U.S. army chief: New sanctions likely against 'non-responsive' Iran
Adm. Mike Mullen says Iran must get to a position where it is 'not a destabilizing force' in the region.
By The Associated Press Tags: Israel news Iran nuclearWorld powers are likely to back a new set of sanctions against Iran over the Islamic Republic's refusal to prove it is not trying to build a nuclear bomb, the top U.S. military officer said Sunday.
"I think signals are very clearly in the air that another set of sanctions, another resolution, that that's coming," said Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
The Obama administration had given a rough deadline of the end of 2009 for Iran to respond to an offer of engagement and show that it would allay world concerns about its nuclear program.
The administration is now beginning a push to get international support for additional penalties against Iran as a result.
"I grow increasingly concerned that the Iranians have been non-responsive. I've said for a long time we don't need another conflict in that part of the world," Mullen told reporters while flying from Germany back to the United States.
"I'm not predicting that would happen, but I think they've got to get to a position where they are a constructive force and not a destabilizing force."
Israel, the U.S. and other Western nations suspect Iran's program is intended to develop nuclear weapon; Iran insists, however, that its work is peaceful and designed to generate electricity.
The administration is concerned about Iran's refusal to carry through on a tentative deal struck in October that called for Iran to ship the majority of its low-enriched uranium out of the country in exchange for fuel to run a research reactor.
The deal was seen by the U.S. and its negotiating partners as a step toward building confidence in Iran's claim that its nuclear program is designed entirely to generate power, not weapons.
The administration also stepped up the momentum toward sanctions after the revelation in September that Iran was secretly building a second uranium-enrichment facility near the holy city of Qom.Meanwhile in Washington, senior Obama adviser David Axelrod said on ABC's This Week that time was running out for Iran to cooperate.
"The international community is going to have to deal with that if they don't change their minds," he said. "I think that the world is united and is willing to take additional steps if the Iranians don't turn around. ... Plainly, there are going to be consequences if they don't turn around."
Republican Sen. John McCain told Fox News on Sunday that the administration should act on its own to punish Iran and demonstrate support for Iranian dissidents.
"The president should stand up for the people who are demonstrating and risking their very lives on behalf of freedom on the streets of Tehran," he said. "Let's make it very clear we are with these people who are struggling for freedom as we always have."
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
I always thought that in a democracy, the military were subordinate to the political level, so it is rather strange to hear a military man (whatever the details) talking about the likelihood of further sanctions. I know that there is a close relationship in Israel between the military and politicos, but I thought that they were more separate in the US. No?
How is cutting gasoline and cookig oil to the average Iranian going to help people fend off the regime, or cause the regime to stop enriching Uranium? What kind of a nap time day dream are you people living in?
U.S. attacks Iran nuke sites. Iran bombs (nukes?) Tel Aviv. Israel is denied vital overhead airspace by the U.S. and subsequent self-defense. The end of the Jewish state? But isn't that what Edom and Ishmael want? Watch your back Israel.
Israel better realize their is no support in the us for a attack on iran and their will be hell to pay the congress is out of touch with the people just look at the poll on the health care bill hear
Is Admiral Mullen the US Army Chief or The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff? Are they the same?
After three rounds, of which all of them were useless, what do you think a fourth one will come to? Iran will be a nuclear power. It is only a question of months... By the end of 2010, Iran will claim to be in the most of select groups (Israel is a member too).
It is funky to read the history of east rome, hwhen byzanz started. Nothing has changed with Israel in the role of Roman supporting Arabs and Byzanz and Iran as the new two superpowers.
Sanctions mean nothing. Iran is thumbing its nose at the US and its sanctions. You can learn from your enemies. Israel should learn to act to protect its own security and not be so concerned with world opinion.
In a democracy like the US, the Commander in Chief of the armed forces is the elected president of the US. The chief foreign policy spokesperson is the Secretary of State. Generals, even (especially) the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, has no business discussing sanctions or any other foreign policy issues and giving statements to the press about the administration's positions. Appointd to the post of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs by Bush in Oct. 2007, his reappointment to a second term with the unanimous consent of the Senate (why can't they agree on health care reform with such zeal?)This gives him no say over foreign policy. Motor-mouth Mullen should keep quiet. Also, please tell the person who writes your headlines that Mullen is NOT the "army chief." He is the highest ranking military officer over all of the branches of the armed forces of the US. He himself was a naval admiral throughout his military career, and has never served in the army.
Israel has hundreds of nuclear bombs so Iran is also entitled. Israel got their bombs under the table (illegally) and so should Iran.