[osint] Shut down Iran's deadly ambitions
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20049842-7583,00.html Michael Danby: Shut down Iran's deadly ambitions To prevent a possible nuclear war, the Howard Government should consider backing US sanctions against Tehran, even if it hurts our wheat trade in the Middle East, insists Labor MP Michael Danby AUSTRALIA'S ambassador to the UN, Robert Hill, suggested last week that Australia might not back the US in imposing financial sanctions against Iran if sanctions were not approved by the Security Council. Hill's caution focuses Australia on the wider issue behind the present conflict in Lebanon - the role of Iran in instigating the Hezbollah attack on Israel, and its ambitions to become a nuclear power. This is an issue Australia cannot avoid. The role of Iran explains why Israel has responded so strongly to Hezbollah's attacks. Some have seen Israel's response as disproportionate. But whether a country's response to an armed attack is proportionate or not depends on the dimension of the threat it faces. Despite Hezbollah's missiles forcing a million Israelis into shelters or into mass evacuations, the real existential threat to Israel - and not just to Israel - is the longer-term ambition of Hezbollah's sponsors, the regime in Iran. Only last week Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, at the Islamic Conference in Malaysia, made another call for the elimination of Israel. In Australia, both the Government and Opposition have forcefully told the Iranian ambassador that such belligerence is outrageous and will have consequences. Hezbollah's stockpile of 13,000 missiles was provided by Iran and delivered through Syria. As well as its old Soviet Katyushas, Hezbollah has hundreds of Fajr missiles, including some with much greater range than those used so far. These can only have come from Iran. On July 11, the day before Hezbollah launched its barrage and abducted two Israeli soldiers, Iran's nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, met EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana in Brussels and told him that Iran would not meet EU demands to stop its nuclear weapons program. Solana told Larijani the EU would therefore support the US in imposing sanctions on Iran. On his way home, Larijani stopped in Beirut and met senior Hezbollah leaders. At that meeting, Hezbollah was given its orders - attack Israel. The motive for this order is clear: to divert attention from Iran's conflict with the US and the EU over its nuclear weapons program. The proposed ceasefire in Lebanon, desirable though it obviously is from a humanitarian point of view, may retard Iranian activities in Lebanon but is not a comprehensive answer to the wider problem: the role of the Tehran regime. Iran is publicly committed to the destruction of Israel and is bent on the development of nuclear weapons. Its agents are seeking to extend their influence in Iraq. Iran ultimately has its eye on Saudi Arabia's oil provinces, where Shi'a arabs are the majority of the population. Iran and North Korea are the only countries in the world whose leaders openly canvass the use of nuclear weapons. Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, has said the casualties Iran would sustain in a nuclear exchange with Israel would be acceptable if it meant Israel could be eliminated at the same time. It is striking that the EU, antagonistic to both Israel and the policies of the US in the Middle East, has taken such a strong stand on the Iranian nuclear question. France and Germany may not be admirers of the Bush administration but they know a real threat to their security when they see one, and they see one in the fanatic ambitions of the theocrats in Tehran. Unfortunately, Russia and to a lesser extent China are making a lot of money helping Iran develop nuclear capacity. They will almost certainly block any move at the Security Council to impose serious economic sanctions on Iran. This means the burden of imposing sanctions will fall on the US and its allies. Australia will have to decide where it stands. Demands from the Prime Minister's Muslim reference group that Hezbollah be delisted as a terrorist organisation will cut no ice with 95 per cent of the Australian parliament. When parliament voted for this measure, Australia was keenly aware of Hezbollah's role in sponsoring terrorism outside the Middle East. Sanctions on Iran might mean the loss of AWB Ltd's $80million wheat contract there, so we can expect the National Party to take a strong interest. This may explain former National Party leader Tim Fischer's recent criticisms of Israel and the allegedly sinister influence of the Israel lobby. So, back to Australia's role at the UN. If Iran refuses to abandon its nuclear ambitions, and if we are serious about preventing a possible nuclear war initiated by Iran, we should support financial sanctions against that country. Michael Danby is a federal Labor MP, secretary of the caucus national security committee and a member of the parliamentary
[osint] Shut down Iran's deadly ambitions
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20049842-7583,00.html Michael Danby: Shut down Iran's deadly ambitions To prevent a possible nuclear war, the Howard Government should consider backing US sanctions against Tehran, even if it hurts our wheat trade in the Middle East, insists Labor MP Michael Danby AUSTRALIA'S ambassador to the UN, Robert Hill, suggested last week that Australia might not back the US in imposing financial sanctions against Iran if sanctions were not approved by the Security Council. Hill's caution focuses Australia on the wider issue behind the present conflict in Lebanon - the role of Iran in instigating the Hezbollah attack on Israel, and its ambitions to become a nuclear power. This is an issue Australia cannot avoid. The role of Iran explains why Israel has responded so strongly to Hezbollah's attacks. Some have seen Israel's response as disproportionate. But whether a country's response to an armed attack is proportionate or not depends on the dimension of the threat it faces. Despite Hezbollah's missiles forcing a million Israelis into shelters or into mass evacuations, the real existential threat to Israel - and not just to Israel - is the longer-term ambition of Hezbollah's sponsors, the regime in Iran. Only last week Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, at the Islamic Conference in Malaysia, made another call for the elimination of Israel. In Australia, both the Government and Opposition have forcefully told the Iranian ambassador that such belligerence is outrageous and will have consequences. Hezbollah's stockpile of 13,000 missiles was provided by Iran and delivered through Syria. As well as its old Soviet Katyushas, Hezbollah has hundreds of Fajr missiles, including some with much greater range than those used so far. These can only have come from Iran. On July 11, the day before Hezbollah launched its barrage and abducted two Israeli soldiers, Iran's nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, met EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana in Brussels and told him that Iran would not meet EU demands to stop its nuclear weapons program. Solana told Larijani the EU would therefore support the US in imposing sanctions on Iran. On his way home, Larijani stopped in Beirut and met senior Hezbollah leaders. At that meeting, Hezbollah was given its orders - attack Israel. The motive for this order is clear: to divert attention from Iran's conflict with the US and the EU over its nuclear weapons program. The proposed ceasefire in Lebanon, desirable though it obviously is from a humanitarian point of view, may retard Iranian activities in Lebanon but is not a comprehensive answer to the wider problem: the role of the Tehran regime. Iran is publicly committed to the destruction of Israel and is bent on the development of nuclear weapons. Its agents are seeking to extend their influence in Iraq. Iran ultimately has its eye on Saudi Arabia's oil provinces, where Shi'a arabs are the majority of the population. Iran and North Korea are the only countries in the world whose leaders openly canvass the use of nuclear weapons. Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, has said the casualties Iran would sustain in a nuclear exchange with Israel would be acceptable if it meant Israel could be eliminated at the same time. It is striking that the EU, antagonistic to both Israel and the policies of the US in the Middle East, has taken such a strong stand on the Iranian nuclear question. France and Germany may not be admirers of the Bush administration but they know a real threat to their security when they see one, and they see one in the fanatic ambitions of the theocrats in Tehran. Unfortunately, Russia and to a lesser extent China are making a lot of money helping Iran develop nuclear capacity. They will almost certainly block any move at the Security Council to impose serious economic sanctions on Iran. This means the burden of imposing sanctions will fall on the US and its allies. Australia will have to decide where it stands. Demands from the Prime Minister's Muslim reference group that Hezbollah be delisted as a terrorist organisation will cut no ice with 95 per cent of the Australian parliament. When parliament voted for this measure, Australia was keenly aware of Hezbollah's role in sponsoring terrorism outside the Middle East. Sanctions on Iran might mean the loss of AWB Ltd's $80million wheat contract there, so we can expect the National Party to take a strong interest. This may explain former National Party leader Tim Fischer's recent criticisms of Israel and the allegedly sinister influence of the Israel lobby. So, back to Australia's role at the UN. If Iran refuses to abandon its nuclear ambitions, and if we are serious about preventing a possible nuclear war initiated by Iran, we should support financial sanctions against that country. Michael Danby is a federal Labor MP, secretary of the caucus national security committee and a member of the parliamentary
