As of July 1, new sanctions against Iran are taking effect, effectively banning crude oil imports to the EU, which accounts for some 18% of Iranian crude oil exports. These new sanctions are coming into play as talks between the Iranian regime and the so called P5+1 nations (the U.S., U.K., China, Russia, and France plus Germany) are not making much headway.

Neither the May 23 meeting in Bagdad nor the June 23 meeting in Moscow resulted in anything substantial. Arguably, Iran is moving closer to the “point of no return” with threats being handed out on all sides and the rhetoric growing fiercer. Although a military solution seems to become more and more likely, there are compelling reasons why an air strike should be avoided at all costs.

An air strike on Iran is neither going be as easy as the Israeli strike on Iraq’s Osirak reactor in 1981, nor the strike on Syria’s reactor near al-Kibar in 2007. Iran, having learned a lesson or two from history, has gone to great lengths to protect their enrichment plants – spread out all over Iran – composing at least a dozen different sites. A top US air-force planner estimates that at least 400 targets would have to be hit, and that at least 75 would require the use of penetrating munitions (such as so called “bunker buster bombs”).

Furthermore, these sites are buried deep under ground, (such as the enrichment plant at Fordow which is located under a mountain), and are protected by sophisticated Russian-made air defence systems.

The air strike would have to be massive, continuous and surgical – and the problem is, it would do nothing but postpone the Iranian nuclear venture, (with some 2-5 years according to analysts). And detriment to the whole cause, a strike would naturally add enormous incentive for Iran to actually acquire the bomb, instead of keeping to peaceful uranium enrichment.

Following an Israeli strike, the Iranians would undoubtedly counterattack. Such a strike would be delivered both by means of conventional weapons such as ballistic missiles towards Israel (Iran has got the biggest stock of ballistic missiles in the Middle East), and also by the use of proxy forces such as Hezbollah who could target Israel with rocket strikes from the neighbouring Lebanon.

Other notable proxy strikes would come from the powerful warlord Moqtada al-Sadr, commander of the Shiite Mahdi Army, who’s openly promised to strike back at U.S. coalition forces in Iraq in the case of a U.S./Israeli strike against Iran.

If such a scenario unfolds, the U.S. would undoubtedly launch its own strike against Iran. The U.S., having built up a presence of some 125,000 troops in close proximity to Iran according to recent CENTCOM figures have the ability to hit some 10,000 targets inside Iran overnight.

However, the aftermath of a potential U.S. strike could prove to be very dangerous, as it would galvanize the other pro-Iranian powerhouses China and Russia, active in the region, and, in a worst case scenario, spark a new cold war.

Furthermore, a U.S. strike would have to be continuous and conducted over a long time span, in order to quell any resumed Iranian nuclear efforts, putting further strain on an already badly overstretched U.S. army, not to mention its economy. And all the while, soaring global oil prices would put the final nail in the coffin of an already badly beaten Western economy.

This is simply a scenario, but makes a rather convincing case why a military strike should be avoided at all costs. But amidst the threats and the gloomy outlooks, there are some positive notions.

Although the conflict has seen some escalations, such as cyber attacks on Iranian enrichment plants, as well as several mysterious and dramatic deaths of leading Iranian nuclear scientists, it has mostly been a war of words up to this point.

Historically, Israel has shown that when they are really intent on striking, such as in the cases of Iraq and Syria, it was done in the quiet, without any warning. The current amount of warnings and threats is thus a sign that Israel is content at keeping it “a war of words,” at least for now. But this rather precarious stalemate is not going to last forever.

Image Courtesy of  Mahmoud Ahmadinejar 

The article Iran, Why all Options Shouldn’t Be on the Table appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

A recent controversial agreement between Israelis and Palestinians has led to the release of one Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, in return for 1,000 Palestinian prisoners. Gilad Shalit, now 25 years old, was captured by Hamas at the age of 19. He was held captive in Gaza after his 2006 kidnapping.

The decision of releasing 1,000 Palestinian prisoners came just one week ago, when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu decided it to be imperative for the return of Shalit. Shalit returned to Israel on October 18. Gilad Shalit was taken by Hamas militants to Egypt, where the swap was finalized.

Shalit was welcomed back into Israel by hugs from his family, as well as Prime Minister Netanyahu and Lieutenant General Benny Gantz, Israel’s military chief. He was seen to be thin and frail. After medical examinations, Shalit has shown to have malnutrition signs and a lack of exposure to the sun.

Shalit stated in an interview of the conditions of the prison he was held in, stating that he was in solitary confinement most of the time. Shalit’s father explained in an interview that his son received harsh conditions at the beginning of his imprisonment, but the conditions improved as time went on.

“I knew all along that my family and many people in Israel are doing everything possible in order to release me,” said Gilad Shalit in an interview with Egyptian television.

Thousands of Israelis descended onto the streets to celebrate the arrival of Shalit. Israelis were singing, cheering, and opening bottles of champagne upon his release. People waved the Israeli flag as Shalit was ushered to his home to be with his family.

Although there was a large support for Shalit’s release and return to Israel, many Isarelis do not agree with the recent events. The unbalanced proportion of released Palestinian prisoners comes as a shock to many. Many family members of those who were killed by Palestinian prisoners are opposed to their release.

Many of those who were released for Shilat were imprisoned for life sentences. Their charges include the deaths of Israelis through a number of attacks. Nasser Yateima killed 30 Isarelis in a hotel bombing in 2002, occurring on the Jewish holiday of Passover. Abdel Aziz Salha assisted in the deadly stabbing of two Israeli soldiers when they made a wrong turn into the West Bank.

An overwhelming crowd of support greeted the Palestinian prisoners as they returned home. As per the agreement of the prisoner swap, 450 Palestinian prisoners were released from Israeli captivity. The second group of prisoners which total 550, will be released in two months time.

The West Bank and Gaza lit up with jubilation as people celebrated in the streets. Thousands of supporters greeted the newly released prisoners with green flags, the dominate color associated with Hamas. Hamas has controlled Gaza through militant tactics. The release of these 1,000 prisoners in exchange for one Israeli soldier comes as an undeniable success in the viewpoint of Palestinians.

Palestinian crowds loudly chanted “The people want a new Gilad.” This message displays the idea that if more Israeli soldiers are kidnapped, future prisoner swaps can be created, potentially leading to the release of hundreds more Palestinian prisoners.

Image Courtesy of   http://www.flickr.com/photos/idfonline/

The article Gilad Shalit Released for 1,000 Palestinian Prisoners appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.