May 20, 2013

What could U.N. sleuths unearth at Iran’s Parchin base?

cd867b48a78b73336fbbae0c1dbc883e What could U.N. sleuths unearth at Irans Parchin base?
(Satellite image of part of the Iranian military complex at Parchin, about 20 miles southwest of Tehran. / Google Earth)

(Reuters) – The self-styled “Sherlock Holmeses” of the U.N. nuclear , now seeking access to a major Iranian base, say they have the capability to find tiny traces of atomic material at a site even if a country were to try to cover it up.

In talks later this month, the International will once again press Tehran to allow its inspectors to visit Iran’s sprawling Parchin military complex. That would enable them to bring back swab samples for thorough checks at the IAEA’s high-tech laboratory near Vienna.

have accused Iran of trying to cleanse the Parchin site of possible signs of tests relevant for the , casting doubt on whether U.N. investigators would discover anything even if they could go.

Iran says Parchin, located south-east of the , is a conventional . It dismisses allegations that it has carried out research and says its disputed is for energy and other peaceful aims only.

Experts say that while it may now be difficult to find any evidence, it would still be possible to locate traces of nuclear materials with equipment that can study particles 10,000 times smaller than a grain of sand.

Tell-tale particles could not be removed completely from a facility where uranium was used, said Stephan Vogt, a senior IAEA official, who emphasized that he was speaking generally and not specifically about Iran or Parchin.

“You cannot get rid of them by cleaning, you cannot dilute them to the extent that we will not be able to pick them up. It is just a ,” Vogt, who heads the IAEA’s Environmental Sample Laboratory, said.

“We won’t find it maybe the first time we go there,” he said. But, “the more often we go, the higher the probability that we will pick up (traces) in some corner, at some table, in some plumbing”.

Former chief IAEA inspector Olli Heinonen said any attempt by Iran to purge Parchin of clues would make the agency’s task considerably harder, but “complete sanitization is very difficult to achieve if nuclear materials were actually used”.

Like others at the IAEA’s Seibersdorf laboratory complex outside the Austrian capital, Vogt was not authorized to discuss Iran, Syria or any other specific cases which have made the agency a key player in international nuclear diplomacy.

But he made clear his confidence in the sophisticated techniques at the scientists’ disposal, including a new 3.8 million euro ($5 million) instrument to study tiny particles.

NUCLEAR “SHERLOCK HOLMESES”

Likening the IAEA’s investigative work to that of fictional detective Sherlock Holmes, Vogt said: “You are running around, looking for the right spot to sample and then you look for microscopic particles, they can tell you stories.”

Installed in a purpose-built building, the Large Geometry Secondary Ion Mass Spectrometer can analyze 100-150 samples per year – up from 30-40 previously – collected around the world by inspectors using small pieces of cotton on surfaces.

“We have a much larger magnifying glass, we see much smaller particles,” Vogt said, showing the machine, which occupies a room of its own. It “opens brand new doors into what we can see and what we can interpret.”

The Seibersdorf facility gained a more prominent verification role in the 1990s after the first Gulf War when the IAEA was given wider powers to detect undeclared activity following the discovery of Iraq’s clandestine nuclear program.

Iraq shut down its nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs under orders from the United Nations. Suspicions that it was not cooperating with investigators were used by the United States and Britain to justify their invasion in 2003.

The IAEA has shown it can find particles even when a country has worked hard to hide them. It picked up tiny traces of enriched uranium at Kalaye Electric in Tehran in 2003, even though Iran had removed equipment and renovated parts of the facility.

The IAEA also uses a network of member states’ laboratories to help it study samples taken during its inspections globally.

In order to strengthen its capabilities, it is now modernizing Seibersdorf, housed in an anonymous-looking complex of white, low buildings.

As part of an 81 million euro ($106 million) upgrade, the IAEA is building a new Nuclear Materials Laboratory where uranium and plutonium samples will be checked to make sure that materials that can be used for bombs are fully accounted for.

Hundreds of samples from nuclear reactors and fuel plants are pored over every year by experts dressed in white coats and protective gear in the present 1970s-era building. The vast majority of tests turn up nothing suspicious.

“People working here don’t know where the sample comes from. We are not doing politics here. We are only doing technical analysis,” said chemistry team leader David Amaraggi.

TUNGSTEN TROUBLE?

But despite the IAEA’s insistence that it is a technical organization serving 159 member states, its monitoring of Iran’s nuclear program can have geopolitical implications.

It regularly inspects Iran’s declared nuclear facilities – including the Natanz and Fordow uranium enrichment sites – but has so far failed to persuade Tehran to enable it to resume a stalled investigation into suspected research.

In a tenth round of talks since early 2012, an IAEA team led by chief inspector Herman Nackaerts will meet Iranian officials in Vienna on May 15 to try to end the deadlock.

The IAEA’s priority is to visit Parchin, where it believes Iran built a steel chamber for explosives tests more than a decade ago, possibly using non-nuclear materials like the metal tungsten as substitutes for uranium.

Citing satellite imagery, Western diplomats have said that Iran appeared to be rebuilding the specific part of Parchin the IAEA wants to see, after earlier razing smaller buildings and removing soil. Iran denies it has anything to hide.

IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano says the U.N. agency still wants to inspect Parchin, even though it fears that the suspected clean-up will have seriously undermined its ability for “effective verification” at the site.

Robert Kelley, a former IAEA inspector in Iraq, said there would be a good chance to discover particles of man-modified uranium if such tests were conducted at Parchin, but if substitutes were used they would be harder to find.

“Environmental sampling is thousands of times less sensitive for detecting non-radioactive things like tungsten,” Kelley said.

($1 = 0.7634 euros)

(Additional reporting by Mark Heinrich in London; Editing by Peter Graff)

Analysis: Israeli credibility on line over Iran nuclear challenge

e834531a4d91c0cde19261a0aacd45a8 Analysis: Israeli credibility on line over Iran nuclear challenge

(Reuters) – Israel risks a loss of credibility over both its “” for Iran’s nuclear program and its threat of military action, and its room for unilateral maneuver is shrinking.

After years of veiled warnings that Israel might strike the Islamic Republic, Netanyahu laid out an ultimatum at the United Nations last September.

Iran, he said, must not amass enough uranium at 20 percent fissile purity to fuel one bomb if enriched further. To ram the point home, he drew a red line across a cartoon bomb, guaranteeing him front page headlines around the world.

However, a respected Israeli ex- says Iran has skillfully circumvented the challenge. Other influential voices say the time has passed when Israel can hit out at Iran alone, leaving it dependent on U.S. decision-makers.

“If there was a good to attack, it was six months ago – not necessarily today,” said Giora Eiland, a former Israeli national security adviser. Pressure from Washington, he said, had forced Israel to drop its strike plan.

Israel has long insisted on the need for a convincing and setting clear lines beyond which Iran’s should not advance, calling this the only way to persuade Iran that it must bow to international pressure.

Serving officials argue that Netanyahu’s repeated warnings of the menace posed by Iran’s nuclear project have pushed the issue to the top of the global agenda and helped generate some of the toughest economic sanctions ever imposed on a nation.

But some officials have also questioned the wisdom of his red line, arguing that such brinkmanship can generate unwelcome ambiguity – as the United States has discovered with its contested stance on the use of chemical weapons in Syria.

Amos Yadlin, a former military intelligence chief who runs a Tel Aviv think-tank, suggested last week that Israel had also got itself into a tangle, saying Iran had expanded its nuclear capacity beyond the Israeli limit, without triggering alarms.

“Today it can be said that the Iranians have crossed the red line set by Netanyahu at the U.N. assembly,” Yadlin told a conference at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), which he heads.

DRUM BEAT RESUMES

Netanyahu’s office declined to respond to Yadlin’s remarks, noting that the prime minister, in recent public statements, had said Iran was “continuing to get closer to the red line”.

Tehran denies there is any military component to its nuclear activities, saying it is focused only on civilian energy needs. It charges that Israel, widely believed to have the Middle East’s only nuclear arsenal, is the greater regional threat.

Keeping in step with Netanyahu, Israeli defense and military officials issued clear warnings this month that Israel was still prepared to go it alone against Iran, once more beating the drums of war after months of relative quiet.

“We will do what is necessary when it is necessary,” armed forces chief of staff Benny Gantz told Israel Radio on April 16.

But there is increasing skepticism within diplomatic circles about the viability of such an option. Envoys doubt that the Israeli military could now make much of a dent on Iran’s far-flung, well-fortified nuclear installations.

“If nothing happened last year, I struggle to see why it will happen this year,” said a top Western diplomat in Tel Aviv, speaking on condition of given the sensitivities.

Israeli President Shimon Peres has done little to bolster belief in unilateral action, making clear this month that he thought U.S. President Barack would be the one to go to war against Iran if nuclear diplomacy failed.

“He knows no one else will do it,” Peres told Israeli TV.

The United States offered Netanyahu a new array of military hardware last week, including refueling tankers that could be used to get fighter jets to and from Iranian targets.

However, Israel cannot match the sort of firepower that the United States could bring to a battlefield. For example, Israel lacks the biggest bunker-busting bombs that experts say would be needed to penetrate Iran’s underground Fordow enrichment plant.

Such limitations always cast doubt on a possible Israeli assault and the more time passes, the more the doubts grow.

Ehud Barak, the previous Israeli defense minister, said in November 2011 that within nine months it would probably be impossible to halt Iran because it was increasing the number of centrifuges and its network of sites, creating what he termed a “zone of immunity”. Seventeen months have gone by since then.

RECONVERSION RATES

Washington has promised Israel it will not let Iran develop a nuclear bomb. Israelis get jittery, however, because they have set a very different clock for when they believe it would be necessary to intervene – hence the importance of the red line.

The Israelis make no distinction between Iran developing the capacity to build an and having the actual weapon. Yadlin told the INSS conference that as soon as Tehran could put just one rudimentary device on a boat and sail it to an Israeli port, it was a de-facto nuclear-armed nation.

Some analysts question whether Iran would indeed attack Israel if it had an atom bomb, or even try to build one, rather than just establish an apparent nuclear capability to project deterrence and regional power. To fire a at Israel, they say, could spell the ruin of the Islamic Republic in counter-strikes by a foe with a far bigger nuclear arsenal.

Gantz himself said last year he felt Iran’s leadership was “very rational” and unlikely to build an atomic bomb.

The U.S. concern is to prevent Iran, which has called for Israel’s destruction, from reaching the verge of acquiring a nuclear bomb – a nuance at variance with Israel’s position that provides a longer window of opportunity to continue diplomacy.

Exasperated by Washington’s refusal to set a clear ultimatum, Netanyahu came up with his 240-250 kg (530-550 pound) limit for 20 percent enriched uranium, hoping this would concentrate minds. The Iranians stayed below this threshold by converting 110 kg of the gaseous material to solid form that they say is destined to power a research reactor.

Yadlin said that rather than turn all of this into solid reactor fuel, Iran had kept 80 kg of it in the interim powdered state. That, he said, could be converted back to original gas form in around a week, inflating the stockpile beyond 250 kg.

With the red line in possible jeopardy, and unilateral military action in doubt, one security official suggested that Israel might turn to covert sabotage, with renewed focus on those specifically working on the 20 percent enrichment.

Five Iranian scientists and academics have been killed or attacked since 2010 in incidents believed to have targeted Iran’s nuclear program. Israel has remained silent about the attacks and other known acts of sabotage at Iranian sites.

(Additional reporting by Fredrik Dahl in Vienna; Editing by Jeffrey Heller and Mark Heinrich)

Kerry underlines conditions for talks for North Korea

355fcbfee108f9f60889d019e7cbeaec Kerry underlines conditions for talks for North Korea

(PhatzNewsRoom / Security) — As North Koreans celebrated the birthday on Monday of their country’s late founder, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry urged the regime in to ditch its and put a lid on its fiery threats if it wants to hold talks.

“The United States has made clear many times what the conditions are for our entering talks and they haven’t changed,” Kerry said during an interview with CNN’s Jill Dougherty in Tokyo.

“The conditions have to be met where the North has to move towards denuclearization, indicate a seriousness in doing so by reducing these threats, stop the testing, and indicate it’s actually prepared to negotiate,” he said.

Kerry was speaking at the end of a three- that focused on securing fresh commitments from South Korea, China and Japan to try to persuade Pyongyang to return to the negotiating table and renounce .

His visit followed weeks of dramatic threats by Un’s regime, including that of a on the United States and South Korea.

There is uncertainty about how advanced the North’s nuclear weapons program is, but Kerry on Monday reiterated the U.S. government view that Pyongyang doesn’t yet have the capacity to carry out a nuclear attack.

Last month, scrapped the 1953 truce that effectively ended the Korean War and said it was nullifying the joint declaration on the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

It also recently pledged to restart a reactor at its main nuclear complex that had been shut down under an agreement reached in October 2007 during talks with the United States, South Korea and four other countries.

Kerry said Monday that the United States is concerned that North Korea’s dogged pursuit of its nuclear weapons program could have consequences elsewhere in the world.

“It is the belief of President Obama, myself and the administration that what happens here also has an impact on perceptions in places like Iran, the Middle East, and elsewhere where we’re engaged in nonproliferation efforts,” he said.

Pyongyang insists that its nuclear weapons are a necessary deterrent because of the threat posed to it by the United States and its allies.

Multilateral talks on North Korea’s nuclear program have ended in failure in the past, and Kerry said the United States isn’t interested in going over old ground.

“We’re not going to go through another cycle of artificial negotiations that are geared to simply attract some kind of aid or lull in events while they continue to pursue their devices’ designs,” he said.

A U.S. State Department official said Monday there are no plans to move toward direct talks, “because North Korea has shown no willingness to move in a positive direction.”

Pyongyang on Sunday rejected a different proposal for dialogue, one by South Korea last week regarding the North’s suspension of activity at the manufacturing zone that the two countries jointly operate.

A statement via KCNA, the state-run news agency, called the South’s offer a “crafty trick” and “empty words without any content.”

And a KCNA commentary Monday was titled, “U.S. is to blame for escalating tension on Korean Peninsula.”

Kerry’s trip finishes on one of the biggest dates on the North Korean calendar: “The Day of the Sun,” when citizens celebrate the birthday of the country’s founder and “eternal president,” Kim Il Sung, who died in 1994. Monday is the 101st anniversary of his birth.

Current leader Kim Jong Un paid tribute Monday to Kim Il Sung, his grandfather, as well as his late father, Kim Jong Il, by visiting the halls where both men lie in state. It was believed to be the young leader’s first public appearance in two weeks.

Suspicions remain that the North could carry out a test of a mobile ballistic in the coming days.

Kerry said in Beijing at the weekend that the United States and China are calling on North Korea to refrain from any provocative steps – including any missile launches.

Pyongyang made good on its promise to launch a long-range rocket around the time of Kim Il Sung’s birthday last year; the rocket broke apart after launch and fell into the sea.

North Korea has made more threats since then. It launched a rocket in December that apparently put a satellite into orbit, and in response, the U.N. Security Council approved broadening sanctions against the country.

Angered by those sanctions, Pyongyang announced in January it was planning its third nuclear test and more long-range rocket launches as part what it called a new phase of confrontation with the United States.

It carried out an underground test in February, resulting in even tougher sanctions. Those measures, along with joint U.S.-South Korean military exercises in South Korea, prompted an intensification in the North’s threats.

CNN’s Elizabeth Joseph and Tim Schwarz contributed to this report.

Mistake in classification led to N. Korea info being revealed

130411204348 general dempsey story top Mistake in classification led to N. Korea info being revealed
(Chairman of the Gen. Martin Dempsey (L) listens as Defense Secretary testifies before the Thursday.)

(PhatzNewsRoom / Security) — The Pentagon was caught by surprise Thursday when sensitive information about ’s nuclear program from a classified March 2013 report was “mistakenly” declassified and discussed during an open hearing on Capitol Hill, raising questions about how such a significant error could have occurred.

In a hearing by the House Armed Services Committee to discuss the Pentagon’s budget, Rep. David Lamborn, R-Colorado, read from what he said was an unclassified sentence in an otherwise classified report by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA).

“DIA assess with moderate confidence the North currently has capable of delivery by , however, the reliability will be low,” Lamborn read before posing a question about its significance to Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey.

“Well, I haven’t seen it,” Dempsey said in response, appearing caught off guard. “And you said it’s not publicly released, so I – I choose not to comment on it.”

Multiple officials told CNN after the hearing that the information read by Lamborn was “mistakenly” marked as unclassified.

“Several of us here in the Pentagon were shocked by hearing that assessment read aloud in an open hearing,” one defense official told CNN.

The line came from a seven-page report, “Dynamic Threat Assessment 8099: North Korea .”

“The only thing DIA has unclassified is that one sentence and the title,” Lamborn said later Thursday in an interview with CNN. “This is not briefing reports supplied to the committee, this is simply a DIA analysis, a seven-page report in which one sentence is unclassified.”

An aide to the committee confirmed to CNN that Lamborn received the material from before the hearing.

“We were very careful and checked with DIA. to confirm that was an unclassified section before beginning any kind of conversation within an open setting about it,” the aide said. “We checked to make sure it was not something that was mistakenly declassified.”

“We double and triple-checked to make sure that what was divulged in an open forum was declassified,” Lamborn said Thursday night in an interview on CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360.

The scenario that played out raised the question of how it could have even occurred in the first place.

“Classification decisions are more of an art than a science,” a government official familiar with those procedures told CNN.

While certain paragraphs within a report may be classified at different levels to protect the revelation of certain sources and methods, the official said it was unusual to have one sentence in a report declassified.

Such a decision would most likely come from the head of the agency that published the report, or a more senior official such as the director of national intelligence, who is charged with overseeing the entire .

A congressional source told CNN there is a layered approach to classification with the level of classification indicated on each paragraph.

While certain paragraphs within reports are occasionally declassified, the source said it is highly unusual for a conclusion, such as the assessment read by Lamborn, to be declassified.

While questions as to how the statement was ultimately declassified are certain to mount within the intelligence community, the Pentagon played down the gravity of the assessment on Thursday evening.

“While I cannot speak to all the details of a report that is classified in its entirety, it would be inaccurate to suggest that the North Korean regime has fully tested, developed, or demonstrated the kinds of nuclear capabilities referenced in the passage,” Pentagon spokesman George Little said in a written statement.

“The United States continues to closely monitor the North Korean nuclear program and calls upon North Korea to honor its international obligations,” he added.

(By Jamie Crawford, with reporting from Pam Benson, Deirdre Walsh, Chris Lawrence and Barbara Starr)

Analysis: North Korea difficult intel target

t1largkimmilitary Analysis: North Korea difficult intel target

(PhatzNewsRoom / CNN Security) — A former senior US official, who recently retired, says is a difficult for the but “the coverage is very extensive using national technical means: imagery, intercepts and other means.” The official said, “It’s hard to get in there, but we do have external capabilities. Looking, listening and watching are all in play.”

Moving a to the east coast is “very discernible”, the official said, even on mobile launchers. The mobile launchers are more difficult–one or two might get through, the official said, but North Korea has limited routes to take whether by rail or road. “It’s not a large country with an intricate transportation system.”

What is difficult to ascertain is its . It could be buried in underground facilities where there are no air samples, nothing to collect.

There are other for gathering intelligence on North Korea, in particular a lack of , the official said. “We don’t have physical access, minimal, if at all,” the official said.

What’s missing from US knowledge is what are the plans and intentions of the Un regime. “They’re not going to attack us or anybody else with because they know the consequences. They’re not suicidal.” But there are a lot of , the official said, “Where are they going with their nuclear program? Who is whispering in Un’s ear? What’s the bottom line?”

The official says the physical aspects are very important, but “we don’t necessarily know where all facilities are, the amount of fissile material it has, how many actual weapons they have produced.”

“We look from afar, but we’re not in the eye of the storm,” the official said.

If the regime decides to launch a missile it would undoubtedly be a test, not a strike, the former official said. “They know enough to know not to take the country down.” But the former official warned that “it doesn’t mean we can’t stumble into something that escalates and spins out of control.”

The former official does agree with the moves the US has taken in response to North Korea’s continued provocations. “Kim Jung Un and the hardliners need to know we are very serious, we have capabilities that are extensive, which extend to our allies in Japan and South Korea and that we are prepared to use them if North Korea does anything of a kinetic nature.”

The official doesn’t think there is a risk Kim Jung Un and the hardliners could feel they are backed into a corner and be forced to act. “They respect you when you are straight, honest, show what you have and don’t threaten them.” But when asked if the show of force by the US–the B2 flights, the additional ships–could be considered a threat by North Korea, the official responded, “They put the ball in play with threats of strikes against the U.S.”

U.S. official puts onus on Iran in upcoming nuclear talks

23c7ed79d7207f5b1055678cef2b79ca U.S. official puts onus on Iran in upcoming nuclear talks

(Reuters) – Progress in this week’s nuclear talks between Iran and six major powers depends on how Tehran responds to a proposal offered by the six in February, a senior U.S. official said on Wednesday.

“How far we get … depends on what the Iranians come back with in terms of a response on the substance to our proposal,” said the official, who spoke on condition of .

“There has been a very positive line out of Tehran on the talks so far. We hope that that positive talk will now be matched with some concrete responses and actions on the ,” the official added.

The United States and its allies suspect Iran of using its civilian as a cover to develop atomic weapons. Iran denies this, saying its program is entirely peaceful.

At February 26-27 in Almaty, Kazakhstan, the six major powers – Britain, China, France, Germany, – offered modest sanctions relief in return for Iran curbing its most sensitive .

The senior U.S. official put the onus on Iran to put forward a at Friday’s talks in Kazakhstan, known informally as “Almaty II,” but also played down the idea that this week’s discussions constituted a last chance for Iran.

“I would hope that we’re not at any last chance,” said the official. “If we are not sure about how much we’ve gotten and whether we have gotten enough, we’ll go back and consult with before we reach any ultimate conclusion here.

“So I think we have to consider what we hear,” the official added. “We hope that they make concrete, substantive and specific responses so that we can go to work.”

In February, said the offer presented then by the six powers included an easing of a ban on trade in gold and other , and a relaxation of an import embargo on Iranian petrochemical products. They offered no details.

In exchange, a senior U.S. official said, Iran would among other things have to suspend uranium enrichment to a fissile concentration of 20 percent at its Fordow underground facility and “constrain the ability to quickly resume operations there.”

This appeared to be a softening of a previous demand that Iran ship out its entire stockpile of higher-grade enriched uranium, which it says it needs to produce medical isotopes.

Iran says it has a sovereign right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes, and wants to fuel nuclear power plants so it can export more oil.

But 20-percent purity is far higher than that needed for nuclear power, and rings alarm bells abroad because it is only a short technical step away from weapons-grade uranium.

Asked whether the United States wanted an absolute shut-down of Fordow, the U.S. official declined to provide details but suggested some flexibility.

“I won’t be able to give you specifics on Fordow, except to say that our objective to deal with Fordow remains the same objective,” said the official. “There are many ways to get there and our proposal is one vehicle for doing that, but our desire to make sure that Fordow does not remain the concern that it is very much part of the proposal … we have put on the table.”

(Reporting By Arshad Mohammed; Editing by Sandra Maler and Todd Eastham)

Obama, Netanyahu united in preventing nuclear-armed Iran

 Obama, Netanyahu united in preventing nuclear armed Iran
President Obama and Israeli Prime shake hands Wednesday at a news conference in Jerusalem.(Photo: Carolyn Kaster, AP)

Story Highlights

Netanyahu, Obama agree paramount with Iran
The trip is seen as a chance to improve U.S. relations with
A in Israel found just 10% of Israelis view Obama favorably

(PhatzNewsRoom / USA Today) — JERUSALEM — Netanyahu told a news conference Wednesday he was “absolutely convinced” President Obama is determined to prevent Iran from developing a .

Netanyahu made his remarks at the end of a long day for Obama, who toured Israeli and stressed that the two nations share the same concern over Iran’s .

“There is not a lot of daylight” between Israel and the United States on assessments of the status of Iran’s nuclear program, Obama said at the joint news conference.

Netanyahu made special point to the media of noting that Obama had reiterated Israel’s right to take steps of its own to defend itself and that includes against Iran.

“Each country has to make its own decisions when it comes to the awesome decision to engage in any kind of military action,” Obama said. “And Israel is differently situated than the United States.”

Obama was greeted warmly on Wednesday in Israel where he is on a high-profile trip to Israel, his first as president, to assure the of U.S. commitment to stopping a nuclear Iran and boost the prospect of peace talks with Palestinians demanding their own state.

“The United States is proud to stand with you as your strongest ally and your ,” Obama said after disembarking from Air Force One at Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion International Airport. “It’s in our fundamental security interest to stand with Israel.”

“Across this region, the winds of change bring both promise and peril,” he said, calling his visit “an opportunity to reaffirm the unbreakable bonds between our nations, to restate America’s unwavering commitment to Israel’s security, and to speak directly to the people of Israel and to your neighbors.”

Obama said his administration would pursue a Mideast peace that would allow residents of the Jewish state to live in peace and free from the threat of terror.

“In this work, the state of Israel will have no greater friend than the United States,” the president said after meeting with Israeli President Shimon Peres.

Peres said he welcomed Obama’s clear message that “no one should let skepticism win the day, a vision that says clearly that peace is not only a wish, but a possibility.”

The two presidents planted a tree brought from the United States to symbolize the relationship between the two nations.

Netanyahu, who has disagreed with Obama on matters of Israeli security, praised the president for his commitment to peace and security for Israel.

“Thank you for standing by Israel at this time of historic change in the Middle East,” he said. “Thank you for unequivocally affirming Israel’s sovereign right to defend itself by itself against any threat.”

The two leaders met again Wednesday evening for dinner at Netanyahu’s home, and held their joint news conference afterward.

The White House said it does not expect significant agreements to come out of the trip, in which Obama will also visit Jordan. Obama last visited the region in 2009, traveling to Saudi Arabia and Egypt. He visited the Jewish state in 2008 as a presidential candidate.

But Israelis, both Jews and Arabs, are skeptical that President Obama’s visit will lead to anything substantive on the peace front.

“The only thing I expect from this visit is huge traffic jams,” said a 60-year-old Jerusalemite on Wednesday, who was watching an early-morning talk show on TV in the small store where he sells lottery tickets, ahead of Obama’s arrival.

“When someone comes to Israel to work seriously, he does so quietly, not with a lot of noise,” said Natan, who said he could not share his last name because he has worked in Israeli security. For Natan, “peace means that my grandchildren won’t have to serve in the army. But that’s just a dream,” he said.

Preparing for a crush of breakfast customers at the bagel café where he works, Nabulsi Alaa, 26, an Arab resident of East Jerusalem, expressed the hope that the American president’s visit will make it possible for Arabs in Israel to visit family and friends in the West Bank, and for Arabs in the West Bank to visit Israel. “I’m somewhat optimistic,” Alaa said.

Former U.S. ambassador to Israel Edward Djerejian says the trip is a chance to improve U.S. relations with Israelis and Palestinians and clarify where the United States stands on the tumultuous events of the Middle East.

“I’m a believer in the importance of the personal relationship and dialogue between leaders,” said Djerejian, ambassador under President Clinton. “It’s important they establish a working relationship … that can be translated into possible action.”

Since Obama last visited, the region has become more dangerous. A 2-year-old rebellion against Syrian President Bashar Assad rages in Syria. Iran is refusing to end its nuclear program despite U.N. sanctions. Islamist governments have gained power in Egypt and Tunisia, and Muslim militias backed by al-Qaeda are on the rise in North Africa and the Persian Gulf states.

Peres referred to these threats in his remarks upon Obama’s arrival.

“The greatest danger is a nuclear Iran. We have tried non-military means, but other options are on the table,” he said.

“Hamas remains a terror organization that targets innocent people. On the northern border is Iran’s proxy Hezbollah. Hezbollah is destroying Lebanon and supporting the brutal massacre of the Syrian people … fortunately Syria’s nuclear capacity was destroyed, but unfortunately there are still .”

Peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians have stalled. Israel says the Palestinian Authority refuses to negotiate over the portions of the West Bank that should go to a Palestinian state and those that should be part of Israel. Palestinians argue that Israel will not compromise to their satisfaction, so why negotiate?

Palestinians held small protests in the West Bank and Gaza. Demonstrators in the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip burned posters of Obama and U.S. flags, accusing the U.S. of being biased toward Israel. The militant Hamas, which has been designated a terror group by the U.S., vows to destroy Israel.

In the West Bank, about 200 activists erected about a dozen tents in an area just outside of Jerusalem to draw attention to Israel’s policy of building housing in areas they want for an independent state.

Silvan Shalom, a Cabinet minister in Netanyahu’s Likud Party, said a provisional agreement is possible. “Our goal is to reach an agreement (even) if it is in stages,” he said.

Dan Schueftan, the director of the National Security Center at the University of Haifa, and a visiting professor at Georgetown University, predicted the Obama visit will accomplish almost nothing for Israeli-Palestinian relations.

“You can’t be pessimistic enough. The gaps between the mainstream Israeli and Palestinian positions are too large. You can’t have a peace deal without including Gaza,” Schueftan said. “But you can’t reach a settlement with the (Palestinian President) Abbas that doesn’t include Gaza. And Israel can’t include Gaza.”

Furthermore, he said, the Palestinians won’t abandon the “right of return,” but “if you bring to Israel every Palestinian whose grandparents left in 1948. No Israeli government could survive if it agreed to this.”

Still, Schueftan believes Obama’s visit could strengthen U.S-Israel ties.

“The basic relations between Israel and the U.S. are very, very solid. I think Obama realizes that he went about things in the wrong way in his first term in office and is adopting a different approach that has much more potential to succeed.

“Now, he is emphasizing the positive and is willing to listen to the Israelis. And the recent Israeli election produced a much more centrist reality. We have a much better starting point.”

However, Obama arrives at a time when a recent media poll in Israel found just 10% of Israelis view him favorably — in light of his public bouts with Netanyahu, who asked Obama to set a “red line” on when military forces must be used against Iran.

“Obama is retreating from the Middle East, indifferent to the collapse of Egypt, uninterested in the return of al-Qaeda to Iraq, and he appears to have no blueprint for Iran other than more concessions,” says Danielle Pletka of the American Enterprise Institute. “So why’s he going?”

Contributing: Oren Dorell in McLean, Va.

Obama: Iran more than a year away from developing nuclear weapon

130314201141 bts obama in israel talking iran 00004708 story top Obama: Iran more than a year away from developing nuclear weapon

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

NEW: says reports of tense relationship with Netanyahu are overblown
NEW: The president says a two-state solution is the answer for
NEW: Obama says he has no immediate plans of releasing convicted spy Jonathan Pollard
Obama says he’s been ‘crystal clear’ on Iran’s possession of a

() — Iran is more than a year away from developing a nuclear weapon, but that does not mean the United States will wait for it to become a reality, President Barack Obama said in an interview that aired Thursday on an station.

“I have been crystal clear about my position on Iran possessing a nuclear weapon. That is a red line for us. It is not only something that would be dangerous for Israel. It would be dangerous for the world,” Obama told CNN affiliate Israeli Channel 2 TV before a scheduled visit next week to the country.

“…I’ve also said there is a window — not an infinite period time, but a — where we can resolve this diplomatically.”

Israeli Netanyahu has repeatedly called on Obama to establish a clear line that Iran cannot cross with its , if it wants to avoid war.

Obama has resisted such a move, and Netanyahu has shown growing impatience with what he has previously called a lack of clarity by the Obama administration on articulating red lines over Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

U.S. have said they do not believe Iran has decided to develop a nuclear weapon, even as evidence continues to mount that the country is improving its ability to do so.

Iran denies that it aims to build a , saying that its nuclear program is for energy and medical use.

“Right now, we think that it would take over a year or so for Iran to actually develop a nuclear weapon,” Obama told Channel 2. The interview was conducted Wednesday in Washington, the channel said.

“But obviously, we don’t want to cut it too close. What we are going to do is to continue to engage internationally with Iran.”

Obama also said he believes that the international economic sanctions, some of the “strongest” ever imposed against Tehran, are having an effect on the country.

“They are not yet at the point, I think, where they’ve made a fundamental decision to get right with the international community,” the president said.

“But I do think they are recognizing that there is a severe cost for them to continue down the path they are on and that there’s another door open.”

Obama said his message to Netanyahu during his visit to Israel would be much the same as it has previously been.

“If we can resolve it diplomatically, that’s a more lasting solution. If not, I continue to keep all options on the table,” he said.

When pushed during the interview to define those options, the president responded: “When I say all options are on the table, all options are on the table. The United States obviously has significant capabilities.”

He said the goal is to ensure that Iran does not develop a nuclear weapon that could threaten Israel or trigger a possible arms race in the region.

United States-Israel relationship

Obama’s three-day visit to Israel next week is widely viewed as an opportunity for the president to relay the United States’ commitment to Israel and its security. It is his first trip to Israel since being elected president. He has visited the country three times, the last as a U.S. senator.

The relationship between Netanyahu and Obama has been reportedly tense in large part because of their differences over major issues such as Iran’s nuclear development and the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

Obama downplayed the tension between the two leaders but conceded that relations between his administration and Netanyahu’s government have not always been sunny.

“There are conservative views both here in the United States and in Israel that may not jibe with mine, particularly when there is an election season coming up,” he said.

During last year’s presidential election, Netanyahu and other Israeli officials painted Obama’s challenger, Mitt Romney, as a stronger proponent of Israel and its security.

Israeli-Palestinian peace

Obama said he plans to meet not only with Netanyahu and Israeli government but also with the Palestinian Authority’s president, Mahmoud Abbas, and its prime minister, Salam Fayyad.

Obama has repeatedly said he backs a two-state solution.

“It’s not a matter of unilateral concessions. It’s a matter of both parties coming together and recognizing that their futures will be inextricably linked and that Israel will be safer, more secure, more prosperous, if the issue can be resolved,” he said.

“And, obviously, Israel can’t resolve it by itself. But it can’t stop trying.”

American spy

Obama also is likely to face questions during his visit about the possible release of convicted spy Jonathan Pollard, a U.S. citizen sentenced to life in prison for giving American military secrets to Israel.

Pollard was a civilian intelligence analyst for the U.S. Navy when he was arrested in 1985 on charges that he provided secrets to the Israelis. He pleaded guilty to one count of espionage.

The Israeli government, which has acknowledged that Pollard was its spy, granted him citizenship and has been lobbying for his release.

But while he is considered a patriot by the Israeli government, Pollard has been turned down for clemency by Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.

“I have no plans of releasing Jonathan Pollard immediately,” Obama said during the interview.

The president also did not commit to reviewing the case other than to ensure that Pollard, as a U.S. citizen, is “accorded the same kind of review” given to all Americans.

Iran, world powers agree to expert talks on Tehran’s nuclear program

912e18387a6f6c630d066f818d18ffac Iran, world powers agree to expert talks on Tehrans nuclear program

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

NEW: Experts to meet in Turkey on March 18
The talks come amid new sanctions toward Iran

Almaty, Kazakhstan () — Diplomats emerged Wednesday from an unusually secretive round of talks over Iran’s controversial with a joint announcement to hold a follow-up meeting within weeks.

In a joint statement, the European Union’s foreign , Catherine Ashton, and the chief Iranian , Saeed Jalili, announced that would meet in Istanbul, Turkey, on March 18.

Political directors would later reconvene in this snowbound Kazakhstani city on April 5.

Iranian and representatives of the P5 plus 1 nations — the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany — entered into the talks Tuesday in Almaty, Kazakhstan, before the backdrop of fresh against Iran.

Their crippling effect has fueled resentment in Tehran.

Iranian arts experts visit counterparts in United States

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Eight arts specialists from Iran are in the United States for three weeks
The visit is part of a program to foster professional ties between Americans, counterparts
won’t meet with U.S. officials because the countries don’t have

Washington (CNN) — Expectations are low for a breakthrough with Iran in the latest round of in Kazakhstan, but relations between the Unites States and the Iranian people are proving much more promising.

U.S. wrestlers visited Tehran last week to compete in the World Cup, where they received a warm welcome by Iranian fans at the capital’s Azadi Stadium.

And now, CNN has learned, eight Iranian museum specialists on Monday began a three-week visit to the United States as part of a State Department cultural exchange program.

The five-city tour includes stops in Washington, Philadelphia, Chicago, New York City, and Los Angeles, where the group will learn about best practices in securing and displaying art exhibits from curators and archeologists at some of the most popular American museums including the National Gallery, the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the Guggenheim Museum. They will also visit universities and meet with other art-related organizations.

The U.S. does not have government-to-government exchanges with Iran, so the visitors will not meet with any American officials.

The State Department’s International Visitor Leadership Program, through which the visitors are being hosted, works to connect Americans and citizens from other countries so they can build relationships with professional counterparts. The State Department’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs offers a wide range of academic, cultural, private-sector, professional and sports exchange programs.

“These visits offer an opportunity to show a different American face to other countries, one that is non-commercial, non-political, and non-military,” one State Department official said of the exchanges. “They support personal growth, lead to a deeper understanding of foreign cultures and improve international relationships”

After a 25-year hiatus, the International Visitor Leadership Program was restarted with Iran in 2006. Since then, the State Department has hosted 31 groups of Iranian mid-level professionals, mostly in the arts, medicine and sports, in an effort to build relationships with the Iranian people and hopefully create a basis for further cooperation.