متن متون سیاسی برای پنجشنبه 25/12/91

دکتر هادیان

US could use 13,600kg bunker buster bomb on Iran nuclear facility

Washington: A 13,600kg bunker buster bomb designed to smash through some 200 feet of concrete before exploding is a "great weapon" that could be used by US forces in a clash with Iran over its nuclear program, an Air Force general said.

Lieutenant General Herbert Carlisle, Air Force deputy chief of staff for operations, said the massive ordnance penetrator, which the military began receiving only last year, is part of the US arsenal available for strikes against countries like Iran, which has some buried nuclear facilities.

"The massive ordnance penetrator is a great weapon. We are continuing to improve that. It has great capability now and we are continuing to make it better. It is part of our arsenal and it will be a potential if we need it in that kind of scenario," Carlisle told a conference on US defence programs.

The Pentagon has begun working on military options if sanctions and diplomacy fail to prevent Tehran from building a nuclear weapon.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told the National Journal in an interview on Thursday that planning had been going on "for a long time."

Major powers are increasingly concerned about Iran's nuclear enrichment program, which they view as an attempt to build an atomic weapon. But Tehran says it is meant for peaceful energy production.

Israel also is worried about potential for Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said during a visit to Washington this week that time was running out for diplomacy and sanctions.


Panetta, who has said diplomacy and sanctions should be given more time, told the National Journal he did not think Israel had decided whether to order a high-risk raid on Iran's nuclear sites.

He said the United States was committed to preventing Iran from acquiring atomic weapons and would have a greater impact than Israel if it decided force was necessary.

"If they decided to do it there's no question that it would have an impact, but I think it's also clear that if the United States did it we would have a hell of a bigger impact," Panetta said.

The tough rhetoric from the Pentagon came despite President Barack Obama's effort this week to tamp down "loose talk" and "bluster" about possible military action, saying there was still an opportunity for diplomacy.

Carlisle also told the Credit Suisse-McAleese defense conference that a conflict with Syria or Iran could see U.S. military operations influenced by new tactical thinking at the Pentagon known as Air-Sea Battle.

That approach aims to take advantage of highly networked and integrated U.S. forces. Carlisle said the tactics focus on operating in multiple domains, from air and sea to space and cyberspace, while networking and integrating information from the different areas, like satellites and sensors on stealth fighters and unmanned aircraft.
"There's a space capability, there's a cyber capability, there's fifth-generation, low-signature force capability," he said.

"All those things are on the table and being thought about as we do this operational planning," Carlisle added, noting that Syria and Iran have developed significant defenses aimed at keeping potential attackers at a distance, a strategy Air-Sea Battle was designed to circumvent.

Carlisle said cyberspace could be a factor in a conflict with the two countries.
"All of the leadership has said nothing is off the table with respect to what we would employ and use," he said.

Iraq moves second group of MKO members from Camp Ashraf

The Iraqi government evacuated a second batch of nearly 400 members of the terrorist Mojahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) from Camp New Iraq, which was formerly known as Camp Ashraf, the Habilian Association website reported on Thursday.

The MKO members were moved to a garrison, where the United Nations aims to help them find places to settle as refugees outside Iraq.

Police in Baquba, capital of Diyala province where Camp New Iraq is located, said 395 MKO members were driven out towards Baghdad in 18 buses.

On February 18, the initial group of 400 MKO members was moved to Camp Liberty, a former U.S. military base near the Baghdad International Airport.

The relocation of the group is part of an agreement reached between the United Nations and the Iraqi government in December.

The MKO started its activities as a terrorist group based in Iraq in the early 1980s. In addition to the assassination of hundreds of Iranian officials and citizens, the group cooperated with Saddam Hussein’s Baathist regime in its repression of the Iraqi people.

The MKO had fought as a mechanized division in alliance with Saddam Hussein during the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war. But it was disarmed and left stranded after the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 that toppled the brutal dictator.

The U.S. government characterized the MKO as a cult and designated it a terrorist group in 1997, holding it responsible for the assassinations of three U.S. Army officers and three civilian contractors before the Islamic Revolution (in 1979).

With funding from the Iranian diaspora, the MKO has mounted a major campaign in the U.S. and Europe and enlisted many top national security figures from mostly Republican administrations as well as a number of prominent Democratic politicians to get its terrorist designation lifted.

+ نوشته شده توسط حشمت اله فرهادی در یکشنبه بیست و یکم اسفند 1390 و ساعت 2:8 |


متن ترجمه متون سیاسی برای پنجشنبه 11 اسفند 1390

دکتر هادیان


Fatah-Hamas deal, a fragile reconciliation but no panacea

The recent reconciliation deal between Fatah and Hamas is a fragile pact, according to many political analysts.

The stances taken by Fatah and Hamas over the decades show that the two bitter rivals have adopted opposite strategies. Fatah supports the idea of peace with Israel, while Hamas is known for its brave resistance against the Zionist regime.

Fatah seems to be disappointed with Israel, and the deal with Hamas is actually just a move meant to help the party save face among Palestinians.

Hamas, on the other hand, believes its day has finally come due to the ascendancy of the discourse of resistance in the Middle East and North Africa in the wake of the Arab world uprisings. The rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in Tunisia, Egypt, and Morocco has elevated the political status of Hamas, which is a movement which was founded in 1987, during the First Intifada, as an offshoot of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood.

Hamas has always followed a strategy of waiting for opportunities to arise, and along those lines, the group signed the reconciliation deal with Fatah.

Some political analysts also describe the deal as a move that was necessary to counteract Israel’s threats. In other words, although it may be tenuous, the reconciliation between the two groups should be viewed as positive because it promotes the Palestinian cause and strengthens the resistance. And both groups know that rifts among the Palestinians embolden Israel to take advantage of the situation.

The reconciliation deal, which was mediated by the pro-Western emir of Qatar, has paved the way for some minor developments in the relationship between the Palestinian Authority, which rules the West Bank, and Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip. For example, political detainees have been released in both the West Bank and Gaza and some other minor changes are expected to happen in the near future. However, the deal can never resolve all the disputes between the two parties because Fatah advocates peace with unacceptable compromises while Hamas believes in resistance until total victory.

In light of all this, it can be said that the Doha deal provides the two groups more time to sort out their internal political problems, but it is no panacea for the chronic illness of discord among the Palestinians.


Election fever sweeps Iran as parliamentary vote draws nigh

Campaigning for Iran’s parliamentary election officially started at 8:00 a.m. on February 23 and closes at 8:00 a.m. on March 1.The election will be held on March 2.

Iran’s streets are full of life as supporters of the various hopefuls are jubilantly campaigning in the streets for their preferred candidates.

The Guardian Council has approved the qualifications of more than 3,400 candidates who are competing for 290 seats, eying a term of four years.

However, a number of candidates have opted out of the election race over the past days. Initially, 5,164 people had registered for the election.

According to statistics, 48,288,799 people are eligible to vote this year.

All eyes are on Iran’s parliamentary election because it is the first election since the political unrest that occurred after the Iranian presidential election of June 2009.

Addressing worshippers at the campus of the University of Tehran on Friday, Interior Minister ….said all groups with different political persuasions are competing in the election.

Power shift to Asia: No need to panic

On February 15th, just as Chinese Vice-President Xi Jinping arrived in the United States for a four-day visit, U.S. President Barack Obama told an audience of American workers in Milwaukee: “Manufacturing is coming back!” Coming back from China, that is. But while the Master Lock Company of Milwaukee has indeed moved some jobs back to the United States, everybody knows that the flow will really continue to be in the other direction.

It doesn’t matter whether China’s economy finally overtakes America’s in 2020, or 2025, or 2030. A great shift of productivity and wealth is underway, and economic power generally translates pretty directly into military power. So will the United States and China be able to manage the shift without a great war?

At the end of Vice-President Xi’s U.S. visit on February 18, the future Chinese leader assured delegates at a trade conference in Los Angeles: “A prosperous and stable China will not be a threat to any country. It will only be a positive force for world peace and development.” Perhaps, but everybody else is very nervous about it.

The transition from one dominant world economic power to another is always tricky, and the historical precedents are not encouraging. Spain was the 16th-century superpower, and the shift to French domination, though never complete, entailed several generations of war. Then Britain displaced France, amidst several more generations of war.

When Germany challenged British supremacy and Japan began building its empire in the Pacific and East Asia in the early 20th century, the transition involved two world wars -- and resulted in the de facto division of the world between two non-European superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union. The omens are not promising, to say the least.

Both the U.S. and the Chinese armed forces use these precedents to argue for greater military spending. The Chinese generals mostly do it privately, within the confines of Communist Party hierarchy. American military leaders do it more publicly, by coming up with risk assessments designed to frighten the public into keeping defense spending up, but they both groups play the same game.

They can’t help it. Their military training and their whole world-view condition them to expect conflict, and their corporate interest in a higher defense budget leads them to define almost any change as a threat. It sometimes feels like we are doomed to repeat the past endlessly.

But the past is a complicated place, and there is a systematic distortion of history that emphasizes violent transitions at the expense of peaceful ones. In fact, at least one major power shift in the past century was entirely peaceful.

The U.S. economy overtook Britain’s late in the 19th century, and it was not inevitable that the change in the pecking order would be peaceful. The time when the two countries would be close allies was still far in the future, and throughout the 19th century Americans continued to see Britain, their old colonial master, as their most dangerous enemy. The two countries fought their last war in 1812-1814, but Britain kept a garrison in Canada until 1870.

London then withdrew the garrison, but not because it trusted the United States. It just calculated that the United States was now so strong that Britain could never win a land war against it in North America. It also concluded that a large Royal Navy presence in American waters was likely to drive the United States into a naval arms race that Britain would lose, and so began thinning out the number of warships that it kept in the western Atlantic.

It was the right strategy. The United States never invaded Canada again, and although it meddled a great deal in the affairs of various Caribbean and Central American countries, that did not threaten any British vital interest. The thorny crown of being the world’s greatest power passed from Britain to the United States without a war, and within one more generation the two countries were actually allies.

So now it’s America’s turn to figure out what to do about an emerging great-power rival on the far side of a great ocean, and one option would be to copy Britain’s example. Don’t provoke the Chinese by hemming their country in with air bases, carrier fleets and military alliances, and they’ll probably behave well. If they don’t, then the other Asian great powers, Japan, India and Russia, are quite capable of protecting their own interests.

The United States has no truly vital interests on the Asian mainland, or at least none that it could protect by fighting China. It was entirely safe from foreign attack before it became the world’s greatest power, and it will still be militarily invulnerable long after it loses that distinction.

Britain is a lot more prosperous than it was when it ran the world, and its people are probably happier too. Decline (especially decline that is only relative) is not nearly as bad a fate as Americans imagine.



ادامه مطلب
+ نوشته شده توسط حشمت اله فرهادی در دوشنبه هشتم اسفند 1390 و ساعت 13:44 |

Powered By