Dishonest Intelligence

In December of 2007, I wrote an article about the National Intelligence Estimate that had just concluded that Iran had abandoned its nuclear weapons program back in 2003. The immediate effect of this pollyanna-ish report was to diminish the need for tough sanctions against Iran and take the military option off the table. We now know that the conclusion reached in the report was categorically false, and that those who issued the report knew it was false.

I entitled my December 2007 article "Stupid Intelligence," because as I argued in it, its author had fallen hook, line and sinker for a transparent "bait and switch" tactic employed by Iran.

The tactic is obvious and well-known to all intelligence officials with an IQ above room temperature.  It goes like this: There are two tracks to making nuclear weapons: One is to conduct research and develop technology directly related to military use... [T]he second track is to develop nuclear technology for civilian use and then to use the civilian technology for military purposes." 

It was clear to many perceptive readers of the report, and to most other intelligence agencies, that Iran had simply - and deceptively - opted for the second track, and had certainly not abandoned its nuclear weapons program.

It now turns out that at the time this "stupid intelligence" estimate was released, our intelligence agencies were aware that the Iranians were building a secret military facility buried deep in the mountains near the holy city of Qom. The United States recently disclosed the existence of this facility (after Iran was forced to acknowledge its existence) together with its firm conclusion that it could be used only for the development of a nuclear weapons program. If the intelligence community knew then what they know now, then its 2007 National Intelligence Estimate was not only stupid, it was dishonest.

Read the rest of this post   |  Comments (34)

Taking a stand against Iran

Irwin Cotler, the former minister of justice and attorney general of Canada, member of Canadian parliament and co-author of this piece, is introducing legislation in Canadian parliament today called the "Iran Accountability Act." While it expressly holds Iran to account - for its genocidal threats, nuclear ambitions and domestic repressions - it can also function to hold any signatory to the Genocide Convention to account. All signatories to the 1948 Genocide Convention (including the United States) have a responsibility to prevent genocide - and to punish incitement to genocide-  that they have largely ignored in the case of the world’s greatest threat. The IAA, while a Canadian initiative, is a template model as to how to fulfill these responsibilities and take a stand against Iranian criminal actions.

Read the rest of this post   |  Comments (22)

Obama's got it exactly backwards

Although President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu got along quite well at their White House meeting last week, each has made demands that the other seems unwilling or unable to meet. Peace seems no closer, even after the warm encounter.

The 800 pound gorilla at the Oval Office meeting was Iran's nuclear program. That became self-evidently clear when, within days of the meeting, Iran deliberately fired a solid fuel rocket and challenged the United States and Israel to do something about it. Ahmadinejad linked the rocket-launching to Iran's nuclear program, as if to allay any doubts that Iran intends to place nuclear payloads on these hard-to-detect rockets.

Read the rest of this post   |  Comments (78)

No linkage between Iran and Palestinians

Rahm Emanuel is a good man and a good friend of Israel, but in a highly publicized recent statement he linked American efforts to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons to Israeli efforts toward establishing a Palestinian state. This is a dangerous linkage.

I have long favored the two-state solution, as do most Israelis and American supporters of Israel. I have also long opposed civilian settlements deep into the West Bank. I hope that Israel does make efforts, as it has in the past, to establish a Palestinian state as part of an overall peace between the Jewish state and its Arab and Muslim neighbors.

Read the rest of this post   |  Comments (43)

Israel's actions are lawful and commendable

Israel's military actions in Gaza are entirely justified under international law, and Israel should be commended for its act of self-defense against international terrorism. Article 51 of the United Nations Charter reserves to every nation the right to engage in self-defense against armed attacks. The only limitation international law places on a democracy is that its actions must satisfy the principle of proportionality. Israel's actions certainly satisfy that principles.

When Barack Obama visited the city of Sderot this summer, he saw the same things that I had seen during my visit on March 20 of this year. Over the last four years, Palestinian terrorists - in particular, Hamas and Islamic Jihad - have fired more than two thousand rockets at this civilian area, which is home to mostly poor and working-class people. The rockets are designed exclusively to maximize civilian deaths, and some have barely missed schoolyards, kindergartens, hospitals, and school buses. But others hit their targets, killing more than a dozen civilians since 2001, including in February 2008 a father of four who had been studying at the local university. These anticivilian rockets have also injured and traumatized countless children.

Read the rest of this post   |  Comments (210)

Why I support Israel and Obama

I am a strong supporter of Israel (though sometimes critical of specific policies). I am also a strong supporter of Barack Obama (though I favored Hillary Clinton during the primaries). I am now getting dozens of emails asking me how as a supporter of Israel I can vote for Barack Obama. Let me explain. 

I think that on the important issues relating to Israel, both Senator McCain and Senator Obama score very high. During the debates each candidate has gone out of his and her way to emphasize strong support for Israel as an American ally and a bastion of democracy in a dangerous neighborhood. They have also expressed support for Israel's right to defend itself against the nuclear threat posed by Iran which has sworn to wipe Israel off the map and the need to prevent another Holocaust. 

Read the rest of this post   |  Comments (144)

Questions for Walt and Mearsheimer

Professors Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer have been invited to speak at Hebrew University. They will continue to pedal their bigoted drivel about the iron grip, the Jewish lobby - which they call the "Israel Lobby," in capital letters - holds over American foreign policy. They will claim, as they did in their previous writings, that Israel's birth was an original sin and crime, that Israel holds the moral low ground, and that if the cause of Israel were in any way deserving of American support, it would not need a lobby. They don't make similar claims about the powerful Saudi lobby or the numerous other lobbies that have been part of America since the days of Thomas Jefferson. If just causes did not need lobbies, then it would follow that the causes of civil rights, civil liberties, gay rights, environmental rights, the rights of the elderly, etc. would all be unjust since each of them has high-powered and effective lobbies. 

Read the rest of this post   |  Comments (56)

British intelligence smarter than US' - and than Gary Hart

Anyone who doubts that Iran is determined to develop deliverable nuclear weapons should not be in position of decision making or influence.  The evidence is as clear as can be, despite the "fog of peace" artificially constructed by the recent National Intelligence Estimate issued by our government's collective intelligence agencies. It may be true, as the estimate concludes, that in 2003 the Iranian shifted from a single track approach to a duel track approach - from taking direct steps toward building the bomb to taking indirect steps that have both civilian and military applications. But it does not follow that either the goal of the program, or even its schedule, has changed significantly. 

As I demonstrated in a previous blog, nothing has really changed with regard to the Iranian nuclear threat since 2003 except that Iran is closer today than it was then to developing a nuclear bomb. 

Yet our intelligence community seems to have fallen for Iran’s version of two-card monte. Either that, or they are deliberately trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the American public in order to discourage what they believed was a drum-beat for a preemptive attack on Iranian nuclear facilities.

One prominent public figure who seems entirely willing to pull the wool over his own eyes, and those of his readers, is former senator and former presidential hopeful Gary Hart. 

Read the rest of this post   |  Comments (48)

Stupid Intelligence

The recent national intelligence estimate that concluded that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 is just about the most stupid intelligence assessment I have ever read. It falls hook, line and sinker for a transparent bait-and-switch tactic employed not only by Iran, but by several other nuclear powers in the past.

The tactic is obvious and well-known to all intelligence officials with an IQ above room temperature. It goes like this: There are two tracks to making nuclear weapons: One is to conduct research and develop technology directly related to military use. That is what the United States did when it developed the atomic bomb during the Manhattan Project. The second track is to develop nuclear technology for civilian use and then to use the civilian technology for military purposes.

Read the rest of this post   |  Comments (2)