RSS
A ‘Long War’ Is Not the Answer to Israel’s Security Problem — and Could Lead to Destruction (PART ONE)
An Israeli military convoy moves inside the Gaza Strip, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, as seen from Israel, June 17, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Amir Cohen
The October 7 disaster shattered many beliefs and concepts in Israeli society, and the war Israel has been waging since that day differs from the wars of its past.
David Ben-Gurion and Ze’ev Jabotinsky believed that rounds of war in which the enemy is smashed against an “Iron Wall” would eventually cause the countries of the region to come to terms with Israel’s existence; this would in turn cause them to change their strategy and choose the path of peace, as did Egypt’s Anwar Sadat and Jordan’s King Hussein. Ben-Gurion’s understanding that an end to the conflict cannot be forced, and that Israel cannot develop and advance in a state of continuous war, led him to the security concept that was in effect until October 7, 2023.
Israel’s security concept has to address a fundamental problem: that the country 1) exists within a hostile region that does not accept its existence, and 2) cannot maintain a large army on a daily basis while advancing economically and socially. The solution — until October 2023 — was to maintain a small regular army to address ongoing security challenges; try and postpone wars by deterring enemies from exercising resistance; and maintain a large and agile reserve army that is mobilized on the basis of intelligence alerts. Because the mobilization of the reserves stalls Israel’s economy, this security concept required that wars be short.
The first commandment of Israel’s security concept was that Israel would never be able to force an end to the conflict on its antagonists because it is simply too small relative to the collective Arab and Muslim world. This approach created the dynamic of cycles of short wars.
Israel was destined to mobilize for a significant clash once every few years, to beat the enemy in a short and powerful war, and thereby gain a few years of relative calm. Israel used these periods of calm, together with the assets it gained during the wars (time, territory, deterrence, strategic stability) to transform from a tiny young country into a regional military and economic power.
But the periods between the rounds of war — that is, the “routine” phase of the security concept — were never calm from a security point of view. In fact, since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, not a month has passed without a security incident in one of the conflict areas. Israel’s routine security situation is in fact a routine of limited conflict.
Throughout its short history, Israel has never been able to completely eliminate any of its enemies. Ten days after the end of the Six-Day War — Israel’s greatest victory, in which it achieved the total disintegration of the Egyptian army — Egypt renewed fire.
Israel’s strategic success in expelling the PLO from Lebanon following the Lebanon War did not eliminate Palestinian hostility from Lebanon, and it certainly did not prevent Hezbollah’s development and indeed acceleration of strength. Operation Defensive Shield in 2002, and the transition from Yasser Arafat to Abu Mazen, who changed his predecessor’s policy of support for terrorism, did not lead to the elimination of Palestinian terrorism. To this day, the IDF is required to carry out operations almost every night to fight Palestinian terrorism in Judea and Samaria.
Israel made good use of the routine periods and turned itself from a small, weak, resource-poor country into a regional power in every respect. Along with strengthening economically, Israel also strengthened militarily. It hit the enemy repeatedly, sometimes so severely that it caused them to weaken and change. But as expected, Israel has failed to force an end to the conflict on its enemies. As Ben-Gurion said, “We cannot have a final battle.”
It can be argued that if Israel is fated to go to war at intervals over and over again forever, then all the Sisyphean security activity during the routine periods is unnecessary — in other words, it fails to bring results, as war inevitably breaks out again anyway. But Israel’s ongoing defensive and offensive military effort makes it possible to postpone the next war and maintain a tolerable level of violence during the routine periods.
Why does Israel allow the other side to arm itself more than it can be expected to tolerate? Why not act before the other side is dangerously well-armed? The answer is clear. Israel uses the routine periods to build and develop. Overly frequent wars might make it more difficult for Israel’s enemies to strengthen, but they would foil the part of Israel’s strategy that depends on the periods of routine. The “addiction to peace” — as the Israeli desire to extend the routine periods is sometimes called by opponents of the Ben-Gurion security concept — is not a sign of the concept’s weakness, but a by-product of its implementation.
If Israel cannot force an end to the conflict on its enemies, and its enemies include those who wish to act against it with violence, what prevents those enemies from acting all the time and arming themselves without limit?
If Israel cannot keep its entire army mobilized and active and must be content with a small regular army, what prevents its enemies from attacking it every day that the army is not mobilized? Why hasn’t every day of Israel’s existence been an October 7?
This is where deterrence and early warning come into play.
Israel’s enemies are usually deterred from starting a high-intensity war against it because Israel has proven that it is stronger than they are, and that a high-intensity war would hurt them more than they are willing to suffer. Deterrence keeps wars from starting and helps Israel maintain a tolerable level of violence during the routine periods. But deterrence is not supposed to, and should not be expected to, prevent war from ever breaking out. Nor is it meant to completely prevent any violence from ever occurring during the routine periods.
Israel tries to strengthen its deterrence capacity not to prevent war but to keep war away for as long as possible, on the understanding that war will eventually break out. At the same time, Israel invests a continuous effort in defense to make it difficult for the other side to cause it harm during the routine periods. Defense cannot, and clearly does not, prevent all violence.
Israel invests a great deal of effort in intelligence, the first purpose of which is to warn of the enemy’s intention to go to war. Because early warning might fail, Israel built a routine defense system designed to stop an attack in the event of such a failure.
Defense needs to respond to both threats from the borders and terrorism that occurs during the routine periods. This dual role — protection against low-intensity violence and an “insurance policy” in the event of a failure of early warning — can create confusion about the defense mission and even the scenario for which the defense is being prepared.
This seems to be what happened on October 7. The IDF failed to recognize the potential for a major Hamas raid on the Israeli villages and towns near Gaza. The IDF is prepared to prevent infiltration, not invasion. Whether the failure was in the IDF’s understanding of the intelligence or in the degree of protection afforded by the new barrier it built around Gaza, the IDF’s preparations did not take into account the possibility of a breach of the barrier or the potentially broad dimensions of such a raid. The IDF did not prepare for this scenario and did not prepare orders or routines for such a case. The Intelligence Division did not build a warning model to protect against such a move, and therefore did not provide warning. Weak preparation, and the failure to prepare a response in case of surprise, allowed Hamas to penetrate the border and carry out the October 7 attack, with all its catastrophic consequences.
But were there elements in the Hamas attack that Israel had no ability to defend against? Had Hamas discovered operative tools against which Israel could not prepare a defensive response? Did Hamas prepare in a way that Israeli intelligence could not discover?
The tragedy is that the answer to all these questions is no.
Has anyone in Israel ever believed that Hamas is interested in peace? Was anyone surprised to learn that Hamas still opposes Israel’s very existence and believes it should be violently resisted until it is destroyed? Did anyone in Israel think the IDF could deter Hamas to the point of forcing it to end the conflict — a principle that is contrary to the first commandment of the security concept?
The horrific harm inflicted on Israeli civilians on October 7, the taking of hundreds of captives, and the appearance of the loss of Israeli power caused Israel to go to war. The object of that war is to make clear that Hamas made a grievous mistake and to renew Israel’s strategic positioning in the arena. But did the magnitude of the blow inflicted on Israel suddenly make it more capable than it ever believed itself to be before the war? Did the catastrophic failure of Israel’s defense and early warning system paradoxically make Israel so strong that it can now force its enemies to end the conflict?
Did the atrocities committed by Hamas in its attack somehow make the IDF strong enough to eliminate the threat of Hamas from Gaza, bearing in mind that Israel has never been able to eliminate any of the threats that surround it? Did the terrible damage suffered by the surrounding communities make Israel’s economy and society so strong that Israel can suddenly conduct a long and intense war?
The shock and sense of rupture caused by October 7 led many to think that the Hamas attack had irreparably broken Israel’s security concept. Israel’s deterrence and early warning both failed, and Hamas was not deterred. Hence: it is no longer true that Israel cannot have a final battle. It is possible to go to war to eliminate Hamas once and for all — to wage a final war and achieve a complete victory.
We will try to formulate this alternative “October 8” concept of security. According to this view, Israel cannot ignore threats against it. It should act decisively and continuously towards the complete elimination of its enemies and their replacement with political elements that accept Israel’s national policies and goals. Thus, the goal of the war in Gaza should be the complete elimination of the military power of Hamas and the dissolution of its civilian rule in the Strip, until it can be ensured that it no longer poses a threat to the surrounding settlements.
Let’s ignore for the moment the endless consequences of this concept when applying it to Lebanon and the other arenas. Gaza is a limited geographical space with a topography that supports maneuvering. But even if it were possible to achieve complete victory in Gaza, what would it look like? Full and lasting Israeli control over the territory, à la Judea and Samaria?
After 10 months of war, the IDF has occupied most of the Gaza Strip and destroyed countless buildings and terrorist and tunneling infrastructures. Hamas still exists and functions, though it is unable to launch significant military operations. But it is possible that the manner in which the IDF used its force was wrong.
Even if the IDF had acted differently, it is not clear how Hamas fighters can be eliminated when they withdraw and assimilate into the general population. How can every last Hamas fighter be eliminated when they are the ones who choose whether to fight or blend into the crowd? A similar logic applies to buildings and infrastructure. The IDF has shown no mercy to buildings and tunnels in Gaza. It has used an unprecedented quantity of aerial weapons and explosives on the ground, and the number of homes it has destroyed is enormous. Notwithstanding claims that the Americans withheld armaments from the IDF, they provided Israel with tens of thousands of bombs that it did not possess at the beginning of the war. Could yet more infrastructure have been destroyed?
Will anyone be surprised if, after the complete victory in Gaza is achieved and Hamas is defeated, there continues to be a threat of terrorism from Gaza, including the occasional rocket launch? Can this be prevented? And if not, what is the advantage of continuing the war without end?
The IDF has been at war at varying levels of intensity for 10 months now. The regular soldiers are fighting almost continuously, and the reserve forces are already in their third round of action. Is this not enough? Is there no limit to the hours the engine of the IDF machine can continue to function? And is there a correlation between the prolonging of the war in Gaza and the problematic strategic situation in the north?
Supporters of the alternative view claim that Ben-Gurion’s view no longer provides security. According to them, avoiding a complete victory stems first and foremost from weakness. But their new concept ignores the reality of the difficulty that would be involved in achieving either the means or the international support necessary to prosecute such a long war. When asked what Israel should do about the lack of armaments, their answer is often that Israel will simply have to achieve independence in the field. But how can a war be waged right now with armaments that we do not yet have? And can Israel really afford to ignore its need for American military and political assistance? Can Israel stand alone against all the threats that surround us, which are not only military but also political and economic? Can Israel survive without American support at the UN? Can it survive a global boycott?
Col. (res.) Gur Laish served as head of the campaign planning department in the Israel Air Force and as head of the security concept division at the National Security Council. He has a master’s degree in political science from the University of Haifa. A version of this article was originally published by The BESA Center.
The post A ‘Long War’ Is Not the Answer to Israel’s Security Problem — and Could Lead to Destruction (PART ONE) first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Global Antisemitic Incidents Decreased in 2024 From Post-Oct. 7 Surge but Remain Alarmingly High, New Study Finds
A pro-Hamas march in London, United Kingdom, Feb. 17, 2024. Photo: Chrissa Giannakoudi via Reuters Connect
Antisemitic incidents worldwide decreased in 2024 following the record surge that followed the Hamas-led massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, but they remain significantly higher than levels recorded prior to the attack, according to a new report published on Wednesday.
Just hours before the start of Israel’s Holocaust Remembrance Day on Wednesday night, Tel Aviv University’s Center for the Study of Contemporary European Jewry, in collaboration with the Irwin Cotler Institute for Democracy, Human Rights, and Justice, released its Annual Antisemitism Worldwide Report, which focuses on anti-Jewish hate crimes in 2024.
“Antisemitism is not just a problem of the past or a fringe issue,” said Professor Uriya Shavit, the report’s editor. “It is a mirror to our societies. And in 2024, that reflection is still deeply troubling.”
The 160-page study revealed that anti-Jewish hatred, which spiked in the wake of the Hamas onslaught, continues to persist across continents a year and a half into the ongoing Gaza conflict.
“Contrary to popular belief, the report’s findings indicate that the wave of antisemitism did not steadily intensify due to the war in Gaza and the humanitarian disaster there,” Shavit said. “The peak was in October-December 2023, and a year later, a sharp decline in the number of incidents was noted almost everywhere.”
“The sad truth is that antisemitism reared its head at the moment when the Jewish state appeared weaker than ever and under existential threat,” he continued.
Australia saw the most significant rise in anti-Jewish incidents, with 1,713 recorded in 2024, compared to 1,200 in 2023 and 490 in 2022.
Despite the sharp surge in anti-Jewish hate following the Oct. 7 attacks, Australia recorded 478 incidents between October and December 2024, a notable drop from the 827 incidents reported during the same period in 2023.
A rise in antisemitism compared to pre-war norms continued into this year. In February, for example, Australia experienced a scandal in which two nurses were caught on video vowing to kill Israeli patients, prompting outrage from authorities. After the video went viral, both nurses were suspended and permanently barred from employment within the New South Wales state health system. They were later charged with crimes.
The United States also saw notable increases in anti-Jewish incidents, especially in cities like Chicago, Denver, and Austin. The Anti-Defamation League released its own report on Tuesday showing that antisemitism in the US surged to break “all previous annual records” in 2024, with the civil rights group recording 9,354 antisemitic incidents last year.
In New York, the city with the world’s largest Jewish population outside of Israel, police recorded 344 antisemitic hate crimes in 2024, up from 325 in 2023 and 264 in 2022. Last month, Jews were the targets of more hate crimes than any other group, according to police data.
However, between October and December 2024, New York saw 68 antisemitic incidents, a sharp decline from the 159 incidents recorded in the same months of 2023.
Canada recorded a record-breaking 6,219 anti-Jewish incidents in 2024, up from 5,791 the previous year. Although members of the Jewish community make up less than 1 percent of the country’s population, they were targeted in one-fifth of all hate crimes.
“Around the world, levels of antisemitism remain significantly higher compared to the period before Oct. 7,” Shavit said in a statement.
In Europe, Italy experienced a sharp rise in anti-Jewish hate, with 877 incidents reported in 2024 — nearly double the 454 recorded in 2023.
Switzerland and Spain both saw a rise in antisemitic activity in 2024. For example, nearly 2,000 antisemitic incidents were reported in French-speaking Switzerland last year — an increase of 90 percent from 2023. The German-, Italian-, and Romansh-speaking regions recorded a 43 percent rise compared to 2023 and a staggering 287 percent increase compared to 2022.
One of the most notorious recent cases was the Zurich attempted murder, in which an Orthodox Jewish man was stabbed and left with life-threatening injuries by a Swiss teenager, an Islamic State supporter of Tunisian origin.
On the other hand, France reported an overall decline in antisemitic incidents in 2024, but there was a concerning rise in physical assaults. The total number of antisemitic outrages last year was a slight dip from 2023’s record total of 1,676, but it marked a striking increase from the 436 antisemitic acts recorded in 2022.
Last week, a Jewish man wearing a Star of David pendant was brutally attacked and called a “dirty Jew” in Villeurbanne, a city in eastern France that is home to the country’s second-largest Jewish community. In another egregious attack that garnered international headlines, a 12-year-old Jewish girl was raped by three Muslim boys in a Paris suburb last year. The child told investigators that the assailants called her a “dirty Jew” and hurled other antisemitic comments at her during the attack.
In the United Kingdom, 3,528 antisemitic incidents were recorded in 2024, down from 4,103 in 2023 and 1,662 in 2022. The country also saw a sharp decline in October, with 310 incidents reported in 2024, compared to 1,389 in the same month of 2023.
Despite recording an 18 percent drop in anti-Jewish hate crimes from the previous year’s all-time high, the UK still experienced its second worst year for antisemitism in 2024.
In Germany, 5,177 antisemitic incidents were recorded in 2024, down from 5,671 in 2023 and 2,811 in 2022. During the October-December period, 671 incidents were reported in 2024, a significant decrease from 3,163 in the same period of 2023.
In South America, both Argentina and Brazil experienced increased antisemitic activity in 2024. For example, Argentina saw a 44 percent rise in reported anti-Jewish hate crimes compared to the previous year.
The post Global Antisemitic Incidents Decreased in 2024 From Post-Oct. 7 Surge but Remain Alarmingly High, New Study Finds first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Celebrities Help ‘Spotlight’ Holocaust Survivors, Their Testimonies in New NYC Portrait Exhibit
Some of the portraits included in “Borrowed Spotlight” that feature Jennifer Garner, Nicola Peltz Beckham, and David Schwimmer with Holocaust survivors. Photo: Shiryn Ghermezian/The Algemeiner
A new portrait series and exhibition that opened in New York City on Tuesday showcases Holocaust survivors paired up with some of the most notable figures in media, fashion, and entertainment, in an effort to preserve survivor testimonies and amplify their stories, as well as to help combat antisemitism.
The portraits in “Borrowed Spotlight,” which is on display at the Detour Gallery, were captured by South African-born, renowned fashion photographer Bryce Thompson. They debuted ahead of Israel’s Holocaust Remembrance Day (Yom HaShoah), which begins on Wednesday night and marks 80 years since the end of World War II. The photographs feature portraits of survivors alongside prominent Jewish and non-Jewish figures such as Cindy Crawford, Jennifer Garner, Billy Porter, Wolf Blitzer, Chelsea Handler, Jenna Dewan, Barbara Corcoran, Nicola Peltz Beckham, Scooter Braun, David Schwimmer, Martha Grant, Ashley Benson, Josh Peck, George Stephanopoulos, Sheryl Sandberg, and Julius Erving.
The recognizable names heard testimonies from the Holocaust survivor they were paired with and then posed for photographs together with the survivor. A total of 18 celebrity and Holocaust survivor-paired portraits are in the series, and they were all taken by Thompson in 2023 and 2024. The exhibit features these large-scale portraits but also additional behind-the-scenes photos and other elements that aim to educate and inspire the public.
One section showcases notes written by some of the Holocaust survivors about life, hope, and reflection. In one such note that was on display, Holocaust survivor Risa Igelfeld, who is 107 years old, wrote: “I am writing this to urge the world to bring only positive thoughts to one another and let love flow.”
“Holocaust survivors are few and far between. Special people with special stories, and I really felt like they need to be told. [And] firsthand was really important to me,” Thompson, who is not Jewish, told the large crowd that attended the exhibit’s opening on Tuesday night. “Hearing a story from someone who has told a story is not the same as sitting in a room with someone who lived through something.”
Thompson told The Algemeiner he was originally hoping to only include non-Jewish celebrities in the portraits because “I wanted non-Jewish people standing up for Jewish people.” But once the project started, Jewish celebrities reached out to him and said they wanted to participate in the portrait series. He also admitted that he had a hard time getting some celebrities on board for the project.
“It wasn’t as easy as I had hoped, but the ones who did say ‘yes’ said [it] willingly and happily, and we were lucky to have them,” he said.
The Holocaust survivors in the series include natives of Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Belgium, Romania, and one man who was born in a Budapest ghetto basement during a bombing raid in 1944. The photographs feature survivors of the Warsaw Ghetto, Auschwitz and Bergen-Belsen concentration camps, and one person who survived 12 concentration camps. After surviving the genocide of World War II, some of these Holocaust survivors went on to have large families, become graduates of MIT, rocket designers, entertainment lawyers, writers, acclaimed sculptors, tailors, members of the Israeli Air Force, doctors of clinical psychology, and Holocaust educators. The photo series also highlights a survivor of the Farhud pogrom that targeted Jews in Baghdad, Iraq.
The goal of the portrait series and exhibit is to take the spotlight off the featured celebrities and instead use it shed some light on the Holocaust survivors, to help magnify their testimonies and help them reach a larger audience, especially the next generation. “In these pairings, recognition is redirected, and the attention so often given to fame is instead used to illuminate history,” read a description of the exhibit that was on display at its entrance. “The result is a series of intimate portraits and conversations where past and present collide, where silence is broken, and where remembrance becomes an act of defiance against forgetting.”
Photo: Sabrina Steck
Brazilian model Daniela Braga is featured in the portrait series alongside Czech Holocaust survivor Gabriella Karin, who survived the war as a teenager by hiding in the one-bedroom apartment of a non-Jewish young lawyer who was located directly across the street from the Nazi-Slovak Gestapo. Born and raised Catholic, Braga converted to Judaism and her husband is Jewish. She told The Algemeiner that hearing about Karin’s experience during the Holocaust made her “very emotional because growing up in Brazil, we learned just a little bit about the Holocaust and World War II. But to have the experience to actually talk to someone who lived through it, it’s something so mind-blowing to me.”
“I could hear the pain in her voice,” Braga added. “It made me happy in the end that she’s alive and is able to tell her story to all of us, to share with other people. When we say, ‘Never Again,’ it really has to be never again.”
Braga also told The Algemeiner she met a Jewish people for the first time ever when she moved to New York 15 years ago.
“I’ve been immersed in this [Jewish] culture for 15 years. The Jewish culture is something very close to my heart. Anything that I can do to help the Jewish community, I will do it,” she said while explaining why she wanted to participate in Thompson’s portrait series.
Jewish actress Kat Graham is photographed in the portrait series with Holocaust survivor Yetta Kana. Graham spoke at the exhibit opening and said Thompson’s portraits capture “truth, resilience, and humanity.” The “Vampire Diaries” actress – whose maternal grandmother fled Europe during the Holocaust – additionally said the photographs “build a bridge between generations; a conversation between memory and legacy.”
“This project is about remembrance but it’s also about responsibility,” she told the crowd. “We are the torchbearers now. It is up to us to keep these stories alive and to ensure that history is never forgotten. That the voices of survivors, like Yetta, are not only heard, but felt. I invite you to see, to feel, and to carry these faces with you, long after you leave … Let’s never forget.”
The opening of “Borrowed Spotlight” on Tuesday night was attended by other well-known figures including Gregg Sulkin, Remi Bader, Moti Ankari, and “Real Housewives of New Jersey” stars Margaret Josephs, Melissa Gorga, and Lexi Barbuto. Sulkin, who is Jewish, told The Algemeiner he wanted to be in the portrait series but ultimately was unable to participate in Thompson’s project because of scheduling conflicts.
The photographs in the exhibit, as well as additional ones not on display, were compiled into a coffee table book available for purchase that features a foreword by Crawford. Proceeds from the book sales will support efforts to educate younger generations about the Holocaust. Proceeds from a private auction on Monday night of select prints in the series will benefit Selfhelp, which provides services and assistance to living Holocaust survivors in New York, and the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.
There are more than 200,000 Holocaust survivors worldwide. Nearly 50 percent of all Holocaust survivors will die within the next six years, while 70 percent will no longer be alive within 10 years, according to a new report released this week by the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany (Claims Conference). There are estimated to be more than 1,400 alive today around the world who are over 100 years old.
“Borrowed Spotlight” will be open at the Detour Gallery through Sunday.
The post Celebrities Help ‘Spotlight’ Holocaust Survivors, Their Testimonies in New NYC Portrait Exhibit first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Iran Fortifying Buried Nuclear Sites as Talks With US Continue, Report Says
Military personnel stand guard at a nuclear facility in the Zardanjan area of Isfahan, Iran, April 19, 2024, in this screengrab taken from video. Photo: WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
Iran is ringing two deeply buried tunnel complexes with a massive security perimeter linked to its main nuclear complex, a report said Wednesday, amid US and Israeli threats of attack.
The Institute for Science and International Security released its report based on recent satellite imagery as the US and Iran prepare to hold a third round of talks this weekend on a possible deal to reimpose restraints on Tehran’s uranium enrichment program.
US President Donald Trump, who pulled the US out of a 2015 pact designed to prevent Tehran from developing nuclear weapons, has threatened to bomb Iran unless a deal is quickly reached that would ensure that same goal.
Trump’s withdrawal prompted Iran to breach many of the pact’s restraints. Western powers suspect it is pursuing the capability to assemble a nuclear weapon through enrichment of uranium to high fissile purity, which Tehran denies.
David Albright, the institute president, said the new perimeter suggested that the tunnel complexes, under construction beneath Mount Kolang Gaz La for several years, could become operational relatively soon.
Tehran has barred access to the tunnels to inspectors of the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) who are monitoring its nuclear program.
This has raised concerns that they could be used to store Iran‘s stockpile of highly enriched uranium or undeclared nuclear materials, and advanced centrifuges that could quickly purify enough uranium for a bomb, Albright said.
IAEA Director General Raphael Grossi, on a visit to Washington, told reporters on Wednesday that those possible uses by Iran of the tunnel complexes “cannot be excluded” and the agency has repeatedly raised the issue with Tehran.
Iran, however, rejects an IAEA legal obligation requiring a member state to inform the agency of any intention to set up a nuclear facility even if radioactive materials have not been introduced, he said. “They are telling us, ‘It is none of your business.’”
“It is obvious that this is a place with numerous and important activities” related to Iran‘s nuclear program, Grossi added. “It’s a bit of a ping pong, but the digging continues, the building continues.”
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi, the chief negotiator with the US, said in a post on X in apparent response to the new report that Israel and unnamed “Special Interest groups” were looking to “derail diplomacy.”
Iran has said that advanced centrifuges would be assembled in one complex in place of a facility at the nearby Natanz plant, the centerpiece of its nuclear program, destroyed by sabotage in 2020.
The complexes, Albright said, are being built at depths much greater than Iran‘s deeply buried uranium enrichment facility at Fordow, near the holy city of Qom.
Commercial satellite images taken on March 29 showed hardened entrances to the complexes, high wall panels erected along the verges of a graded road encircling the mountain peak, and excavations for the installation of more panels, the report said.
The north side of the perimeter joins the Natanz plant security ring, it said.
The ongoing construction at the complexes appears to underscore Tehran’s rejection of demands that any talks with the US lead to the total dismantlement of its nuclear program, saying it has the right to peaceful nuclear technology.
Israel has not ruled out a strike on Tehran’s nuclear facilities in coming months, while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu insists that any talks must lead to the complete scrapping of Iran‘s program.
Iran‘s nuclear energy chief Mohammad Eslami, referring to concerns about the vulnerability of its nuclear program, on Tuesday appeared to refer to projects such as the construction of the new security perimeter around the tunnel complexes.
“Efforts are ongoing [to] expand protective measures” at nuclear facilities, Eslami was quoted by Iranian state media as saying at an event marking the anniversary of the establishment of Iran‘s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
The post Iran Fortifying Buried Nuclear Sites as Talks With US Continue, Report Says first appeared on Algemeiner.com.