheon of the revolutionary leadership) in June 1980 and of the popularly elected Iranian president Muhammad Rajayi in August of the same year. The second terrorist strike came close to eliminating the entire revolutionary leadership under Khomeini.

It must be one of the quirks of modern history that Western intelligence has depended on the MKO, which practices an ideological mix of Marxism, nationalism and Islam, as the principal instrument to subvert the Islamic regime in Iran. Iranian security personnel and Lebanon's Hezbollah busted in a major counterintelligence operation in Beirut the entire network of the US Central Intelligence Agency in Lebanon and Iran.

The CIA was apparently using Lebanon as the "gateway" to penetrate Iran, given the relative freedom of movement between the two countries. Through May and June, Iranian security officials arrested more than three dozens Iranians who were working for the CIA. Their interrogation revealed that recent covert operations against Iran were the joint ventures of the CIA, Mossad and the MKO.

Thus the British move to rehabilitate the MKO (whose leadership is based in Brussels and is allowed to travel freely to the European capitals) has infuriated Tehran to no end. It seems to be the real reason behind the present crisis. Tehran is resorting to "asymmetrical" response by striking at the symbol of British power because it lacks the capacity to pay back to London in the same coin.

A deep chill is setting in with Iran's ties with Britain. The relationship has been a hugely troubled one historically, the high-water mark in recent history being the coup leading to the overthrow of the government of Mohammed Mossadeq in Iran in 1952, which is commonly attributed to the CIA but was actually the handiwork of MI6. And Iran remembers it. Iran knows better than most countries that Britain continues to be the "brain" behind America's policies - be it toward Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria or Myanmar.
Britain will almost certainly take its grouse over the Iranian snub to the European councils and will seek a "regional" consensus in the Western world to make diplomatic moves against Iran in unison. The predictable pattern will be that given the heightened feelings in London, such countries as Germany that have extensive involvement in Iran will fall in line. All the same, it becomes an occasion to take the temperature on European unity when chips are down over the Iran situation in the coming months.
This, in a manner of speaking, will also be the trial run for the Middle East. The lines are being drawn as the night of the long knives begins. Everyone understands it. And for the autocratic regimes in the Persian Gulf, there will be no corner to go and hide in. The hurried visit by King Abdullah of Jordan to Israel shows the panic over the gathering storm. Saudi Arabia's robust efforts to divide the region on Sunni-Shia sectarian lines haven't succeeded. The Arab street will find it difficult to accept the Western push against Iran. That is the thought worrying Abdullah most. What if this mass indignation erupts in Jordan?

The United States and Israel will no doubt work overtime in the European capitals to get the West to downgrade ties with Iran and if they succeed, they will beat the drums that Iran faces "international" isolation. But it may have no value other than propaganda. Clearly, Tehran has factored in the downstream diplomatic fracas that will follow by insulting Britain, and is nonetheless going ahead with its decision to downgrade ties.

So, what is on the Iranian mind? Some serious conclusions can be drawn. First, Tehran estimates that a US-British-Israeli axis is in any case gearing up for a confrontation. The strategic ambiguity - "all options are on the table" - no longer exists really, after the hardline policy speech by US National Security Adviser Tom Donilon at the Brookings Institution in Washington last week.

Evidently, Donilon spoke up for President Barack Obama, fully mindful of the criticality of an already supercharged Middle East situation:
We have enhanced our significant and enduring US force presence in the region. In addition, we have worked to develop a network of air and missile defenses, shared early warning, improved maritime security, closer counterterrorism cooperation, expanded the programs to build partner capacity, and increased efforts to harden and protect our partners' critical infrastructure.

The steps demonstrate unmistakably to Tehran that any attempt to dominate the region will be futile. And they show the United States is prepared for any contingency ... President Obama has said as recently as last week, we are not taking any options off the table in pursuit of our basic objectives.
Second, Tehran estimates that this confrontation may take place within Obama's first term as president - because it may well ensure the success of his bid for a second term. The manner in which the Obama administration jacked up the tensions with Iran almost in parallel with the commencement of his re-election bid hasn't escaped Tehran's attention. Third, emanating out of the above, Tehran has little choice left but to take to the high ground, as it is no longer a matter of Iran being flexible on the nuclear issue or not, of Iran being conciliatory toward Israel or not, or of Iran being "moderate" on the Palestine problem and the Arab-Israeli conflict or not.

It is pure power play and realpolitik. A similar situation arose in 1980 when Tehran couldn't care less anymore what the US and Britain thought of its revolution, and Tehran feels today once again that it is far better off without the British hanging about. The Iranian historical consciousness still regards Imperial Britain as a poisonous serpent that every now and then crept up from India to devour the succulent Persian fruit.

Collective memory
The animus against Britain comes out clearly in the statement issued by the student protesters who stormed the embassy: The embassy of the old fox should have been occupied much earlier. Every free-minded Iranian whose heart is beating for this land and has observed the crimes of the old colonialism against Iran and the Iranians should know that occupation of the embassy of the old fox serves the interests of Iran and our country's national interests.

The recent statements by Iranian military commanders have warned that Iran has known (and unknown) capabilities to retaliate if attacked. By warning explicitly, it hopes to inject some rational thinking into the US-British-Israeli discourses that are bordering on delusional estimations regarding Iran's policies and choices. But Tehran senses the futility of trying to influence the undergirding of the Obama administration's disposition anymore in the near term.

In the Iranian estimation, Obama is simply not interested in hearing Iran's narrative. His obsessive concern is his 2012 re-election bid, and his campaign interests lie in diverting the locus of the political discourse away from his failings in mending the US economy. A regime change in Syria and a move toward cracking down on the Hezbollah are just the kind of decisive leadership that he needs to project to get over the image that he "leads from the rear".
With an amazing degree of belligerence, Donilon continued in his speech at Brookings: The end of the [Bashar al-] Assad regime [in Syria] would constitute Iran's greatest setback in the region, a strategic blow that would further shift the balance of power in the region against Iran. Tehran would have lost its closest ally in the region. To be sure, the "revolutionary" mood in Tehran is developing against the regional backdrop. Tehran links Donilon's belligerence with the stationing of the nuclear aircraft carrier USS George H W Bush off Syria. The US 6th Fleet is also patrolling the eastern Mediterranean off Syria. The US and Turkey have asked their nationals to leave Syria.

Again, US Vice-President Joseph Biden has arrived on a surprise visit to Iraq, en route to Turkey on a mission to display US backing for Ankara's interventionist role in Syria. Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmed Davutoglu hinted for the first time on Tuesday that his country was ready for an intervention in Syria.

According to Britain's Daily Telegraph newspaper, a secret meeting was held in Istanbul last Friday between Turkish officials and representatives of the Libyan "opposition" to work out the logistics to bring Libyan fighters who were trained and equipped by the West to fight in Syria.

There are reports in the Russian media that the first contingent of 600 Libyan fighters may have already been transferred to Syria. The dilemma facing Turkey and its Western allies is that the Syrian armed forces have overwhelmingly remained loyal to the regime. Thus the fig leaf of Syrian "resistance" is unavailable, which in turn would expose the gamut of the outside intervention. The Libyan fighters are expected to make up for this operational deficiency.

In short, the writing is there on the wall that a Western intervention in Syria led by Turkey is shaping up. France has openly called for creating a European Union-backed humanitarian corridor that would allow Western intelligence and military advisers to move through Turkey into Syria and mastermind the regime change. Turkey was specially invited to the EU foreign ministers' meeting in Brussels on Tuesday.

All in all, Tehran is left in no doubt that the time has come to switch the Iranian nation into a revolutionary mode. The intrusion into the British Embassy invokes archetypal symbols of defiance and resistance, which are embedded in the Iran's revolutionary consciousness - especially when the collective memory about Britain is summoned. It is Iran's ultimate line of defense - as was the hostage crisis with the US in the months following the revolution when Iran came under siege.

Clearly, Obama, who has a panache for taking political gambles - and has so far won in a meteoric political career - is on a slippery path. Syria is a hard nut to crack; Hezbollah is waiting in the wings; so is Hamas. The odds are 50-50 that things may not happen the way Donilon tried to persuade us to anticipate, even if they may not be an exact replay of the outcome that horrified Jimmy Carter. On Tuesday afternoon, the US-Iran standoff moved to a flashpoint.

Click to expand...

Iran's Revolutionary Guards prepare for war
Iran’s Revolutionary Guards have been put on a war footing amid increasing signs that the West is taking direct action to cripple Iran’s nuclear programme.

By Con Coughlin8:45PM GMT 05 Dec 2011
An order from Gen Mohammed Ali Jaafari, the commander of the guards, raised the operational readiness status of the country’s forces, initiating preparations for potential external strikes and covert attacks.
Western intelligence officials said the Islamic Republic had initiated plans to disperse long-range missiles, high explosives, artillery and guards units to key defensive positions.
The order was given in response to the mounting international pressure over Iran’s nuclear programme. Preparation for a confrontation has gathered pace following last month’s report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna that produced evidence that Iran was actively working to produce nuclear weapons.
The Iranian leadership fears the country is being subjected to a carefully co-ordinated attack by Western intelligence and security agencies to destroy key elements of its nuclear infrastructure.
Recent explosions have added to the growing sense of paranoia within Iran, with the regime fearing it will be the target of a surprise military strike by Israel or the US.

Its ballistic missile programme suffered a major setback on Nov 12 after an explosion at the regime’s main missile testing facility at Bidganeh, about 30 miles west of Tehran.
At least 17 people died, including Gen Hassan Tehrani Moghaddam, the head of Iran’s missile research programme.
The IAEA report said Iranian scientists had worked to develop a missile capable of carrying nuclear warheads. Security analysts described Iran’s missile advances as “a turning point” that had “profound strategic implications”.
Last week another mysterious explosion caused significant damage to Iran’s uranium conversion facility at Isfahan.
“It looks like the 21st century form of war,” said Patrick Clawson of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a Washington think tank, told the Los Angeles Times. “It does appear that there is a campaign of assassinations and cyber war, as well as the semi-acknowledged campaign of sabotage.”
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s spiritual leader, issued a directive to the heads of all the country’s military, intelligence and security organisations to take all necessary measures to protect the regime.
Gen Jaafari responded to this directive by ordering Revolutionary Guards units to redistribute Iran’s arsenal of long-range Shahab missiles to secret sites around the country where they would be safe from enemy attack and could be used to launch retaliatory attacks.
In addition, the Iranian air force has formed a number of “rapid reaction units”, which have been carrying out extensive exercises to practice a response to an enemy air attack.
At the weekend, Iran claimed it had succeeded in shooting down an advanced American RQ-170 drone in the east of the country. If true, this would represent a major coup for the ayatollahs, as this type of drone contains sensitive stealth technology that allows it to operate for hours without being detected.
A spokesman for Nato’s International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan would only confirm that US operators had “lost control” of a drone, without specifying the model.


Intelligence officials believe the dangerous game of cat and mouse between Iran and the West was responsible for last week’s attack on the British Embassy in Tehran. William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, closed the embassy and expelled Iranian diplomats in response.
But with Iran showing no sign of backing down over its nuclear programme, there is growing concern that Israel will launch unilateral military action.
At the weekend, Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, warned that he would take “the right decision at the right moment” if Iran continued with its uranium enrichment programme.
Israel’s uncompromising approach is viewed with alarm in Washington.
Leon Panetta, the US defence secretary, has warned that a unilateral strike by Israel risked “an escalation” that could “consume the Middle East in confrontation and conflict that we would regret”.
A senior Western intelligence official said: "There is deep concern within the senior leadership of the Iranian regime that they will be the target of a surprise military strike by either Israel or the US.
"For that reason they are taking all necessary precautions to ensure they can defend themselves properly if an attack happens."

Click to expand...