Via the Scotsman: Israel buys nuclear subs

WITH Iran confidently defying pressure to curb its nuclear programme, Israel has signed a contract with Germany to buy two more submarines capable of firing nuclear missiles, it emerged yesterday.Israeli security sources said the submarines are needed to counter long-range threats from countries such as Iran, whose president has called for Israel to be “wiped off the map”.

This is, of course, exactly the kind of behavior one would expect: as a state perceives a threat it reacts by attempting to counter the threat or, if a direct counter is not possible, it seeks to up the ante on any possible attack. As such: if Tehran were to attack Israel with some future nuclear missile, Israel is signalling that they will have the capacity to strikes back–and not just from within Israel.

Via WaPo we find: U.S. Spy Agencies Criticized On Iran

A key House committee issued a stinging critique of U.S. intelligence on Iran yesterday, charging that the CIA and other agencies lack “the ability to acquire essential information necessary to make judgments” on Tehran’s nuclear program, its intentions or even its ties to terrorism.

The 29-page report, principally written by a Republican staff member on the House intelligence committee who holds a hard-line view on Iran, fully backs the White House position that the Islamic republic is moving forward with a nuclear weapons program and that it poses a significant danger to the United States. But it chides the intelligence community for not providing enough direct evidence to support that assertion.

The report states:

“American intelligence agencies do not know nearly enough about Iran’s nuclear weapons program” to help policymakers at a critical time, the report’s authors say. Information “regarding potential Iranian chemical weapons and biological weapons programs is neither voluminous nor conclusive,” and little evidence has been gathered to tie Iran to al-Qaeda and to the recent fighting between Israel and Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, they say.

And from the NYT we have:

Some senior Bush administration officials and top Republican lawmakers are voicing anger that American spy agencies have not issued more ominous warnings about the threats that they say Iran presents to the United States.

However, if the House committee report has any credence, how can White House officials be grousing about the lack of a warning, since it may well be (indeed, it is likely) that we don’t know enough to issue said warnings?

This all sounds a bit too much like Iraq, where it was clear that many in the administration had decided (indeed, were quite convinced) that Saddam was a WMD threat, and then went looking for the intel to make their case. I don’t think we need to repeat that methodology here.

The bottom line is: if we don’t have solid intel, then upon what are these WH officials basing their claims?

And I find this view to be a bit odd

“Analysts were burned pretty badly during the run-up to the war in Iraq,” said Representative Rush Holt, a New Jersey Democrat who sits on the House Intelligence Committee. “I’m not surprised that some in the intelligence community are a bit gun-shy about appearing to be war mongering.”

Or, perhaps, they learned that they need to make a better case this time and not be pressured into reaching a specific conclusion.

The Jerusalem Post reports that Report: Iran planning nuclear ’surprise’.

Now, while one does not want to ignore the real threat posed by Iran, I will note that this reminds we of previous posturing by Iran on this subject (and indeed, is generically reminiscent of the claims of communist regimes of yore when they wanted to either get the international community’s attention or, more likely, boost the morale of their citizens).

Indeed, we should recall that back in April the Iranians held a huge rally to announced that they had “joined the nuclear club”–yet in reality they had only made a small step forward in uranium enrichment. At the time I opined that Iran was suffering from a national inferiority complex and noted:

Most countries have less pomp and circumstance at presidential inaugurations than the Iranians had yesterday with the colorfully garbed individuals holding up cylinders meant to represent enriched uranium.

We should also recall the claim (sans evidence, I would note) made by Iran that they have developed some sort of stealth missiles.

When trying to come to a reasonable understanding of what Iran is doing, it is important to remember that this entire enterprise is about, in large measure, prestige–both in the international community and at home. To be a nuclear power is to advance to a new level of international importance that has significance well beyond any issues of actual military usage.

While I would prefer, in the extreme, that regimes such as Iran’s and North Korea’s would not acquire nuclear weapons, I would note that it would a mistake to assume that the only reason (or even the main reason) that they are trying to acquire them is to use them. It is clear that nuclear powers are treated differently in the international system than non-nuclear powers. That Iran wants to join that club is wholly understandable, even if it is also disconcerting.

If anything, this promise of a “surprise” is probably all about PR.

Via Reuters: Iran set to reject key demand

Iran, set to reply on Tuesday to an offer by world powers aimed at defusing a nuclear standoff, has insisted it would not stop enriching uranium as they demand by an August 31 deadline to avoid possible sanctions.

Refusing to suspend the work, which Iran says is aimed only at generating electricity but which the West sees as a disguised bid for atom bombs, would be tantamount to rejecting the package of incentives offered in return, Western diplomats say.

If you are shocked by this, I have some oceanfront property in Arizonia I’d like to sell you. I bought it from a Nigerian Prince via e-mail.

Via the AP: Iranian leader bans usage of foreign words

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has ordered government and cultural bodies to use modified Persian words to replace foreign words that have crept into the language, such as “pizzas” which will now be known as “elastic loaves,” state media reported Saturday.

The presidential decree, issued earlier this week, orders all governmental agencies, newspapers and publications to use words deemed more appropriate by the official language watchdog, the Farhangestan Zaban e Farsi, or Persian Academy, the Irna official news agency reported.

What a nice, totalitarian move (of course, the French often engage in the same type of behavior).

I would share a few choice foreign words with Ahmadinejad right now, but this is a family blog.

Many of you may recall the Books for Baghdad project that I noted here at PoliBlog originally two years ago.

Dr. Safaa al-Hamdani of Jacksonville State University recently e-mailed me the following updates on the program.

Update: Books for Baghdad Project No. 2

and

Shipment of Books for Baghdad University Underway

Hans Blix — you may remember the name — comes out with a startling revelation here.

He says nuclear weapons are dangerous, and would like to get rid of them.

A study led by former U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix called Thursday for outlawing nuclear weapons and reviving global cooperation on disarmament including security guarantees to curb the nuclear programs in Iran and North Korea.

* * *

But he said “we are going to have to come much further in the area of a settlement of the Middle East before this can be a possibility.”

No kidding. So two news flashes in a row: (1) Nuclear weapons are dangerous, and (2) the Middle East may be a problem. My goodness, this study is certainly shaping up to be a standard UN one. It took a long time, cost a lot of money, and then reports things that are either known by everyone, have no real solution offered, or both.

If only there were some way to blame the US, it would be the perfect UN report. Oh, wait.

In the broader effort to free the world of weapons of mass destruction, the commission said the single most important thing that countries can do is to ratify the nuclear test ban treaty, which the U.S. Senate has rejected.

“We don’t see any sign of that here in the current administration, and the U.S. is opposed to a ratification but the reality is probably that if the U.S. were to ratify then China would, if China did then India would, if India did Pakistan would, if Pakistan did then Iran would. So it would set in motion a good domino effect,” Blix said.

Perfect.

Yes, if we just signed the treaty, then the elves would come and spread pixie dust, and they would fix all the shoes and replace the missiles in North Korea and Iran with ponies, and . . .

I do apologize to the readers expecting Steven T.’s more thoughtful analysis, but this has been a long week and frankly, I cannot see that this report merits a thoughtful response. North Korea signed a treaty in the 90’s, then promptly broke it. Their leader had no intention of *ever* following through on it. the USSR broke arms control treaties whenever it felt like it benefited from such a breach. It is baffling that Mr. Blix feels that this next treaty will somehow be magically different.

Unless you believe the elf theory.

In regards to the bogus story about the Iranianss putting Jews and other non-Muslims to wear distinctive clothing, James Joyner notes the following chilling notion:

It’s classic pre-war propaganda.

That isn’t a comforting thought.

See Jim Henley for more.

Via the BBC: Iraq warns on Iran border moves

Iraq has expressed concern about troop build-ups by both Iranian and Turkish forces along their borders with Iraq.

Outgoing Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said Iran had been told of Iraqi concerns but said his country wanted to resolve any problems through dialogue.

Like Turkey, Iran has its own Kurdish population, and it is likely that the build-up in that area of the Iran-Iraq border is solely related to security concerns on that issue, should Iraq fall into full civil war in such a way that the Kurds might seek autonomy–a move that could spark secessionist movements in Kurdish Turkey and Iran.

If this is the motivation, then it is a reasonable security precaution being made by the Iranians. Indeed, this seems to be the case:

Recent weeks have seen a number of cross-border bombardments by Iranian troops along Iraq’s north-east border, directed against Iranian Kurdish opposition groups taking refuge in the Iraqi Kurdish area.

Now, cross-border bombardments is another matter, as such moves are a violation of Iraqi sovereignty.

The piece notes that the Turks have similarly built up forces on their border with northern Iraq as well

Via Reuters: Iran spurns UN pressure in nuclear dispute.

And I so thought they would listen.