ID :
211302
Wed, 10/05/2011 - 12:03
Auther :
Shortlink :
https://oananews.org//node/211302
The shortlink copeid
Former Mossad Chief: Iran Far from Achieving N. Bomb
TEHRAN (FNA)- Former Mossad Chief Meir Dagan said Iran is far from acquiring a military nuclear program, and dismissed the Israeli leaders' remarks about a military raid on Iran, saying that attacking Iran is not a preferable option due to Israel's increasingly bad conditions, given the developments in the region.
Elaborating on why attacking Iran would be harmful to Israel, Dagan said Israel's strategic situation is "the worst in its history," he warned, adding that Israel itself has contributed a lot to this deterioration. As an example, he cited the Zionist regime Deputy Foreign Minister, Danny Ayalon's decision to humiliate the Turkish ambassador last year by demonstratively seating him on a low chair.
Dagan made his remarks on the same day that visiting US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta passed on a clear message from his boss in Washington: The United States opposes any Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.
At a joint press conference with Zionist regime's Defense Minister Ehud Barak, Panetta stressed that any steps against Iran's nuclear program must be taken in coordination with the international community.
Panetta cited Iran's nuclear program as number one on the list of issues he had discussed with Barak. He voiced concern not only about the nuclear program, but also about Iran's growing clout in the region and the world.
At the press conference, Panetta also stressed America's deep commitment to Israel's security.
His message for Barak, at their second meeting in two weeks, appeared to be simultaneously embrace and restrain: America is standing by Israel, but an uncoordinated Israeli strike on Iran could spark a regional war. The United States will work to defend Israel, but Israel must behave responsibly.
Washington has been worried by statements various senior Israeli officials have made recently that seemed to take a more aggressive line on Iran.
Earlier, in a conversation with American journalists on the flight over, Panetta had warned that Israel was suffering regional isolation following the crises in its relations with Turkey and Egypt.
Speculation that Israel could also bomb Iran mounted after a big Israeli air drill three years ago. In the first week of June 2008, 100 Israeli F-16 and F-15 fighters reportedly took part in an exercise over the eastern Mediterranean and Greece, which was interpreted as a dress rehearsal for a possible attack on Iran's nuclear installations.
Israel and its close ally the United States accuse Iran of seeking a nuclear weapon, while they have never presented any corroborative document to substantiate their allegations. Both Washington and Tel Aviv possess advanced weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear warheads.
Iran vehemently denies the charges, insisting that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only. Tehran stresses that the country has always pursued a civilian path to provide power to the growing number of Iranian population, whose fossil fuel would eventually run dry.
Iran has warned that it would target Israel and its worldwide interests in case it comes under attack by the Tel Aviv.
The United States has always stressed that military action is a main option for the White House to deter Iran's progress in the field of nuclear technology.
Iran has warned that in case of an attack by either the US or Israel, it will target 32 American bases in the Middle East and close the strategic Strait of Hormoz.
An estimated 40 percent of the world's oil supply passes through the waterway.
Meantime, a recent study by the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS), a prestigious American think tank, has found that a military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities "is unlikely" to delay the country's program.
The ISIS study also cautioned that an attack against Iran would backfire by compelling the country to acquire nuclear weaponry.
A recent study by a fellow at Harvard's Olin Institute for Strategic Studies, Caitlin Talmadge, warned that Iran could use mines as well as missiles to block the strait, and that "it could take many weeks, even months, to restore the full flow of commerce, and more time still for the oil markets to be convinced that stability has returned".
In a Sep. 11, 2008 report, the Washington Institute for the Near East Policy also said that in the two decades since the Iran-Iraq War, the Islamic Republic has excelled in naval capabilities and is able to wage unique asymmetric warfare against larger naval forces.
According to the report, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps Navy (IRGCN) has been transformed into a highly motivated, well-equipped, and well-financed force and is effectively in control of the world's oil lifeline, the Strait of Hormuz.
The study says that if Washington takes military action against the Islamic Republic, the scale of Iran's response would likely be proportional to the scale of the damage inflicted on Iranian assets.
Elaborating on why attacking Iran would be harmful to Israel, Dagan said Israel's strategic situation is "the worst in its history," he warned, adding that Israel itself has contributed a lot to this deterioration. As an example, he cited the Zionist regime Deputy Foreign Minister, Danny Ayalon's decision to humiliate the Turkish ambassador last year by demonstratively seating him on a low chair.
Dagan made his remarks on the same day that visiting US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta passed on a clear message from his boss in Washington: The United States opposes any Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.
At a joint press conference with Zionist regime's Defense Minister Ehud Barak, Panetta stressed that any steps against Iran's nuclear program must be taken in coordination with the international community.
Panetta cited Iran's nuclear program as number one on the list of issues he had discussed with Barak. He voiced concern not only about the nuclear program, but also about Iran's growing clout in the region and the world.
At the press conference, Panetta also stressed America's deep commitment to Israel's security.
His message for Barak, at their second meeting in two weeks, appeared to be simultaneously embrace and restrain: America is standing by Israel, but an uncoordinated Israeli strike on Iran could spark a regional war. The United States will work to defend Israel, but Israel must behave responsibly.
Washington has been worried by statements various senior Israeli officials have made recently that seemed to take a more aggressive line on Iran.
Earlier, in a conversation with American journalists on the flight over, Panetta had warned that Israel was suffering regional isolation following the crises in its relations with Turkey and Egypt.
Speculation that Israel could also bomb Iran mounted after a big Israeli air drill three years ago. In the first week of June 2008, 100 Israeli F-16 and F-15 fighters reportedly took part in an exercise over the eastern Mediterranean and Greece, which was interpreted as a dress rehearsal for a possible attack on Iran's nuclear installations.
Israel and its close ally the United States accuse Iran of seeking a nuclear weapon, while they have never presented any corroborative document to substantiate their allegations. Both Washington and Tel Aviv possess advanced weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear warheads.
Iran vehemently denies the charges, insisting that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only. Tehran stresses that the country has always pursued a civilian path to provide power to the growing number of Iranian population, whose fossil fuel would eventually run dry.
Iran has warned that it would target Israel and its worldwide interests in case it comes under attack by the Tel Aviv.
The United States has always stressed that military action is a main option for the White House to deter Iran's progress in the field of nuclear technology.
Iran has warned that in case of an attack by either the US or Israel, it will target 32 American bases in the Middle East and close the strategic Strait of Hormoz.
An estimated 40 percent of the world's oil supply passes through the waterway.
Meantime, a recent study by the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS), a prestigious American think tank, has found that a military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities "is unlikely" to delay the country's program.
The ISIS study also cautioned that an attack against Iran would backfire by compelling the country to acquire nuclear weaponry.
A recent study by a fellow at Harvard's Olin Institute for Strategic Studies, Caitlin Talmadge, warned that Iran could use mines as well as missiles to block the strait, and that "it could take many weeks, even months, to restore the full flow of commerce, and more time still for the oil markets to be convinced that stability has returned".
In a Sep. 11, 2008 report, the Washington Institute for the Near East Policy also said that in the two decades since the Iran-Iraq War, the Islamic Republic has excelled in naval capabilities and is able to wage unique asymmetric warfare against larger naval forces.
According to the report, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps Navy (IRGCN) has been transformed into a highly motivated, well-equipped, and well-financed force and is effectively in control of the world's oil lifeline, the Strait of Hormuz.
The study says that if Washington takes military action against the Islamic Republic, the scale of Iran's response would likely be proportional to the scale of the damage inflicted on Iranian assets.
