Obama Ordered Stuxnet Virus. Impeachable Offense?

Obama Ordered Stuxnet Virus, Part of Organized Cyberattacks Against Iran

Cyberattacks Escalated Obama's cyberattack order significantly expands the historical use of cyberweapons in the United States. Wikimedia Commons

According to a report today in the New York Times, President Obama secretly ordered accelerated cyberattacks against the computers running Iran's nuclear enrichment facilities.

Started by the Bush administration in 2006, the stealth operation went under the handle "Olympic Games" and a major part of the project, a worm planted by spies meant to knock out enrichment facilities, went public in the summer of 2010 when the worm escaped Iran's Natanz plant because of a programming error and made it into the Internet. The president and other members of the administration then considered shutting it down, but ultimately let it continue. Two new versions of the worm hit the plant in the coming weeks and at one point shut down 1,000 of the 5,000 centrifuges Iran was using to purify uranium. After that, the worm was discovered -- though its source was unknown -- and named Stuxnet. Observers marveled at how advanced the malware was.

According to the report, it's since been shut down, but Olympic Games as a whole is marching on.

[New York Times]

source: CLICK HERE

Stuxnet virus origin confirmed: USA and Israeli governments

This week it has been confirmed that the computer virus known as Stuxnet which spread accidentally across the global internet in 2010 was created originally by the governments of the United States and Israel to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities. The worm was originally created to sabotage and shake apart Iran’s nuclear program, and was part of a larger program code-named “Olympic Games.” This virus became public after what’s assumed to have been a rogue laptop transported the virus out to the global web.

The new information we have today comes from a New York Times article created after 18 months of interviews with “American, European and Israeli officials involved in the program, as well as a range of outside experts.” The New York Times notes that none of the names of the people they interviewed will be shared due to the “highly classified” nature of the program.

Interviewees suggest that the effort was actually successful in setting back Iran’s nuclear weapons program “18 months to two years” despite the accidental leak of the virus at the center of it all. To get the worm into the Iranian facility they’d targeted, Stuxnet was placed on a USB flash drive.

“Getting the worm into Natanz, however, was no easy trick. The United States and Israel would have to rely on engineers, maintenance workers and others—both spies and unwitting accomplices—with physical access to the plant. “That was our holy grail,” one of the architects of the plan said. “It turns out there is always an idiot around who doesn’t think much about the thumb drive in their hand.”" – NYT

Since the software “escaped”, a word used many times in this report, the Stuxnet code was “found then disassembled by security researchers” according to Ars Technica. It appears though that the United States government has things well in hand at this point outside this situation – but do acknowledge the threat for the future.

“He repeatedly expressed concerns that any American acknowledgment that it was using cyberweapons — even under the most careful and limited circumstances — could enable other countries, terrorists or hackers to justify their own attacks. “We discussed the irony, more than once,” one of his aides said.” – NYT

read more HERE 

Stuxnet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Stuxnet is a computer worm discovered in June 2010 that is believed to have been created by the United States 

and Israel to attack Iran's nuclear facilities. Stuxnet initially spreads via Microsoft Windows, and targets Siemens

industrial software and equipment. While it is not the first time that hackers have targeted industrial systems,^[1] 

it is the first discovered malware that spies on and subverts industrial systems,^[2] and the first to include a 

programmable logic controller (PLC) rootkit.^[3][4]

The worm initially spreads indiscriminately, but includes a highly specialized malware payload that is designed to 

target only Siemens supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems that are configured to control and 

monitor specific industrial processes.^[5][6] Stuxnet infects PLCs by subverting the Step-7 software application that 

is used to reprogram these devices.^[7][8]

Different variants of Stuxnet targeted five Iranian organizations,^[9] with the probable target widely suspected to be 

uranium enrichment infrastructure in Iran;^[8][10][11] Symantec noted in August 2010 that 60% of the infected 

computers worldwide were in Iran.^[12] Siemens stated that the worm has not caused any damage to its 

customers,^[13] but the Iran nuclear program, which uses embargoed Siemens equipment procured secretly, has 

been damaged by Stuxnet.^[14][15] Kaspersky Lab concluded that the sophisticated attack could only have been 

conducted "with nation-state support".^[16] This was further supported by the F-Secure's chief researcher 

Mikko Hyppönen who commented in a Stuxnet FAQ, "That's what it would look like, yes".^[17]It has been 

speculated that Israel^[18] and the United States may have been involved.^[19][20]

In May 2011, the PBS program Need To Know cited a statement by Gary Samore, White House Coordinator for 

Arms Control and Weapons of Mass Destruction, in which he said, "we're glad they [the Iranians] are having 

trouble with their centrifuge machine and that we – the US and its allies – are doing everything we can to make 

sure that we complicate matters for them", offering "winking acknowledgement" of US involvement in Stuxnet.^[21] 

According to The Daily Telegraph, a showreel that was played at a retirement party for the head of the Israel 

Defense Forces (IDF), Gabi Ashkenazi, included references to Stuxnet as one of his operational successes as 

the IDF chief of staff.^[18]

On 1 June 2012, an article in The New York Times said that Stuxnet is part of a U.S. and Israeli intelligence 

operation called "Operation Olympic Games", started under President George W. Bush and expanded under 

President Barack Obama.^[22]

On 24 July 2012, an article by Chris Matyszczyk from cnet^[23] reported how the Atomic Energy Organization of 

Iran e-mailed F-Secure's chief research officer Mikko Hyppönen to report a new instance of malware.

On 25 December 2012, an Iranian semi-official news agency announced there was a cyberattack by Stuxnet,

 this time on the industries in the southern area of the country. The virus targeted a power plant and some other

 industries in Hormozgan province in recent months.^[24]

Affected countries

A study of the spread of Stuxnet by Symantec showed that the main affected countries in the early days of the 

infection were Iran, Indonesia and India:^[32]

Country	Infected computers
Iran	58.85%
Indonesia	18.22%
India	8.31%
Azerbaijan	2.57%
United States	1.56%
Pakistan	1.28%
Others	9.2%

Iran was reported to have "beefed up" its cyberwar capabilities following the Stuxnet attack, and has been 

suspected of retaliatory attacks against U.S. banks.^[33]

READ MORE HERE

Expect A War With Iran By Summer. This Forecasted By Russian General.

Russian General Forecasts attack on Iran by Summer
Moscow, Feb 14 (Prensa Latina) An attack against Iran could be made next summer, said Tuesday the Russian Chief of Staff, Army General Nikolai Makarov, mentioned by channel Russia Today.   When referring to the strong tensions created around the nuclear program of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Makarov pointed out that western countries, mainly the military in Washington and Tel Aviv, prepare a war action against the Persian country for April or June. The argument for the aggression, that Teheran considers was manufactured artificially to justify a war, refers to the supposed Iranian attempt of developing a nuclear program with military objectives. But Iran defends its right to use atomic energy with peaceful ends and to produce fuel for its nuclear facilities. Western countries react with rage and more unilateral sanctions against the Iranian government every time that it refers to new programs to develop the atomic energy and reiterate its peaceful character, said the source. Makarov remembered that Iran was the target of cybernetic attacks, while several of its scientists were victims of attacks which responsibility Teheran attributes to Israeli intelligence. The Iranian authorities captured a US spy drone, mentioned the high Russian official. Also, United States maintains a great concentration of naval forces in the Persian Gulf and in the Strait of Ormuz, while Tel Aviv accuses Iran now of being after supposed attempts of organizing attacks to Israeli embassies in Tiflis and New Delhi. The Russian general considered that when a conflict in Iran starts, it could extend on the whole Middle East with a domino effect and with unpredictable consequences, with possibility of becoming an international confrontation.

Source: PlengLish.com

West may strike Iran by summer - Russian Gen-Staff Chief

Russia’s top military boss says an attack against Iran, which the west suspects of developing nuclear weapons, could begin as early as summer.

Thus far, tensions between Tehran and the west have been confined to the battlefield of heated rhetoric. Russia’s highest ranking military officer, however, predicts it may be just a matter of time before the verbal grenades get real.

The Russian General Staff is closely watching the situation, and is not ruling out the possibility of a coordinated attack on the Islamic Republic, General Nikolay Makarov, head of the Russian General Staff, told reporters on Tuesday.

"Iran is a sore spot,” Makarov noted. “I think a decision will be made by the summer."
If Makarov is correct in his estimations, the situation in the region – overwhelmed as it is with political crises and war – could spin rapidly out of control. Indeed, some are warning that an attack on Iran could trigger a domino effect across the Middle East, possibly even culminating in another world war.

In the slide towards escalating violence, there have been a string of disturbing incidents, including alleged cyber attacks against Iran, as well as the downing of a sophisticated US drone, which Iran says it guided to the ground after electronically hacking into the vehicle.

Then there are the mysterious assassinations.

In January, Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, 31, who supervised a department at the Natanz uranium enrichment facility, was killed by a car bomb in northern Tehran.

Exactly two years earlier, Masoud Ali Mohammadi, a senior physics professor at Tehran University, was killed when a bomb-rigged motorcycle exploded beside his car as he was about to leave for work.
Iran blamed Israeli intelligence for the killings.

In the latest ratcheting up of tensions, Israel on Monday blamed Iran for masterminding attacks against Israeli embassies in Tbilisi and New Delhi.  Following the incidences, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called Iran "the world's greatest exporter of terror."

Clearly, this game of tit-for-tat can readily explode into all-out conflict, which would be a worst-case scenario not just for the region, but for the entire world.

In November, US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta warned that military action against Iran could have “unintended consequences” in the region.

Panetta, like his Russian counterpart, believes that the decision to attack Iran may be imminent.

Washington Post columnist David Ignatius wrote earlier this month that Panetta "believes there is a strong likelihood that Israel will strike Iran in April, May or June before Iran enters what Israelis described as a 'zone of immunity' to commence building a nuclear bomb."

US and French naval vessels are already prowling the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz, and with Iranian patrol boats nearby the situation could rapidly deteriorate.

Russia is adamantly opposed to any military action against Iran, though Moscow has supported UN Security Council sanctions against Tehran in an effort to force the Islamic Republic to cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Meanwhile, Benjamin Netanyahu is working overtime to get US President Barack Obama onboard the campaign against Iran. And it will not hurt his fierce lobbying efforts that the Democrats and Republicans – the only  game in town – are stockpiling ammunition for presidential elections in November.

Thanks to the hawkish neoconservative philosophy that has hijacked traditional conservative thinking (which, to his credit, Ron Paul genuinely represents), President Obama can expect to be accused of “going weak on Iran” if he proposes anything short of war.

Thus, Russia’s top military commander may be right: the overstretched US military and its budget-broke NATO allies may find themselves fighting yet another senseless war with unknown consequences very soon.
Robert Bridge, RT

Source:Reuters

Iran war in summer: Russian army boss

Wednesday, 15 February 2012

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

February 15:

Russia’s highest ranking military officer says a military strike against Iran over the country’s nuclear program could begin as early as summer.
The head of the Russian General Staff, General Nikolai Makarov, said Moscow is closely watching the situation and is not ruling out the possibility of a coordinated attack on Iran, Russia Today reported.

"Iran is a sore spot," the general told reporters on Tuesday. "I think a decision will be made by the summer."

The prediction comes as anti-Iran war rhetoric has been intensified during the past months after the US and its Western allies failed to stop Iran’s peaceful nuclear energy program by imposing sanctions.

The United States has repeatedly said no options have been taken off the table regarding Iran.
On Tuesday (14 February), the American aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln passed through the Strait of Hormuz shadowed by Iranian patrol boats.

Meanwhile, Commander of the US Navy base in Bahrain Vice Admiral Mark Fox warned on Sunday that US forces are prepared for a strike against Iran.

"We have built a wide range of options to give the president and we are ready... We are ready today," he said.

Tehran said it would shut down the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic and vital shipping route, after the US and its European allies imposed new unilateral sanctions against the country’s oil and financial sectors.

The commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps, Major General Mohammad Ali Jafari, has said Iran has chosen intelligent control of the Strait of Hormuz as its main strategy to counter foreign threats and sanctions.

The US and Israel have repeatedly threatened Tehran with the "option" of a military strike, saying Iran's nuclear program may include a covert military aspect, a claim strongly rejected by Tehran.

------Agencies

Source: Siasat.com

Iran and the Crisis With The Strait of Hormuz

Iran, the U.S. and the Strait of Hormuz Crisis

January 17, 2012
By George Friedman
The United States reportedly sent a letter to Iran via multiple intermediaries last week warning Tehran that any attempt to close the Strait of Hormuz constituted a red line for Washington. The same week, a chemist associated with Iran's nuclear program was killed in Tehran. In Ankara, Iranian parliamentary speaker Ali Larijani met with Turkish officials and has been floating hints of flexibility in negotiations over Iran's nuclear program.

This week, a routine rotation of U.S. aircraft carriers is taking place in the Middle East, with the potential for three carrier strike groups to be on station in the U.S. Fifth Fleet's area of operations and a fourth carrier strike group based in Japan about a week's transit from the region. Next week, Gen. Michael Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, will travel to Israel to meet with senior Israeli officials. And Iran is scheduling another set of war games in the Persian Gulf for February that will focus on the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps' irregular tactics for closing the Strait of Hormuz.

While tensions are escalating in the Persian Gulf, the financial crisis in Europe has continued, with downgrades in France's credit rating the latest blow. Meanwhile, China continued its struggle to maintain exports in the face of economic weakness among its major customers while inflation continued to increase the cost of Chinese exports.

Fundamental changes in how Europe and China work and their long-term consequences represent the major systemic shifts in the international system. In the more immediate future, however, the U.S.-Iranian dynamic has the most serious potential consequences for the world.

The U.S.-Iranian Dynamic

The increasing tensions in the region are not unexpected. As we have argued for some time, the U.S. invasion of Iraq and the subsequent decision to withdraw created a massive power vacuum in Iraq that Iran needed -- and was able -- to fill. Iran and Iraq fought a brutal war in the 1980s that caused about 1 million Iranian casualties, and Iran's fundamental national interest is assuring that no Iraqi regime able to threaten Iranian national security re-emerges. The U.S. invasion and withdrawal from Iraq provided Iran an opportunity to secure its western frontier, one it could not pass on.

If Iran does come to have a dominant influence in Iraq -- and I don't mean Iran turning Iraq into a satellite -- several things follow. Most important, the status of the Arabian Peninsula is subject to change. On paper, Iran has the most substantial conventional military force of any nation in the Persian Gulf. Absent outside players, power on paper is not insignificant. While technologically sophisticated, the military strength of the Arabian Peninsula nations on paper is much smaller, and they lack the Iranian military's ideologically committed manpower.

But Iran's direct military power is more the backdrop than the main engine of Iranian power. It is the strength of Tehran's covert capabilities and influence that makes Iran significant. Iran's covert intelligence capability is quite good. It has spent decades building political alliances by a range of means, and not only by nefarious methods. The Iranians have worked among the Shia, but not exclusively so; they have built a network of influence among a range of classes and religious and ethnic groups. And they have systematically built alliances and relationships with significant figures to counter overt U.S. power. With U.S. military power departing Iraq, Iran's relationships become all the more valuable.

The withdrawal of U.S. forces has had a profound psychological impact on the political elites of the Persian Gulf. Since the decline of British power after World War II, the United States has been the guarantor of the Arabian Peninsula's elites and therefore of the flow of oil from the region. The foundation of that guarantee has been military power, as seen in the response to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990. The United States still has substantial military power in the Persian Gulf, and its air and naval forces could likely cope with any overt provocation by Iran.

But that's not how the Iranians operate. For all their rhetoric, they are cautious in their policies. This does not mean they are passive. It simply means that they avoid high-risk moves. They will rely on their covert capabilities and relationships. Those relationships now exist in an environment in which many reasonable Arab leaders see a shift in the balance of power, with the United States growing weaker and less predictable in the region and Iran becoming stronger. This provides fertile soil for Iranian allies to pressure regional regimes into accommodations with Iran.

The Syrian Angle

Events in Syria compound this situation. The purported imminent collapse of Syrian President Bashar al Assad's regime in Syria has proved less imminent than many in the West imagined. At the same time, the isolation of the al Assad regime by the West -- and more important, by other Arab countries -- has created a situation where the regime is more dependent than ever on Iran.

Should the al Assad regime -- or the Syrian regime without al Assad -- survive, Iran would therefore enjoy tremendous influence with Syria, as well as with Hezbollah in Lebanon. The current course in Iraq coupled with the survival of an Alawite regime in Syria would create an Iranian sphere of influence stretching from western Afghanistan to the Mediterranean. This would represent a fundamental shift in the regional balance of power and probably would redefine Iranian relations with the Arabian Peninsula. This is obviously in Iran's interest. It is not in the interests of the United States, however.

The United States has sought to head this off via a twofold response. Clandestinely, it has engaged in an active campaign of sabotage and assassination targeting Iran's nuclear efforts. Publicly, it has created a sanctions regime against Iran, most recently targeting Iran's oil exports. However, the latter effort faces many challenges.
Japan, the No. 2 buyer of Iranian crude, has pledged its support but has not outlined concrete plans to reduce its purchases. The Chinese and Indians -- Iran's No. 1 and 3 buyers of crude, respectively -- will continue to buy from Iran despite increased U.S. pressure. In spite of U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's visit last week, the Chinese are not prepared to impose sanctions, and the Russians are not likely to enforce sanctions even if they agreed to them. Turkey is unwilling to create a confrontation with Iran and is trying to remain a vital trade conduit for the Iranians regardless of sanctions. At the same time, while the Europeans seem prepared to participate in harder-hitting sanctions on Iranian oil, they already have delayed action on these sanctions and certainly are in no position politically or otherwise to participate in military action. The European economic crisis is at root a political crisis, so even if the Europeans could add significant military weight, which they generally lack, concerted action of any sort is unlikely.

Neither, for that matter, does the United States have the ability to do much militarily. Invading Iran is out of the question. The mountainous geography of Iran, a nation of about 70 million people, makes direct occupation impossible given available American forces.

Air operations against Iran are an option, but they could not be confined to nuclear facilities. Iran still doesn't have nuclear weapons, and while nuclear weapons would compound the strategic problem, the problem would still exist without them. The center of gravity of Iran's power is the relative strength of its conventional forces in the region. Absent those, Iran would be less capable of wielding covert power, as the psychological matrix would shift.

An air campaign against Iran's conventional forces would play to American military strengths, but it has two problems. First, it would be an extended campaign, one lasting months. Iran's capabilities are large and dispersed, and as seen in Desert Storm and Kosovo against weaker opponents, such operations take a long time and are not guaranteed to be effective. Second, the Iranians have counters. One, of course, is the Strait of Hormuz. The second is the use of its special operations forces and allies in and out of the region to conduct terrorist attacks. An extended air campaign coupled with terrorist attacks could increase distrust of American power rather than increase it among U.S. allies, to say nothing of the question of whether Washington could sustain political support in a coalition or within the United States itself.

The Covert Option

The United States and Israel both have covert options as well. They have networks of influence in the region and highly capable covert forces, which they have said publicly that they would use to limit Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons without resorting to overt force. We assume, though we lack evidence, that the assassination of the Iranian chemist associated with the country's nuclear program last week was either a U.S. or Israeli operation or some combination of the two. Not only did it eliminate a scientist, it also bred insecurity and morale problems among those working on the program. It also signaled the region that the United States and Israel have options inside Iran.

The U.S. desire to support an Iranian anti-government movement generally has failed. Tehran showed in 2009 that it could suppress demonstrations, and it was obvious that the demonstrators did not have the widespread support needed to overcome such repression. Though the United States has sought to support internal dissidents in Iran since 1979, it has not succeeded in producing a meaningful threat to the clerical regime. Therefore, covert operations are being aimed directly at the nuclear program with the hope that successes there might ripple through other, more immediately significant sectors.

As we have long argued, the Iranians already have a "nuclear option," namely, the prospect of blockading the Strait of Hormuz, through which roughly 35 percent of seaborne crude and 20 percent of the world's traded oil passes daily. Doing so would hurt them, too, of course. But failing to deter an air or covert campaign, they might choose to close off the strait. Temporarily disrupting the flow of oil, even intermittently, could rapidly create a global economic crisis given the fragility of the world economy.

The United States does not want to see that. Washington will be extremely cautious in its actions unless it can act with a high degree of assurance that it can prevent such a disruption, something difficult to guarantee. It also will restrain Israel, which might have the ability to strike at a few nuclear facilities but lacks the force to completely eliminate the program much less target Iran's conventional capability and manage the consequences of that strike in the Strait of Hormuz. Only the United States could do all that, and given the possible consequences, it will be loathe to attempt it.

The United States continues, therefore, with sanctions and covert actions while Iran continues building its covert power in Iraq and in the region. Each will try to convince the region that its power will be supreme in a year. The region is skeptical of both, but will have to live with one of the two, or with an ongoing test of wills -- an unnerving prospect. Each side is seeking to magnify its power for psychological effect without crossing a red line that prompts the other to take extreme measures. Iran signals its willingness to attempt to close Hormuz and its development of nuclear weapons, but it doesn't cross the line to actually closing the strait or detonating a nuclear device. The United States pressures Iran and moves forces around, but it doesn't cross the red line of commencing military actions. Thus, each avoids triggering unacceptable actions by the other.
The problem for the United States is that the status quo ultimately works against it. If al Assad survives and if the situation in Iraq proceeds as it has been proceeding, then Iran is creating a reality that will define the region. The United States does not have a broad and effective coalition, and certainly not one that would rally in the event of war. It has only Israel, and Israel is as uneasy with direct military action as the United States is. It does not want to see a failed attack and it does not want to see more instability in the Arab world. For all its rhetoric, Israel has a weak hand to play. The only virtue of the American hand is that it is stronger -- but only relatively speaking.

For the United States, preventing the expansion of an Iranian sphere of influence is a primary concern. Iraq is going to be a difficult arena to stop Iran's expansion. Syria therefore is key at present. Al Assad appears weak, and his replacement by a Sunni government would limit -- but not destroy -- any Iranian sphere of influence. It would be a reversal for Iran, and the United States badly needs to apply one. But the problem is that the United States cannot be seen as the direct agent of regime change in Syria, and al Assad is not as weak as has been claimed. Even so, Syria is where the United States can work to block Iran without crossing Iran's red lines.

The normal outcome of a situation like this one, in which neither Iran nor the United States can afford to cross the other's red lines since the consequences would be too great for each, would be some sort of negotiation toward a longer-term accommodation. Ideology aside -- and the United States negotiating with the "Axis of Evil" or Iran with the "Great Satan" would be tough sells to their respective domestic audiences -- the problem with this is that it is difficult to see what each has to offer the other. What Iran wants -- a dominant position in the region and a redefinition of how oil revenues are allocated and distributed -- would make the United States dependent on Iran. What the United States wants -- an Iran that does not build a sphere of influence but instead remains within its borders -- would cost Iran a historic opportunity to assert its longstanding claims.

read more here Stratfor.com

Iran Successfully Test-fires Missiles

THIS SHOULD NOT BE A SURPRISE TO ANYONE KEEPING UP WITH CURRENT EVENTS.  WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THIS ACTION AND WHAT DO YOU THINK THE ACTION OF THE UNITED STATES AND OTHER COUNTRIES SHOULD BE?

Iran test-fires missiles in Gulf exercise

Says it has no intention of closing the Strait of Hormuz, but has carried out mock exercises on shutting it

Ramin Mostafavi/Reuters 

Tehran: Iran on Monday said it had successfully test-fired what it described as two long-range missiles, flexing its military muscle in the face of mounting Western pressure over its nuclear programme.

Building firepower: Iran’s semi-official Fars news agency says the Qader missile’s range was only 200km, and no figure was given for the Nour. Photo: Reuters

The announcement came at the climax of 10 days of naval exercises in the Gulf, during which Tehran has warned it could shut the Strait of Hormuz, through which 40% of world oil is shipped, if sanctions were imposed on its crude exports.

Analysts say Iran’s increasingly strident rhetoric, which has pushed oil prices higher, is aimed at sending a message to the West that it should think twice about the economic cost of putting further pressure on Tehran.
“We have successfully test-fired long-range shore-to-sea and surface-to-surface missiles, called Qader (Capable) and Nour (Light) today,” deputy navy commander Mahmoud Mousavi told state television.

Despite his use of the term “long-range”, the semi-official Fars news agency said the Qader’s range was only 200km, and no figure was given for the Nour.

Iran is about 225km at its nearest point from Bahrain, where the US fifth fleet is based, and about 1,000km from Israel. Its longest-range missile, the Sajjil-2, has a range of up to 2,400km.

Iran on Monday said it had no intention to close the Strait of Hormuz, but has carried out “mock” exercises on shutting it.

“No order has been given for the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. But we are prepared for various scenarios,” state television quoted navy chief Habibollah Sayyari as saying.

The US fifth fleet said it would not allow shipping to be disrupted in the strategic waterway.

Tehran denies Western accusations that it is trying to build atomic bombs, saying it needs nuclear technology to generate electricity.

The US and Israel have not ruled out military action against Iran if diplomacy fails to resolve the Islamic state’s nuclear row with the West.

Israel played down the military impact of Iran’s announcement, saying Tehran’s forces were no match for the West’s in the Gulf.

Moshe Yaalon, vice prime minister and minister of strategic affairs, told Israel Radio the exercises reflected Iran’s concern about sanctions to curb its nuclear ambitions, and its efforts to suggest its naval forces could match those of the West, led by the US, in the Gulf.

On that point, Yaalon was dismissive. “Really, this couldn’t even be called a fair fight between the two sides.” He repeated Israel’s call for tougher economic sanctions against Iran accompanied by “a credible military option as a last resort”.

The European Union (EU) is considering following the US in banning imports of Iranian crude oil. US President Barack Obama signed new sanctions against Iran into law on Saturday, stepping up the pressure with sanctions on financial institutions that deal with Iran’s central bank.

If enforced strictly, the sanctions could make it nearly impossible for most refiners to buy crude from Iran, the world’s fourth biggest producer.

The United Nations Security Council has already imposed four rounds of global sanctions on Iran over its refusal to halt sensitive nuclear activities.

Iran has so far shown no willingness to change its nuclear course, but Iranian media reported on Saturday that nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili​ would write to the EU foreign policy chief to say Tehran was ready for fresh talks on its nuclear programme.

Hossein Jaseb in Tehran and Jeffrey Heller in Jerusalem contributed to this story.
feedback@livemint.com

A MUST READ WEBSITE - OUR SOURCE HERE

http://www.livemint.com/2012/01/02220056/Iran-testfires-missiles-in-Gu.html

Attention! Multi-Action War Against Iran.

The Covert Intelligence War Against Iran

By Scott Stewart | December 8, 2011

By Scott Stewart
There has been a lot of talk in the press lately about a “cold war” being waged by the United States, Israel and other U.S. allies against Iran. Such a struggle is certainly taking place, but in order to place recent developments in perspective, it is important to recognize that the covert intelligence war against Iran (and the Iranian response to this war) is clearly not a new phenomenon.

Indeed, STRATFOR has been chronicling this struggle since early 2007. Our coverage has included analyses of events such as the defection to the West of Iranian officials with knowledge of Tehran’s nuclear program; the Iranian seizure of British servicemen in the Shatt al Arab Waterway; the assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists; the use of the Stuxnet worm to cripple Iranian uranium enrichment efforts; and Iranian efforts to arm its proxies and use them as a threat to counteract Western pressure. These proxies are most visible in Iraq and Lebanon, but they also exist in Yemen, Afghanistan, Syria, the Palestinian territories, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states.

While the covert intelligence war has been under way for many years, the tempo of events that can readily be identified as part of it has been increasing over the past few months. It is important to note that many of these events are the result of hidden processes begun months or even years previously, so while visible events may indeed be increasing, the efforts responsible for many of them began to increase much earlier. What the activities of recent months do tell us is that the covert war between Iran and its enemies will not be diminishing anytime soon. If anything, with the current withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq and Iranian nuclear efforts continuing, we likely will see the results of additional covert operations — and evidence of the clandestine activity required to support those operations.

Ramping Up

All eyes were on this covert intelligence war after The New York Times published an article Jan. 15 reporting that the United States and Israel worked together to create and launch Stuxnet against the Iranian nuclear program. The visible events related to the intelligence war maintained a relatively steady pace until Oct. 11, when the U.S. Department of Justice announced that two men had been charged in New York with taking part in a plot by the Iranian Quds Force to kill Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to the United States, Adel al-Jubeir, on U.S. soil.

In early November, a new International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report was issued detailing Iranian efforts toward a nuclear weapons program. While this report did not contain any major revelations, it did contain new specifics and was more explicit than previous IAEA reports in its conclusion that Iran was actively pursuing a nuclear weapons program. The IAEA report resulted in an Israeli-led diplomatic and public relations campaign urging more effective action against Iran, ranging from more stringent sanctions to military operations.

Then, in the early afternoon of Nov. 12, explosions occurred at an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) ballistic missile base near Tehran, killing 17 people, including a high-ranking IRGC commander who was a critical figure in Iran’s ballistic missile program. Iran has insisted the blast was accidental, but speculation has since spread that the explosion could have been part of a sabotage operation carried out by Israeli intelligence. Israeli intelligence officials also have undertaken not-so-subtle efforts to ensure that outside observers believe they were responsible for the blasts.

Later on Nov. 12, the Bahraini government went public with the discovery of an alleged plot involving at least five Bahrainis traveling through Syria and Qatar to carry out attacks against government and diplomatic targets in Bahrain. Iran vehemently denied it was involved and portrayed the plot as a fabrication, just as it responded to the alleged plot against the Saudi ambassador.

The next day, the Iranian press reported that Ahmad Rezai, the son of Mohsen Rezai — who is the secretary of Iran’s Expediency Council, a former IRGC commander and a presidential contender — was found dead at a hotel in Dubai. The deputy head of the Expediency Council told the Iranian press that the son’s death was suspicious and caused by electric shocks, while other reports portrayed the death as a suicide.

On Nov. 20, the Los Angeles Times reported that U.S. intelligence officials confirmed the CIA had suspended its operations in Lebanon following the arrest of several of its sources due to sloppy tradecraft on the part of CIA case officers assigned to Beirut. Following this report, the Iranian government announced that it had arrested 12 CIA sources due to tradecraft mistakes. We have been unable to determine if the reports regarding Lebanon are true, merely CIA disinformation or a little of both. Certainly, the CIA would like the Iranians to believe it is no longer active in Lebanon. Even if these reports are CIA spin, they are quite interesting in light of the Oct. 11 announcement of the thwarted assassination plot in the United States and the Nov. 12 announcement of the arrests in Bahrain.

On Nov. 21, the United States and the United Kingdom launched a new wave of sanctions against Iran based on the aforementioned IAEA report. The new sanctions were designed to impact Iran’s banking and energy sector. In fact, the United Kingdom took the unprecedented step of totally cutting off Iran’s Central Bank from the British financial sector. The Canadian government undertook similar action against the Central Bank of Iran.

On Nov. 28, there were unconfirmed press reports of an explosion in Esfahan, one of Iran’s largest cities. These reports were later echoed by a STRATFOR source in Israel, and U.S. sources have advised that explosions did occur in Esfahan and that they caused a significant amount of damage. Esfahan is home to numerous military and research and development facilities, including some relevant to Iran’s nuclear efforts. We are unsure which facilities at Esfahan were damaged by the blasts and are trying to identify them.
Elsewhere on Nov. 28, Iran’s Guardians Council, a clerical organization that provides oversight of legislation passed by Iran’s parliament, approved a bill to expel the British ambassador and downgrade diplomatic relations between the two countries. The next day, Iranian protesters stormed the British Embassy in Tehran, along with the British Embassy’s residential compound in the city. The angry — and well-orchestrated — mob was protesting the sanctions announced Nov. 21. Iranian authorities did not stop the mob from storming either facility.

On Dec. 1, the European Union approved new sanctions against some 180 Iranian individuals and companies over Iran’s support of terrorism and its continued nuclear weapons program. The European Union did not approve a French proposal to impose a full embargo on Iranian oil.

In the early hours of Dec. 4, a small improvised explosive device detonated under a van parked near the British Embassy building in Manama, Bahrain. The device, which was not very powerful, caused little structural damage to the vehicle and none to the building itself.

The next day, an unnamed U.S. official confirmed Dec. 4 reports from several Iranian news outlets that Iran had recovered an RQ-170 “Sentinel” unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) in Iranian territory. The Iranian reports claimed that Iranian forces were responsible for bringing down the Sentinel — some even said the Iranians were able to hack into the UAV’s command link. U.S. officials have denied such reports, and it is highly unlikely that Iran was able to take control of a UAV and recover it intact.

Outlook

The United States is currently in the process of completing the withdrawal of its combat forces from Iraq. With the destruction of the Iraqi military in 2003, the U.S. military became the only force able to counter Iranian conventional military strength in the Persian Gulf region. Because of this, the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq will create a power vacuum that the Iranians are eager to exploit. The potential for Iran to control a sphere of influence from western Afghanistan to the Mediterranean is a prospect that not only frightens regional players such as Israel, Saudi Arabia and Turkey but also raises serious concerns in the United States.

As we have noted before, we don’t believe that a military attack against Iran’s nuclear facilities alone is the answer to the regional threat posed by Iran. Iran’s power comes from its ability to employ its conventional forces and not nuclear weapons. Therefore, strikes against its nuclear weapons program would not impact Iran’s conventional forces or its ability to interfere with the flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz by using its conventional forces asymmetrically against U.S. naval power and commercial shipping. Indeed, any attack on Iran would have to be far broader than just a one-off attack like the June 1981 Israeli strike at Osirak, Iraq, that crippled Saddam Hussein’s nuclear weapons program.

Because of this difficulty, we have seen the Israelis, Americans and their allies attacking Iran through other means. First of all, they are seeking to curb Iran’s sphere of influence by working to overthrow the Syrian regime, limit Syria’s influence in Iraq and control Hezbollah in Lebanon. They are also seeking to attack Iran’s nuclear program by coercing officials to defect, assassinating scientists and deploying cyberwarfare weapons such as the Stuxnet worm.

It is also necessary to recognize that covert action does not occur in a vacuum. Each covert activity requires a tremendous amount of clandestine intelligence-gathering in order to plan and execute it. With so much covert action happening, the clandestine activity undertaken by all sides to support it is obviously tremendous. But as the frequency of this activity increases, so can sloppy tradecraft.

Finally, as we examine this campaign it is remarkable to note that not only are Iran’s enemies using covert methods to stage attacks on Iran’s nuclear program and military capabilities, they are also developing new and previously unknown methods to do so

Read more: The Covert Intelligence War Against Iran | STRATFOR

"The Covert Intelligence War Against Iran is republished with permission of STRATFOR."

U.S.Military Concerned About Captured Drone. Iran's Revolutionary Guards Prepare For War

Iran capture of stealth drone 'a concern'

US military officials said they are concerned that Iran may have an opportunity to acquire information about the classified surveillance drone programme after one of the stealthy aircraft crashed in Iran while patrolling in western Afghanistan. 

The RQ-170 – known as the Sentinel – has been used in Afghanistan, particularly along the border, for several years. The U.S. Air Force has just "a handful" of them, said defence analyst Loren Thompson, with the Virginia-based Lexington Institute.

"I think we're always concerned when there's an aircraft, whether it's manned or unmanned, that we lose, particularly in a place where we're not able to get to it," Navy Capt. John Kirby, a Pentagon spokesman, told reporters on Monday.
read more here http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/8937401/Iran-capture-of-stealth-drone-a-concern.html

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.

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 Photo: AP








By Con Coughlin

8:45PM 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.
read more here  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/8936797/Irans-Revolutionary-Guards-prepare-for-war.html