Israeli strike on Iran's Parchin facility disrupts key nuclear bomb development capabilities - WALLA!

 

by WALLA!

The sophisticated equipment destroyed in the attack was essential for shaping and testing plastic explosives that encase uranium in a nuclear device.

 

A screengrab shows an Israeli Air Force plane, which the Israeli army says is departing to carry out strikes on Iran, from a handout video released on October 26, 2024

(photo credit: IDF)

The Israeli strike at the end of October on Iran's military complex in Parchin significantly hindered Iran's ability to develop a nuclear bomb, should it choose to do so, according to two senior Israeli officials.

The sophisticated equipment destroyed in the attack was essential for shaping and testing plastic explosives that encase uranium in a nuclear device, crucial for initiating a nuclear chain reaction. This equipment was previously used by Iran before it froze its military nuclear program in 2003.

Over the past year, Iran has resumed research related to nuclear weapons, according to American and Israeli officials, although it has not taken concrete steps toward building a nuclear bomb. The Israeli officials noted that if Iran decides to develop nuclear weapons, it would need to replace the destroyed equipment.

They believe Israeli or American intelligence would likely detect any attempt by Iran to build or acquire such machinery. "This equipment is a bottleneck. The Iranians are stuck without it," stated a senior Israeli official.

The Taleghan 2 facility within the Parchin military complex was used before 2003 for testing explosives necessary for a nuclear device. This activity was halted when Iran suspended its military nuclear program. Additionally, the equipment destroyed had been stored at the site since at least 2003, Israeli officials say.

A satellite image shows Khojir rocket motor casting facility, in an aftermath what an American researcher said was an Israeli airstrike hitting a building that was part of Iran's defunct nuclear weapons development program, near Teheran, Iran October 26, 2024. (credit: Planet Labs Inc/Handout via REUTERS)

American and Israeli officials reported that Iran resumed scientific activities in the past year that could serve as a basis for developing nuclear weapons, although these could also be presented as civilian research. "They conducted scientific work that could lay the groundwork for nuclear weapons production. It was highly secretive, known only to a small part of the Iranian government," said an American official.

Strike disrupts Iran's nuclear progress

The destroyed equipment at Taleghan 2 was reportedly not being used for these research activities but would be critical in future stages if Iran decided to build a nuclear bomb. "This is equipment the Iranians would need if they wanted to move towards a nuclear bomb. Now, they don't have it, and finding an alternative won't be easy. We would see any such effort," a senior Israeli official explained.

When planning a retaliatory strike following Iran's massive missile attack on October 1, Israel selected the Taleghan 2 facility as a target. President Biden requested Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not to target Iranian nuclear sites to avoid sparking a war with Iran, according to American officials. However, since Taleghan 2 was not part of Iran's declared nuclear program, Tehran could not acknowledge its existence or the damage incurred without admitting to violating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

"The strike sent a not-so-subtle message that Israel has significant access to what is happening in the Iranian system, even with activities kept secret and known only to a very small group in the Iranian government," noted an American official.

WALLA!

Source: https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-829333

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Intifada Was Globalized in Amsterdam - Alan M. Dershowitz and Andrew Stein

 

by Alan M. Dershowitz and Andrew Stein

The anti-Israel rioters were hunting down Jews...

 

• There is no moral or legal equivalence between non-violent mischief — such as tearing down flags and shouting racial insults — and committing life-threatening assaults upon people based on their religion and ethnicity. The anti-Israel rioters were hunting down Jews...

• Muslim extremists have a long history of hurling spears in response to non-violent insults. Recall the numerous deadly attacks — shootings, stabbings, bombings and lethal fatwas—against those who allegedly insulted the prophet by picturing him or authoring books about him. There was also violence against those who burned Korans or otherwise demeaned Islam. Even cartoons provoked deadly responses.

• The law in no Western nation grants the victims of non-violent insults the right to respond by violence. If a Jew were to physically assault the many Muslims who have repeatedly demeaned Judaism or its nation-state during recent protests, they would be appropriately punished, as some have been.

• [W]e are likely to see more anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish pogroms in other parts of the world as antisemitism moves from the fringes to the mainstream.

• Protestors – both pro- and anti-Israel – have the right to express their views verbally and even symbolically, but they have no right to attack individuals or groups based on religion, ethnicity or national origin. Those who engaged in physical assaults – and many were caught on video – must be prosecuted and, if convicted, imprisoned or deported. A clear line must be drawn between lawful, even if immoral, protests, and criminal violence.... It is a bright-line distinction that many in the media are deliberately trying to blur.

• The U.S. has a stake in stopping this violence: the call to "globalize the intifada" is not limited to Europe. Those who advocate globalization are inciting violence against Americans of Jewish heritage. The incitement may be too general to be denied First Amendment protection against criminal punishment, but the single standard demands that universities apply the same standard to calls for intifada than they would to calls for lynching of blacks or assaulting of gays. The real difference is that no university student or faculty member would ever call for the latter, and if they did, they would be disciplined or expelled. Yet today it is entirely acceptable, indeed expected, that radical students will call for the lynching and assaulting of Jews and Israelis. That, after all, is what an intifada entails.

We are likely to see more anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish pogroms in other parts of the world as antisemitism moves from the fringes to the mainstream. Unless something proactive is done, it's coming to a theater – or stadium – near you. Pictured: Police officers chase rioters who attacked Jews and Israelis in Amsterdam on November 7, 2024. (Photo by Wahaj Bani Moufleh/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images)

On university campuses throughout the world, there have been chants demanding that the violent intifada – which killed thousands of Israeli children, women and other civilians – be "globalized." Last week, we witnessed the first significant manifestation of that demand in Amsterdam, where large groups of predominantly Arab and Muslim rioters physically attacked Israelis and Jews who had been cheering for an Israeli soccer team.

Although some of the media tried to blame the attacks on Israelis, the evidence strongly suggests that this pogrom was planned well in advance and would have taken place even if there had been no provocation by Israeli fans.

What some Israeli fans are accused of doing is all too typical of European soccer "hooligans": tearing down the opposing team's flags – in this instance Palestinian flags – and shouting racist epithets, but there is no evidence of any violence directed against pro-Palestinian individuals by Israelis or Jews. The violence was ALL perpetrated by anti-Israel and anti-Jewish rioters against Israeli and Jewish victims.

There is no moral or legal equivalence between non-violent mischief — such as tearing down flags and shouting racial insults — and committing life-threatening assaults upon people based on their religion and ethnicity. The anti-Israel rioters were hunting down Jews, compelling victims to beg for their lives by denying they were Jewish.

Without justifying the shouting of racial slurs by some Israelis, it is important to remember Sigmund Freud's brilliant insight that "civilization began on the day the first human hurled an insult rather than a spear at his opponent."

Muslim extremists have a long history of hurling spears in response to non-violent insults. Recall the numerous deadly attacks — shootings, stabbings, bombings and lethal fatwas—against those who allegedly insulted the prophet by picturing him or authoring books about him. There was also violence against those who burned Korans or otherwise demeaned Islam. Even cartoons provoked deadly responses.

The law in no Western nation grants the victims of non-violent insults the right to respond by violence. If a Jew were to physically assault the many Muslims who have repeatedly demeaned Judaism or its nation-state during recent protests, they would be appropriately punished, as some have been.

This attempt to justify the violence committed is yet another manifestation of the rancid double standard imposed by the media and others against all things Jewish. It also reflects widespread acceptance of the racist excuse that "Muslims will be Muslims" when it comes to violently responding to insults.

Evidence strongly suggests that the violence in Amsterdam was planned and coordinated well in advance of any non-violent provocations, and would have occurred even if no flags had been taken down and no insults shouted. Also, many non-Arab and non-Muslim Dutch antisemites cheered on the attackers, reflecting the long-standing and deep Jew-hatred that has been part of Dutch culture since before the Holocaust. The Netherlands was among the most pro-Nazi nations in Europe during World War II, and after the war took little action against Dutch people who collaborated with the German occupiers.

Not surprisingly, the Amsterdam police did not do enough to stem last week's violence, and law enforcement authorities quickly freed most of the rioters, including those who committed assaults.

Leaders of the Dutch government eventually apologized and took measures to prevent recurrences. But we are likely to see more anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish pogroms in other parts of the world as antisemitism moves from the fringes to the mainstream. Unless something proactive is done, it's coming to a theater – or stadium – near you.

Protestors – both pro- and anti-Israel – have the right to express their views verbally and even symbolically, but they have no right to attack individuals or groups based on religion, ethnicity or national origin. Those who engaged in physical assaults – and many were caught on video – must be prosecuted and, if convicted, imprisoned or deported. A clear line must be drawn between lawful, even if immoral, protests, and criminal violence. There is no continuum. It is a bright-line distinction that many in the media are deliberately trying to blur.

The U.S. has a stake in stopping this violence: the call to "globalize the intifada" is not limited to Europe. Those who advocate globalization are inciting violence against Americans of Jewish heritage. The incitement may be too general to be denied First Amendment protection against criminal punishment, but the single standard demands that universities apply the same standard to calls for intifada than they would to calls for lynching of blacks or assaulting of gays. The real difference is that no university student or faculty member would ever call for the latter, and if they did, they would be disciplined or expelled. Yet today it is entirely acceptable, indeed expected, that radical students will call for the lynching and assaulting of Jews and Israelis. That, after all, is what an intifada entails.

Some may argue that the literal meaning of intifada includes non-violent actions, but many of those who hear the call to globalize the intifada understand it to justify violence of the type seen in Amsterdam – and worse.

Alan M. Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus at Harvard Law School, and the author most recently of War Against the Jews: How to End Hamas Barbarism, and Get Trump: The Threat to Civil Liberties, Due Process, and Our Constitutional Rule of Law. He is the Jack Roth Charitable Foundation Fellow at Gatestone Institute, and is also the host of "The Dershow" podcast.

Andrew Stein is an American Democratic politician who served on the New York City Council and was its last president, and as Manhattan Borough President.

• Follow Alan M. Dershowitz on X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook

Alan M. Dershowitz and Andrew Stein

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21118/amsterdam-globalized-intifada

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Deceptive BBC headline implies Gazan's criticism of Hamas Oct 7 atrocities ‎- Itamar Marcus

 

by Itamar Marcus

The Islamic scholar in Gaza did not criticize the rape and murder of Israelis. He only criticized the negative impact on Palestinians

 

Last week, the BBC published an article about an Islamic leader's response to the Gaza war which opened with the misleading headline: "Gaza's top Islamic scholar issues fatwa criticizing 7 October attack." It then continued to highlight his criticism of Hamas and the religious leaders prominence in Gaza, but never mentioning that he only criticized the devastating impact that the war had on Palestinians. His fatwa did not have one word of criticism of the rape, burning alive, and massacre of Israeli civilians. This approach follows the Palestinian Authority's policy that Palestinian Media Watch has reported on repeatedly, to defend and justify the Oct. 7 atrocities while criticizing Hamas for the destruction in Gaza.

The implication of the BBC headline, on the other hand, and opening paragraphs of the BBC article is clearly that he was criticizing what happened on Oct 7:

"The most prominent Islamic scholar in Gaza has issued a rare, powerful fatwa condemning Hamas's 7 October 2023 attack on Israel, which triggered the devastating war in the Palestinian territory… Dr Dayah's fatwa, which was published in a detailed six-page document, criticises Hamas for what he calls ‘violating Islamic principles governing jihad'… Dr Dayah adds: ‘If the pillars, causes, or conditions of jihad are not met, it must be avoided in order to avoid destroying people's lives. This is something that is easy to guess for our country's politicians, so the attack must have been avoided.' For Hamas, the fatwa represents an embarrassing and potentially damaging critique, particularly as the group often justifies its attacks on Israel through religious arguments to garner support from Arab and Muslim communities."

The BBC quoted al-Dayeh that Jihad requires "to avoid destroying people's lives," and since the BBC wrote that he was "criticizing 7 October attack," the implication is that he was critical of Israel's civilian deaths. This was totally false.

The fatwa by Islamic scholar Salman al-Dayeh, has six parts, each critical of a statement made by a senior Hamas figure regarding the war in Gaza. The fatwa states that Hamas did not fulfill the conditions of jihad because it did not take into consideration the disastrous impact on civilian Palestinians.

The conditions for waging jihad, he writes, include waging the war far away from Muslim civilians and ensuring that they have enough food and water for the duration of the war:

The jihad must be "far from [the Muslim] population centers and safe shelter away from inhabited houses, populated towers, crowded schools, busy hospitals… and to store provisions that will last them longer than what opinion holders and advisors expect regarding the war."

[Salman Daya, Facebook page]

He also insists that based on the "war people," i.e., Israel's past responses to Palestinian's lesser attacks from Gaza and the West Bank, Hamas should have anticipated this counterattack and should not have attacked:

"This [the counterattack] is something that politicians and leaders in our country can easily assess if they examine the aggression of the war people [=Israelis] on the West Bank and Gaza in previous confrontations, which were much lighter than what happened on October 7th, and [Palestinians] were met with many martyrs and wounded, the explosion of houses and towers, the uprooting of people for days and months to schools and hospitals.... If the response of the war-people [Israelis, in the past] was causing severe damage for much more minor reasons than what happened on October 7th, this causes any rational person to understand that the extent of damage from their response in the case of a larger event than before would be many times greater."

The Oct. 7 attack was a total failure because none of the jihad goals were achieved:

"None of the goals behind provoking the enemy, angering it and stirring up war with it, which the resistance [Hamas] declared at the time, were achieved."

Moreover, Hamas' goals were not realistic in the first place:

"When it is likely that the goals of jihad will not be achieved... it should be avoided."

Finaly, the fatwa author criticizes Hamas for its self-satisfied attitude that implies victory but totally ignores the reality of its defeat and the destruction it caused:

"I see that [Hamas'] motivation is high, that faces are glowing, that cheeks are flushed, and that the tone of speech indicates satisfaction and contentment. This appears like the joy of a victor, over a victory that achieved security and peace for your people in their life domains, that freed the prisoners, that separated them from their enemy, and that put an end to injustice at Al-Aqsa Mosque. While the opposite is true: your entire people have become sick in soul or body, disabled, mentally impaired, sad at heart... This is in addition to frightening numbers of martyrs and amputees, widows and orphans. This is such a tragedy that even if the war ends tonight, its suffering will continue for decades."

Later in its article, the BBC does point out his criticism of Hamas for the suffering of Palestinians:

"Al-Dayeh argues that the significant civilian casualties in Gaza, together with the widespread destruction of civilian infrastructure and humanitarian disaster that have followed the 7 October attack, means that it was in direct contradiction to the teachings of Islam.
Hamas, he says, has failed in its obligations of "keeping fighters away from the homes of defenceless [Palestinian] civilians and their shelters, and providing security and safety as much as possible in the various aspects of life... security, economic, health, and education, and saving enough supplies for them."

Nowhere, however, does the BBC mention that the fatwa author does not have any criticism of the October 7 atrocities against Israelis, which was the overt message of its headline and opening sentence: "Gaza's top Islamic scholar issues fatwa criticizing 7 October attack. The most prominent Islamic scholar in Gaza has issued a rare, powerful fatwa condemning Hamas's 7 October 2023 attack on Israel…"

Much has been written and publicized accusing the BBC of significant misrepresentation and anti-Israel bias. Headlining an article to give the readers the impression that the Oct. 7 atrocities were criticized by a leading Gazan religious figure can now be added to that list.

Nonetheless, the fatwa is very significant as it shows that even today after all the atrocities are well known, when a top Gazan religious figure criticizes Hamas, he is not critical of the murder and rape of Israelis.

The following is the screenshot of the BBC article:

Hamas war on Israel October 2023

Over 1,100 Israelis, including over 800 civilians, were murdered and over 5,000 wounded, in addition to approximately 251 who were abducted into the Gaza Strip (including 153 later released or liberated - among them 36 whose bodies were retrieved - and at least 41 who were killed on Oct. 7 whose bodies were abducted to Gaza), in a Hamas terror war that began when approximately 3,000 Hamas terrorists and thousands of Gazan civilians broke through Israel's security fence at the Gaza Strip border and launched a surprise attack, taking control of several Israeli towns and attacking a music festival on the Jewish holiday of Simchat Torah, which fell on the Sabbath, Oct. 7, 2023. During the massacre the terrorists tortured, raped, shot, beheaded, and burned their victims alive, murdering entire families and leaving at least 21 children without parents. Hamas terrorists also fired at least 5,000 rockets at Israeli population centers. In response, Israel launched Operation Iron Swords to counter the Hamas terror threat. Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon joined Hamas' terror war starting from the following day, attacking Israel from the north. Frequent rocket launches, drone attacks, and shootings continued from Lebanon throughout the war, in which approximately 20 Israeli civilians and 20 Israeli soldiers were killed and nearly 200 Israelis were wounded. As a result of the attacks from Gaza and Lebanon, roughly 200,000 Israeli residents of the north and south were internally displaced during the war. A ceasefire and prisoner exchange deal began on Nov. 24, 2023, in which Israel agreed to release 150 terrorist prisoners, pause drone surveillance in the Gaza Strip, and allow movement between the northern and southern Gaza Strip, in return for 50 Israeli female and child hostages held by Hamas. The deal was subsequently extended with additional releases, until Hamas violated the agreement and resumed attacking on Dec. 1, 2023.

Itamar Marcus

Source: https://palwatch.org/page/35642

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Trump admin. plans to bankrupt Iran with 'maximum pressure' policies - report - Jerusalem Post Staff

 

by Jerusalem Post Staff

Sources revealed that the administration plans to impose stricter sanctions, particularly on Iran’s oil exports, which serve as a critical revenue source.

 

Donald Trump over a backdrop of an Iranian flag. (Illustrative)

(photo credit: Canva, RAHEB HOMAVANDI/REUTERS)

US President-elect Donald Trump’s administration is preparing to reinstate its "maximum pressure" strategy against Iran, targeting Tehran’s economic stability and its ability to support militant proxies and nuclear development, The Financial Times reported on Saturday, citing sources close to the transition team.

The sources revealed that the administration plans to impose stricter sanctions, particularly on Iran’s oil exports, which serve as a critical revenue source. 

The anticipated sanctions could drastically reduce Iranian oil exports, which currently exceed 1.5 million barrels per day, up from a low of 400,000 barrels per day in 2020. Experts suggest that these measures would severely impact Iran’s economy. Bob McNally, an energy consultant and former US presidential adviser, indicated that reducing exports to a fraction of current levels would leave Iran in a far worse economic position than during Trump’s first term, Financial Times reported.

According to the report, the renewed strategy aims to bring Iran back to the negotiating table for a comprehensive nuclear deal. According to Trump’s transition team, the approach involves crippling Iran’s financial resources to push its leadership into talks.

However, experts cited in the report expressed skepticism, noting that Tehran is unlikely to agree to what are expected to be stringent US terms. The Financial Times highlighted Trump’s campaign statement regarding Iran in September, saying, “We have to make a deal because the consequences are impossible.”

Iran's top nuclear negotiator Abbas Araqchi attends a meeting of the JCPOA Joint Commission in Vienna, Austria, June 28, 2019. (credit: REUTERS/LEONHARD FOEGER/FILE PHOTO)

Not giving in to pressure

Iranian officials have already rejected the possibility of resuming negotiations under coercion. In a statement posted on X/Twitter earlier this week, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned that repeating the “maximum pressure” policy would result in failure, as it had during Trump’s first term.

Maximum Pressure 1.0' compelled 'Maximum Resistance' and ended in 'Maximum Defeat' for the US. The proof? One example: just compare Iran's peaceful nuclear program before and after the so-called 'Maximum Pressure' policy.

Attempting 'Maximum Pressure 2.0' will only result in…

— Seyed Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi) November 12, 2024

He emphasized that Tehran remains open to talks but only under fair conditions. 

The security risks associated with the deteriorating US-Iran relationship were also addressed in the report. The Financial Times noted ongoing threats against Trump and former US officials following the 2020 assassination of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani. Additionally, it highlighted legislative efforts by Trump’s advisers, such as Mike Waltz, to impose secondary sanctions on Chinese entities purchasing Iranian oil.

Jerusalem Post Staff

Source: https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-829374

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Weaponization to the very end? Jim Jordan probing last-minute Biden DOJ blitzkreig - John Solomon

 

by John Solomon

Jordan sent a letter to Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust Jonathan Kanter demanding answers about a recent spate of activity since Trump won the Nov. 5 election.

 

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan is aggressively investigating a series of lame-duck actions the Biden Justice Department has been taking during its last few weeks in power, saying a recent flurry of activity against businesses and red states smacks of a new wave of politically weaponized government action.

In a wide-ranging interview with Just the News on Friday, Jordan cited DOJ efforts to investigate Elon Musk and his companies after his overt support for Donald Trump’s campaign, threatening letters sent to states seeking to remove noncitizens from voters rolls and several hastily launched antitrust inquiries as examples of potentially abusive DOJ behavior.

“This pattern of turning these agencies on the very people they're supposed to serve -- we the people, the taxpayers -- has been a concern from the get-go,” he told the Just the News, No Noise television show. “We're concerned now with what they may be doing with the antitrust issue, going after companies as they're heading out the door.

“Of course, right prior to the elections, we saw the Civil Rights Division in the Justice Department going after Virginia for simply keeping noncitizens from voting in our elections,” he added. “Imagine that we got the same thing in Ohio, our Secretary of State was sent a letter three weeks before Election Day saying they were concerned about the good work he was doing. So we're always concerned about this. We're going to keep working.”

Jordan sent a letter Friday to Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter, who oversees the DOJ’s antitrust division, demanding answers about a recent spate of activity since Trump was declared the winner of the Nov. 5 election.

“According to information available to the Committee, the Antitrust Division aggressively moved to escalate its regulation of American businesses shortly following the election of President Trump,” Jordan wrote Kanter. “Specifically, we have received allegations that the Division sent demand letters to numerous businesses indicating an intention to start enforcement actions in the final days of the Biden-Harris Administration.

“With the American people clearly rejecting the failed policies of the Biden-Harris Administration, the Division's actions are inappropriate and  inconsistent with the will of the American people,” he said.

You can read the full letter here.

JordanLetterDOHAntiTrust11-16-24.pdf

The letter demands that the DOJ “preserve all existing and future records and materials responsive to any request for documents and information related to the Committee's oversight of the DOJ Antitrust Division.”

Jordan also made clear he plans to continue to investigate the behavior of Special Prosecutor Jack Smith in his pursuit of criminal charges against Trump, even if Smith drops the cases and resigns as widely expected.

“That's why we put them on notice. Preserve everything and understand the Congress. The history is that Congress oversees the special counsel,” he said.

The chairman said he was particularly interested in exploring whether one of Smith’s deputies, Jay Bratt, had contact with the Biden White House as the criminal cases against Trump were being conceived.

“We have concerns about Mr. Bratt. What were his conversations with people when it looks like he was at the White House? We want to know if, in fact, that happened, who he who he talked to, what he talked about, any correspondence relevant to that,” Jordan explained.

“We think all that is worthy of us getting information on and making sure, again, this kind of stuff doesn't, not supposed to happen, shouldn't happen in the future,” the Ohio Republican explained.

Jordan also signaled he will use his perch atop the committee next year to make a new push for long-awaited reforms of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) spying.

Jordan nearly succeeded in the last year in getting a requirement that U.S. intelligence and the FBI get a court-ordered warrant to spy on Americans' phone calls overseas. The measure failed in a tie vote, and Jordan said he plans to reintroduce the warrant requirement when the new Congress convenes in January.

Jordan expressed particular excitement for Trump's pick of former Democratic congresswoman and presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard to be the next Director of National Intelligence, saying he was hopeful it could tip FISA reform over the top.

"Having Tulsi at ODNI. I mean, she's a champion of the First Amendment," Jordan told the Just the News, No Noise television show.

"This is what I love so much about President Trump's election, he is putting people in these Cabinet agencies, nominating people who have the attitude the American people elected, that American people voted for, which is we're going to go serve the people, protect their liberties, make government actually more efficient smaller, working for the country and protecting their rights," he added. "That I think is great, and Tulsi believes in the First Amendment, free speech and freedom."

John Solomon

Source: https://justthenews.com/accountability/satweaponization-very-end-jim-jordan-probing-last-minute-biden-doj-blitzkreig

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Company lobbied for restrictive subsidy rules on green hydrogen, but production is in Saudi Arabia - Kevin Killough

 

by Kevin Killough

Air Products lobbied for more restrictive rules on green hydrogen tax credits, which would make it harder for competitors to enter the market, but it plans to produce the gas in Saudi Arabia to ship to Europe and California.

 

For the past few years, net-zero emissions proponents have hyped "green hydrogen" as the fossil fuel-free alternative to energy from natural gas, and the Biden-Harris administration eagerly hopped on board. 

When the administration released its proposed rules for clean hydrogen production tax credits in December, the Treasury Department’s initial guidance was in line with the preferences of climate activists, emphasizing the “three pillars” guidelines, which had stricter emissions accounting requirements to define clean hydrogen production. 

In June, the Natural Resources Defense Council touted a study arguing that the “three pillars” approach would increase hydrogen production while helping to advance “U.S. climate progress.” 

"Outliers"

The restrictive guidelines, however, were controversial among many companies planning to enter the nascent green-hydrogen business. Frank Wolak, president and CEO of the hydrogen industry’s largest trade association, the Fuel Cell and Hydrogen Energy Association (FCHEA), told Bloomberg Law  that of the organization’s 100 members, companies supporting the restrictive credits were “outliers.” 

Just before the guidance on the tax credits was released, seven companies signed a letter to the Biden-Harris administration backing the three-pillars restrictions. Air Products, an industrial gas supplier, was among them. 

“We applaud the administration’s strong three pillar hydrogen tax credit proposed rule, which will be essential to delivering real emissions reductions, creating the stimulus for broader investments across the hydrogen value chain, and cementing the U.S.’s global climate leadership,” Air Products President and CEO Seifi Ghasemi said in a statement released by the Treasury Department.  

Ghasemi said Air Products was making a $15 billion commitment to clean hydrogen to decarbonize the heavy-duty transportation and industrial sectors of the economy.

However, the company’s primary green-hydrogen investment is in Saudi Arabia’s NEOM project. During a panel discussion at CERAWeek in Houston in March, according to S&P Global Ghasemi said Air Products sees potential to ship green hydrogen from Saudi Arabia to California and Europe. 

During the company’s first quarter earnings call this year, Ghasemi said the company’s $5 to $5.5 billion planning capex was going mainly to the project. The company has another project in Louisiana, but according to Hydrogen Insight, it won’t be tapping the 45V green hydrogen tax credit. Instead, it will utilize natural gas as the feedstock for its hydrogen, and will utilize carbon capture tax credits instead. 

It’s unclear why Air Products supported the restrictive tax credits when most of Air Products’ green-hydrogen investments are in Saudi Arabia, and the company didn’t respond to requests for comments. 

The company spent $4.6 million since 2022 on lobbying efforts, according to the Washington Beacon, since the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act, and lobbying disclosures show almost all of the focus was hydrogen production tax credits. Likewise, the Beacon reports, Ghasemi gave $350,000 to the Biden Victory Fund, which later became the Harris Victory Fund, and he sent another $47,900 to President Joe Biden’s presidential campaign. 

California dreaming

California, however, had hoped to create its own green-hydrogen industry in support of jobs and the state’s economy. California Sen. Josh Newman, chairman of the Select Committee on Transitioning to a Zero-Emission Energy Future, told S&P Global that he was “none too pleased” with the idea of importing green hydrogen into California, which runs counter to the state’s initiatives. 

A company spokesperson told the Beacon that it has not yet formalized a deal to export hydrogen from Saudi Arabia to California. 

The company had planned a green hydrogen project in Texas, but during its fourth quarter earnings call Thursday, the company announced it isn’t moving forward with the project. 

The company’s investors are also expressing dissatisfaction with the company’s Saudi Arabia plans. In a letter to Air Products’ board of directors obtained by Just the News, the investors called attention to the company’s underperformance. 

“We initially reached out to you privately over a month ago in the hopes of having a constructive dialogue aimed at addressing the Company’s longstanding total shareholder return underperformance as well as deficiencies in the Company’s governance and capital allocation policies,” the letter states. 

APD Letter.pdf

Among the concerns is that the company is investing billions of dollars in green hydrogen production, but it has no agreements from buyers to take the product. The plan, the investors point out, departs from the company’s traditionally conservative industrial gas model.

Economic realities: "Prohibitive"

The entire green-hydrogen industry is cratering under economic realities that producing the gas is too expensive to the point of not just being uncompetitive with natural gas. It’s cost prohibitive, according to a Harvard study published in Joule last month. 

"Even if production costs decrease in line with predictions, storage and distribution costs will prevent hydrogen being cost-competitive in many sectors," the study’s lead author, Roxana Shafiee, a postdoctoral fellow at the Harvard University Center for the Environment, said in a statement. Co-author Daniel Schrag, Sturgis Hooper Professor of Geology and Professor of Public Policy at Harvard, said in the release that hydrogen could play a role in reducing emissions, but it would be unwise to expect green hydrogen to be a total solution.

In the face of these economics, it’s not surprising that multiple projects in the U.S. and across the world are being canceled. 

As Bulgarian energy writer Irina Slav reports on her “Irina Slav on Energy” Substack, Saudi Arabia is planning to invest $10 billion in green hydrogen production, while a similar effort by Abu Dhabi’s Masdar is being delayed by several years. The company didn’t explain the decision, but BNN Bloomberg notes that green hydrogen is enormously expensive to produce, and development of infrastructure in importing companies takes a long time. That’s on top of safety issues. 

As was seen with many climate initiatives executed under the now-defeated Biden-Harris administration, from electric vehicles to green manufacturing, federal money from the Inflation Reduction Act was poured out without little forethought, leading to cronyism and boondoggles. Green hydrogen appears to be heading to a fate, metaphorically, as the Hindenburg. 

 
Kevin Killough

Source: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/energy/company-lobbied-restrictive-subsidy-rules-green-hydrogen-production-saudi

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Winning an Election: An Opportunity Not an End - Thaddeus G. McCotter

 

by Thaddeus G. McCotter

Winning an election is not an end but an opportunity—one that, if squandered, creates an opportunity for one's adversaries.

 

As a child, my mother warned me not to put my hand on the electric stove when the heating ring glowed orange. Even at that early age, an innate anti-authoritarian, I dismissed her advice, and once her back was turned, I placed my hand on the stove. While the pain has receded in memory, as I wailed about the blackened, serpentine scar seared onto my palm, I distinctly recall my mother calmly saying, “I told you not to do that.”

Well, it is time to pay it forward: do not grab onto the post-2024 presidential election “hot takes” served up by sundry pundits trolling for clicks and ratings. Doing so may not immediately char your palm, but it will eventually give you heartburn and immense, though avoidable, amounts of pain. So, let us disabuse ourselves of a handful (no pun intended) of the most red-hot, election post-mortem nonsense simmering in the political ether.

First, this election was not the ultimate triumph of MAGA and populist-Republicans.

Impressive as it was, the victory was but the second of Mr. Trump’s and the movement’s. But like all populist movements, it must now deliver the restoration of sanity, liberty, prosperity, and security it promised the electorate. If and as it does, the movement will be sustained and strengthened; grow in stature and esteem in the public’s mind; and, thereby, facilitate not only future electoral wins but, more importantly, lay the foundations for an abiding American exceptionalism.

Second, regrettably, this is not the end of progressivism.

True, the majority of Americans loathe identity politics, cancel culture, political correctness, and other societal symptoms of the left’s cerebral disease of cultural Marxism. Due to its radical socialist ideology, progressives, who largely cannot produce wealth, must rely upon the money of others—their favorite of subsidization being the taxpayers and corporate largesse. Indeed, the fact that in 2023, American companies alone spent 8 billion dollars on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs is a testament to the left’s ability to monetize its survival and success. Sure, in the wake of their 2024 presidential defeat, some Democrats have called for a jettisoning of progressivism, or at least parts of its agenda. But the left cannot and will not voluntarily close this cornucopia of other people’s money, and, bluntly, the base of the Democrat Party is no longer center-left. It is hard left. And it is going nowhere but further left, because that is the ideological core of its pillars of power: academia, the media, Big Tech, and the administrative state.

Finally, this is not a political realignment for the MAGA or the GOP. In time, it could lead to one, but it is too early for such a conclusion.

In many ways, Mr. Trump’s victory was a personal one. He is a unique figure in recent American politics—indeed, one may need to go back to Andrew Jackson for a similarly beloved and reviled figure. His recent victory bordered on a landslide, and, while it did abet slim GOP majorities in the House and Senate (the “trifecta”), the gains were nowhere near those of other similar presidential wins.

Thus, the conundrum: Did the GOP candidates who ran behind the top of the ticket and lost do so because they were not sufficiently MAGA and populist-Republican, thereby losing the support of many of Mr. Trump’s base voters? Or was the issue that these defeated candidates were identified as too aligned with Mr. Trump, turning off independent voters who split their tickets so a Democrat Congress would serve as a check upon Mr. Trump? After all, most independents and many new Trump voters were not all that happy with the options the two major parties presented them. They voted based on their personal, practical experience that they were better off under the first Trump administration than under the subsequent Biden administration; nonetheless, this clearly did not necessarily translate into voting GOP down the ballot.

Whether it be these or other yet unidentified reasons that led to the reduced coattails of Mr. Trump’s triumph, the Republican populists will have to divine them to consolidate and expand their majorities in future elections. Executive Orders can only do so much. (Ask Mr. Biden how his student loan forgiveness E.O.s worked out.) Because hard as it is to pass important legislation with slim majorities in Congress, it is damn near impossible if the Democrats control one or both.

In the grand scheme of things, campaigning is easy; governing is hard. Ultimately, then, winning an election is not an end but an opportunity—one that, if squandered, creates an opportunity for one’s adversaries. For despite all the elation or dejection in the wake of victory or defeat, nothing in politics is written in stone, and one forgets this age-old political truism at their own peril.

For those who disagree and stubbornly decide to slam your hand on the political hot stove, I suggest you consult all the Democrats who pronounced (now) president-elect Trump and the MAGA/populist Republican movement dead on November 4, 2020.

Better still, just glance at their charred palm.

***

An American Greatness contributor, the Hon. Thaddeus G. McCotter (M.C., Ret.) served Michigan’s 11th Congressional District from 2003-2012 and served as Chair of the Republican House Policy Committee. Not a lobbyist, he is a frequent public speaker and moderator for public policy seminars and a Monday co-host of the “John Batchelor Radio Show,” among sundry media appearances.

Thaddeus G. McCotter

Source: https://amgreatness.com/2024/11/16/winning-an-election-an-opportunity-not-an-end/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Possibility of a 'Golden Age' in the Middle East - Majid Rafizadeh

 

by Majid Rafizadeh

The repercussions of allowing Iran... to operate without meaningful deterrence, simply underscores the need for a "Golden Age" -- especially a new regime in Iran more aligned with the dreams of so many of its citizens -- and not a moment too soon.

 

• Iran launched from its own soil hundreds of ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and attack drones at Israel, a country smaller than the state of New Jersey -- a demonstration of the regime's fundamentalist commitment to destroying the Jewish state.

• President-elect Donald J. Trump at present seems averse to regime change in Iran. Unfortunately -- due to the regime's commitment to "wipe Israel off the map" and, as stated in its constitution, to export its version of Islam across the world -- there does not appear to be the possibility for a real long-term peace in the Middle East without regime change. Anything short of that simply invites the regime to wait Trump out, as well as whoever succeeds him.

• Not enough can be said to warn nations of the dangers that can arise from a lack of robust leadership, the perils of underestimating the ambitions of adversarial states, and the paralysis of being unable to confront an adversary for fear of escalation. The adversary, not the leader of Free World, is supposed to fear "escalation."

• The repercussions of allowing Iran... to operate without meaningful deterrence, simply underscores the need for a "Golden Age" -- especially a new regime in Iran more aligned with the dreams of so many of its citizens -- and not a moment too soon.

Never underestimate the power of an administration's single term or the harm that policies – whether constructive or poorly-informed -- can have on the international stage. As President Joe Biden's administration approaches the end of its term, it is hard not to see the global volatility, emboldened adversaries, and fractured alliances. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Never underestimate the power of an administration's single term or the harm that policies – whether constructive or poorly-informed -- can have on the international stage.

As President Joe Biden's administration approaches the end of its term, it is hard not to see the global volatility, emboldened adversaries, and fractured alliances.

Those are lessons to be learned about the costs of weakness in leadership and the consequences of strategic missteps in foreign policy.

Throughout the past four years, authoritarian leaders worldwide exploited opportunities afforded them by what they appear to have viewed as a weakness of American leadership. Dictators who had previously been isolated or reined in evidently saw an opening and capitalized on this strategic vacuum. Russia invaded Ukraine. China flew spy balloons over America's most sensitive nuclear military installations, in addition to killing at least 100,000 Americans each year with fentanyl and other opiates.

Iran, once on the brink of economic collapse and mired in domestic unrest, found itself reinvigorated as U.S. policies allowed billions to flow into its economy. This infusion of resources and a perceived lack of decisive U.S. opposition empowered Iran's leadership to assert itself more aggressively on the world stage. No doubt emboldened by this renewed strength, Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and terrorist proxies - Hamas, Hezbollah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Houthis, among others -- launched brazen attacks on Israel and effectively shut down shipping through the Suez Canal. For the first time, Iran launched from its own soil hundreds of ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and attack drones at Israel, a country smaller than the state of New Jersey -- a demonstration of the regime's fundamentalist commitment to destroying the Jewish state.

More importantly, witnessing a weakened U.S. stance, the Iranian regime accelerated its nuclear weapons ambitions, advancing its program reportedly to within "1-2 weeks" of a full nuclear breakout. Iranian leaders now openly claim that they have achieved the technological threshold required to build nuclear weapons. Tehran has been racing closer to this long-standing goal. Iran acquiring nuclear weapons is an accomplishment that will not only destabilize the Middle East, but undoubtedly spur "the mother of all arms-races."

President-elect Donald J. Trump at present seems averse to regime change in Iran. Unfortunately -- due to the regime's commitment to "wipe Israel off the map" and, as stated in its constitution, to export its version of Islam across the world -- there does not appear to be the possibility for a real long-term peace in the Middle East without regime change. Anything short of that simply invites the regime to wait Trump out, as well as whoever succeeds him.

Russia, not content with merely violating Ukraine's sovereignty, has also cultivated an increasingly robust military partnership with China, North Korea and Iran. Iran has been transformed into a significant weapons supplier for Moscow, and has provided crucial drones and missiles, and other arms essential for Russia's continued military aggression in Ukraine.

Recently, North Korea reportedly sent Russia 10,000 soldiers. "Why is Putin doing this?" U.S. Senator Rick Scott observed. "Because he knows Biden is weak."

U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham asserted that Biden "has screwed the world up every way you can." "[T]he world's on fire," Graham stated on NBC's "Meet the Press."

China and North Korea have joined Iran in supporting Russia's objectives, thereby introducing a new group that challenges Western influence. The Biden administration's inaction has not just permitted, but catalyzed, the formation of this formidable coalition among the world's most repressive regimes -- a new "Axis of Evil": China, Russia, Iran and North Korea.

The Biden administration's lack of decisive responses seems to have created a void of leadership on the global stage -- a void that was quickly filled by this axis of authoritarian dictators. The Tehran Times, a newspaper close to Iran's foreign ministry, openly boasted, "today we are witnessing the formation of a new world order," and acknowledged how the vacuum had allowed them to further their agendas.

Iran has also openly defied sanctions by selling weapons to Russia and engaging in oil trade with both Russia and China. Iran's oil exports have apparently reached a peak.

Not enough can be said to warn nations of the dangers that can arise from a lack of robust leadership, the perils of underestimating the ambitions of adversarial states, and the paralysis of being unable to confront an adversary for fear of escalation. The adversary, not the leader of Free World, is supposed to fear "escalation."

Biden's single term in office has contributed to an unprecedented destabilization of global security in Eastern Europe, the Middle East and in the Indo-Pacific. It is a turmoil marked by Iran's unchecked nuclear advancements, empowered authoritarian regimes, and an emboldened axis of nations ready to challenge U.S. interests across the globe.

"I never worry about action," Winston Churchill once stated, "but only about inaction."

The repercussions of allowing Iran, its proxies, and its allies -- Russia, China, North Korea and other malign actors -- to operate without meaningful deterrence, simply underscores the need for a "Golden Age" -- especially a new regime in Iran more aligned with the dreams of so many of its citizens -- and not a moment too soon.

• Follow Majid Rafizadeh on X (formerly Twitter)

 
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a scholar, strategist and advisor, Harvard-educated analyst, political scientist, board member of Harvard International Review, and president of the International American Council on the Middle East. He has authored several books on the US Foreign Policy and Islam. He can be reached at Dr.Rafizadeh@Post.Harvard.Edu

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21117/golden-age-middle-east

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

How South Africa uses anti-Israel rhetoric in the ICJ – report - Jerusalem Post Staff

 

by Jerusalem Post Staff

A recent report from the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy finds links between South Africa's ruling party and Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran.

 

SOUTH AFRICAN legal team leader John Dugard attends an ICJ session on emergency measures against Israel, following accusations by South Africa that the IDF operation in Gaza is a state-led genocide, in The Hague, in January.

(photo credit: PIROSCHKA VAN DE WOUW/REUTERS)

South Africa's case at the ICJ reportedly was backed by funding from Iran, a study by the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy (ISGAP) reported. 

The report, titled South Africa, Hamas, Iran, and Qatar: The Hijacking of the ANC and the International Court of Justice was published Friday. In it, ISGAP alleges that South Africa had developed strategic relationships with terrorist groups and allied nations, such as Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, and Qatar, which the report links with the ICJ case that accuses Israel of genocide.

It further alleges that the African National Congress (ANC), the ruling party of South Africa, brought forward the case to distract from domestic issues, which in turn allowed Iran and Qatar to push an anti-Israel agenda under the guise of South Africa's social justice reputation. Hamas and the ANC have had longstanding relations, the report alleges, saying that Hamas has presented its plight against Israel as a struggle against apartheid. 

According to the ISGAP report, the ANC was on the verge of bankruptcy shortly after South Africa announced its case against Israel. South Africa's ICJ case required a significant amount of capital to proceed; the initial submission alone is expected to have cost $10.5 million, and the final legal fees are estimated to be approximately $79 million. 

The party coincidentally received a sudden influx of unidentified cash after a series of meetings between Hamas, Iranian, and Qatari leaders, and ANC ministers, which caused concerns about foreign financial influence. ANC leaders refused to disclose the source of the funds, which covered all of the party's nearly $30 million in debts. 

South Africa's Minister of Justice Ronald Lamola speaks to members of the media on at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague, Netherlands, January 11, 2024 (credit: REUTERS/THILO SCHMUELGEN)

South Africa is a terror financing hub under the ANC

South Africa has become a hub for terror financing, according to the ISGAP report. Hamas and Hezbollah receive funneled money from South Africa, often with the approval of local officials. This is in addition to a growing presence of Islamic Militant groups, including Hamas and Hezbollah, in South Africa, the ISGAP report asserts, citing a 1998 South African intelligence document. The report claims that terrorist organizations use South Africa as a hub for military training, fundraising, and other media operations. 

The ISGAP report highlights that South African Foreign Minister Ronald Lamola attended Iranian President Massoud Pezeshkian's inauguration this summer in Tehran. Lamola met with Iranian officials during his July visit, such as acting Foreign Minister Ali Bagheri, who “highlighted the high capacities for cooperation between the two countries in international political and judicial fields by adopting multilateral mechanisms to counter unilateral approaches and the illegitimate restrictions imposed by some Western countries," according to the report. 

Bagheri also "hailed Lamola for his outstanding role as an undaunted and innovative diplomat in pursuing the case of the Zionist regime’s crimes at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and the special efforts by the South African government to denounce the regime’s crimes in international legal and judicial circles."

Additionally, the report goes over the strategic relationships between Iran, Qatar, and South Africa. South Africa has been instrumental in helping Iran gain political legitimacy and influential economic access by facilitating its involvement in the BRICS nations group. Qatar has invested heavily in South African energy projects, and the two nations have worked together on several international political issues, such as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. A Hamas official further claims that the terrorist organization's mediation caused Qatar and South Africa to strengthen ties.

ISGAP's report further details the several flaws present in South Africa's case, namely the fact that the plaintiffs did not mention Hamas's war crimes. It also mentions how the case left out parts of the Hamas charter that call for the total annihilation of Israel and of Jews around the world; doubly interesting when some of the legal team had links to anti-Israel organizations or participated in organizations with ties to organizations like the Popular Conference for Palestinians abroad. 

The report also asserted that 45 of the 574 references in South Africa's ICJ submission were sourced from harshly anti-Israel organizations, raising questions about the credibility of the claims. Al-Haq, an Israeli-classified terrorist organization, is cited, though it is not recognized by the US. 

All in all, ISGAP's report further puts into question South Africa's motivations for submitting the ICJ case against Israel as well as the overall integrity of the legal proceedings.

Jerusalem Post Staff

Source: https://www.jpost.com/international/article-829360

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Defense Department fails seventh consecutive audit but says on path to pass by 2028 - Misty Severi

 

by Misty Severi

A breakdown of the audit found that 15 of the 28 standalone financial audits received a failing grade, while nine of them passed. One received an "acceptable" or "qualified" opinion, while the other three remain pending.

 

The Defense Department on Friday failed to pass the seventh consecutive audit of its finances, but said it is making progress in having a clean audit by 2028. 

The Pentagon has never successfully passed the audit of its $824 billion budget since it was required in 2018, but the Marine Corps passed its own audit in February. A total of 1,700 auditors worked on the 2024 audit, which cost about $178 million.

A breakdown of the audit found that 15 of the 28 standalone financial audits received a failing grade, while nine of them passed. One received a "qualified" opinion, while the other three remain pending. The department as a whole received an "disclaimer of opinion," which means it did not provide enough financial information to form an opinion.

"Despite the disclaimer of opinion, which was expected, the Department has turned a corner in its understanding of the depth and breadth of its challenges," Pentagon Comptroller Michael McCord said in a statement. "Momentum is on our side, and throughout the Department there is strong commitment—and belief in our ability—to achieve an unmodified audit opinion.

"The path forward is clear," he continued. "Significant work remains and challenges lie ahead, but our annual audit continues to be a catalyst for Department-wide financial management reform, resulting in greater financial integrity, transparency, and better-supported warfighters."

McCord also noted that significant progress was made in five crucial areas, including addressing material weaknesses, improvements in system controls, “moving the needle” on physical assets, leadership engagement and use of data analytics, according to Stars and Stripes.

“This means that the Army, the Navy, the Marine Corps, the Air Force and [the Defense Information Systems Agency] have gotten their house in order on all their funding, or cash, as some people might think of it,” McCord said. “For context, the department has improved from less than 7% to over 82% of its funding being free of material weaknesses since I returned to this job (in June 2021).”

The comptroller added that he believes the 2028 goal of passing the audit is still achievable, but that the department would need to improve faster and stronger. 

The Defense Department is the only Cabinet-level department to have consistently failed its annual audit. 

 
Misty Severi is an evening news reporter for Just The News. You can follow her on X for more coverage.

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/security/defense-department-fails-seventh-consecutive-audit-path-pass-2028

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

IAEA chief: Iran’s nuclear sites ‘should not be attacked’ - JNS Staff

 

​ by JNS Staff

Rafael Grossi met with the Iranian foreign minister, who said that the government is willing to resume nuclear talks, but not "under pressure and intimidation."

 

Iran's head of the Atomic Energy Organization Mohammad Eslami (right) and the United Nations nuclear chief Rafael Grossi give a joint press conference in Tehran on Nov. 14, 2024. Photo by Atta Kenare/AFP via Getty Images.

International Atomic Energy Agency Director Rafael Grossi cautioned on Thursday against striking Iran’s nuclear sites, after Israel’s Defense Minister Israel Katz suggested they may be targeted.

“I say this with regards to Iran …, nuclear installations should not be attacked,” Grossi said during a news conference in Tehran, according to AFP.

Katz said on Monday that Iran was “more exposed than ever to strikes on its nuclear facilities. We have the opportunity to achieve our most important goal—to thwart and eliminate the existential threat to the State of Israel.”

Jerusalem is believed to have knocked out the Islamic Republic’s air defenses during its attack on Oct. 26, leaving the country’s nuclear facilities vulnerable.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly held back from attacking Iran’s nuclear sites due to pressure from the Biden administration. On the campaign trail in early October, a month before being reelected as U.S. president, Donald Trump said that Israel should strike Iran’s nuclear facilities in response to Tehran’s Oct. 1 ballistic missile attack on the Jewish state.

Jerusalem views a nuclear Iran as an existential threat.

Grossi was in Iran for his first visit to the country since May.

Iran’s official IRNA news agency said that he was expected “to negotiate with the country’s top nuclear and political officials.”

“Started my two-day visit to Iran with an indispensable meeting with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi,” tweeted Grossi.

Started my two-day visit to Iran with an indispensable meeting with Iranian Foreign Minister @araghchi. pic.twitter.com/c8Fg9LqqqD

— Rafael MarianoGrossi (@rafaelmgrossi) November 14, 2024

For his part, Araghchi described the talks as “important and straightforward,” adding that Iran is a committed member of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and will continue to fully cooperate with the IAEA.

“Differences can be resolved through cooperation and dialogue. We agreed to proceed with courage and good will. Iran has never left the negotiation table on its peaceful nuclear program. The ball is in the EU/E3 court. Willing to negotiate based on our national interest & our inalienable rights, but NOT ready to negotiate under pressure and intimidation,” Araghchi tweeted.

Important & straightforward talks with DG @rafaelmgrossi this morning.

As a committed member of NPT we continue our full cooperation with the IAEA. Differences can be resolved through cooperation and dialogue. We agreed to proceed with courage and good will.

Iran has never… pic.twitter.com/bwLLzrKzwE

— Seyed Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi) November 14, 2024

Grossi also reportedly met the head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, Mohammad Eslami, and was expected to later meet with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian.

Furthermore, Grossi said that he would visit the Fordo and Natanz uranium enrichment sites on Friday to assist in giving him “a full picture” of the country’s nuclear program.

“Tomorrow will be a very important step in my visit this time, since I am going to be visiting important facilities in Fordo and Natanz, which are also going to help me in having a full picture of the evolution of the program,” the IAEA chief said alongside Araghchi.

In his remarks to AFP on Tuesday, Grossi said he expects to work together with President-elect Trump on the issue.

“I already worked with the first Trump administration and we worked well together,” the IAEA chief said.

During his first term in 2018, Trump pulled the United States out of the 2015 JCPOA nuclear deal with Iran and stepped up sanctions on the regime in Tehran.

The president-elect plans to renew his “maximum pressure” policy on Iran when he returns to the White House on Jan. 20, including issuing punishing sanctions and targeting Tehran’s oil income.

Sources briefed on Trump’s early plans told The Wall Street Journal on Friday that the harsh measures against the regime are part of an aggressive strategy to weaken the Islamic Republic’s support for its regional terrorist proxies and significantly harm its nuclear ambitions.

Former Trump officials said that his approach to Iran will likely be influenced by its attempt to assassinate him. The U.S. Department of Justice charged three men on Friday who it said were involved in the Iranian plot.

Trump and Netanyahu “see eye-to-eye on the Iranian threat in all its aspects,” the Israeli premier said on Sunday following phone calls with the American.

“In recent days, I have spoken three times with U.S. President-elect Donald Trump,” Netanyahu revealed in a written statement published by the Prime Minister’s Office on Sunday afternoon.

The “very good and important talks” were meant to “further enhance the steadfast bond” with Washington, he said.

“We see eye-to-eye on the Iranian threat in all its aspects and on the dangers they reflect,” Netanyahu said. “We also see the great opportunities facing Israel, in the area of peace and its expansion, and in other areas.”

Tehran has the capacity to produce nuclear weapons should it choose to do so, an adviser to Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei said on Nov 1.

“We now have the technical capabilities necessary to produce nuclear weapons,” Kamal Kharrazi told the Hezbollah-affiliated Al-Mayadeen outlet.

“Only the supreme leader’s fatwa currently prohibits it,” he said, referring to a religious ruling made by Iranian leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in the mid-’90s.

“If the survival of Iran comes under serious threat, we reserve the right to reconsider,” added Kharrazi.

In May, Kharrazi told the ISNA news agency, “If the Zionist regime dares to damage Iran’s nuclear facilities, our level of deterrence will be different. We have no decision to produce a nuclear bomb, but if the existence of Iran is threatened, we will have to change our nuclear doctrine.”

The Iranian nuclear program is the greatest threat facing the Jewish state, Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar told the press on Monday.

“The most crucial issue for the future of our region and the security of Israel is to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons,” he said.

“The most important issue by far for the future of this region and the security of the State of Israel is to avoid Iran getting a nuclear weapon,” Sa’ar stated, adding that he was confident that Israel and the United States would work together to stabilize the region.

A nuclear Iran poses a threat to the entire region, he said.

“Iran attacks other neighbors, [it] attacked the Saudis, for example. Iran is directly connected, financing and instructing and responsible for so many terror organizations, some of them became terror states in the region,” he noted.

The IAEA reports that Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile has now reached 60% purity, nearing the 90% threshold needed for nuclear weapons.

JNS Staff

Source: https://www.jns.org/iaea-chief-irans-nuclear-sites-should-not-be-attacked/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter