• Published 11:48 21.12.09
  • Latest update 16:42 21.12.09

U.S. won't rule out Iran strike; France touts new nuclear sanctions

France FM says Russia already agrees to impose set on Tehran, believes China will follow.

By Haaretz Service and News Agencies Tags: Israel news Iran nuclear

Military force would have only limited effect in stopping Iran from developing nuclear weapons but must remain an option, the top U.S. military officer said Monday.

"Tehran shows no signs of backing down in the standoff over what the United States and other countries say is its drive for a nuclear bomb," Adm. Mike Mullen, the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told his staff in an annual assessment of the nation's risks and priorities.

"My belief remains that political means are the best tools to attain regional security and that military force will have limited results," Mullen wrote. "However, should the president call for military options, we must have them ready."

On Monday, Republican Sen. John McCain voiced support for attempting economic pressure against Iran before considering military action. "Sanctions have to be tried before we explore the last option," he said on ABC television.

But McCain, the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, wondered whether other countries such as Israel have the patience to see if sanctions will work.

Mullen, the president's chief military adviser, had said separately on Sunday that he is worried about Iran's intentions and said the clock is running on Obama's offer of engagement.

"I've said for a long time we don't need another conflict in that part of the world, he told reporters traveling with him on a visit to Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq. 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."

Also on Monday, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said the international community has no other choice than to impose new sanctions on Iran for Tehran's refusal to cooperate on its nuclear program.

Kouchner said Russia was already on board with the need for sanctions, and that he believed the Chinese will follow.

"I think there is no other solution," Kouchner told journalists. "The exact nature of the sanctions was still under discussion," he said, but added that they would be specific.

"The wealthy will be hit," Kouchner said, implying that measures to restrict access to funds outside Iran were under consideration. He also said that sanctions would be difficult to put in place.

The United States has given Iran an informal deadline of the end of the year to demonstrate that it is seriously willing to discuss its nuclear program. The U.N. Security Council is not expected to discuss the issue of possible sanctions until January.

Kouchner also expressed his continued support for the Iranian opposition movement.

"I believe deeply in the importance of this movement," he said, adding that the "opposition had been urging the international community to do more to support its efforts."

In addition to Iran's nuclear program, Kouchner said France would not consider a prisoner exchange with Tehran to allow young French academic Clotilde Reiss - who was arrested in Iranian postelection protests - to return home.

"It is out of the question ... We will not exchange anything," Kouchner said.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has hinted at a prisoner exchange to resolve the issue.

An Iranian convicted in the killing of Shapour Bakhtiar, a former Iranian prime minister turned exiled opposition leader, is imprisoned in France.

Kouchner said Reiss is a "hostage .... she is innocent."

U.S. Senator John McCain echoed Kouchner's comments Monday, when the Arizona Republican told television network ABC that sanctions "have to be tried before we explore the last option, like a military attack."

Meanwhile, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator called for a global nuclear weapons ban on Monday but insisted all nations - including his own - have a right to develop nuclear energy.

Visiting Tokyo to meet with senior Japanese officials, Saeed Jalili insisted that his country's nuclear program is for civilian purposes, although the U.S. and other nations fear its goal is to produce weapons.

"The crime that was committed in Hiroshima must never be repeated," Jalili told reporters at the Foreign Correspondents' Club of Japan, referring to the United States' dropping of an atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Japan, at the end of World War II. "A global determination must be made to disarm all nations with these weapons."

  • Print Page
  • Send to a friend
  • Share
  • Text Size +|-
 
 
TalkBacks

Why Facebook Connect?

Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.

Add a comment

Add your reply

  • 16. 0 0
    "sanctions" is code for containment
    • jon
    • 22.12.09
    • 16:44

    "sanctions" are really code word for containment..why is that? because I think it's generally understood, that a) sanctions wont have real teeth, and b) regardless, they wont work, and therefore, proponents of sanctions are actually settling for containment, which I don't believe works in irans case. Boil it down, it's short term gain for long term pain. Iran will use what they develop...bet on it. what no one seems to want to discuss, is if a military strike delays their nuke program, maybe it buys time to topple the regime? maybe it emboldens the reformists? so many leftists seem to think it will rally iranians to the govt and the mad mullahs...why is that? I think it will embolden reformists..and if it buys time, so much the better..the mantra that a military strike accelerates iran's efforts toward nuke development is ridiculous..they are moving there already so it doesn't change that fact if we buy time needed now.

  • 15. 0 0
    Lynn - You are quite mistaken
    • Natallie Durson
    • 22.12.09
    • 04:23

    I don't know whether Iran is building a bomb or not. I have always assumed they were and my posts reflect my opinion.

  • 14. 0 0
    Educate me
    • jerri i
    • 22.12.09
    • 04:13

    Can anyone tell me of a single instancewhen sanctions against an agressive dictatorial state has ever accomplished anything? Do not cite S.Africa it was not an agresive dictatorship though it was a racist state.

  • 13. 0 0
    "should the president call for military options"...
    • Fortuna Benmayor
    • 22.12.09
    • 02:29

    Enough with the "won't rule out strikes" fad. The president has no balls for it, no stomach for it and no understanding of the nightmare that both leaving Iran with nukes as well as its retaliation against Israel will be, in case it is struck.

  • 12. 0 0
    Iran's Bomb
    • sfg
    • 22.12.09
    • 02:13

    Will be used by a proxy such as Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, Syria, etc. Iran will be able to deny using the bomb.

  • 11. 0 0
    iran
    • observer
    • 22.12.09
    • 00:54

    brianL well spoken

  • 10. 0 0
    whether other countries such as Israel have the patience to see
    • Joseph .E
    • 21.12.09
    • 22:47

    if sanctions will work. " It's not about patience, nor sanctions . Iran will have the bomb by next year 2010 . sanctions are only smoke creen to give Iran the time needed to speedily manufacture the bomb . you don't heal a hand by checking the leg .

  • 9. 0 0
    BrianL
    • JJ
    • 21.12.09
    • 22:28

    you sound brilliant!

  • 8. 0 0
    Let Us Assume (For Argument's Sake) That Iran Has A Nuke
    • chet
    • 21.12.09
    • 21:54

    First, to correct a dangerous false misconception: Ahmedinejad absolutely does nor have the political power to order a nuclear strike - that power resides solely with the mullahs. Second, does anyone but delusional Israel-firsters believe that Iran's leaders are not completely aware that an unprovoked attack on Israel would lead to Iran's total destruction by the US and Israeli response? Or that such an unprovoked attaxk will never happen?

  • 7. 0 0
    Durson..but you said they weren't building a bomb
    • Lynn
    • 21.12.09
    • 21:52

    or any other nuclear weapons. It would seem the deniers of reality are the dumb ones. You fit in that category quite nicely.

  • 6. 0 0
    France says more talk while others want action
    • Chaim Ben Kahan
    • 21.12.09
    • 21:23

    France always wants more talk while they make side deals with Iran and profit off the oppression of the Iranian people and global insecurity. The fact that we keep asking ourselves whether to bomb Iran is a clear indicator that we should be bombing Iran as its the best recourse to make the region and planet safer. We must do so with respect to civilians and with no intention to occupy Iran only to cause a regime change, end the Islamic revolution and nullify the nuclear threat. We would be doing a favor for the Iranian people who live in daily fear of their own government and have no freedoms.

  • 5. 0 0
    US is kidding,and Iran knows it very well
    • Observer
    • 21.12.09
    • 20:25

    I donñt understand why the US follow this foolish way,Iran will continue with its nukes,because they have the missiles to reach to the whole Israel and has the army to attack US army in middleast.

  • 4. 0 0
    Ruling Out Options
    • Mark of Lewiston
    • 21.12.09
    • 20:12

    Few, if any countries take the military option off the table. But few reach for the gun first, too. Russia hasn't ruled out the military option with Chechnya not with Georgia. Israel never takes the option off the table. Only Abbass seems to have taken the military option entirely off the table and look how effective his negotiations have been.

  • 3. 0 0
    What is the dumbest political move in the history of the world?
    • BrianL
    • 21.12.09
    • 19:03

    Q: What is the dumbest political move in the history of the world? Natallie Durson Los Angeles, CA. A: Attacking a nation on the verge of obtaining nuclear weapons. WRONG! Actually, the dumbest political move in history would be to let a religious, fanatical maniac who constantly calls openly for the destruction of a country, kills his own people, continues to deny that Hitler MURDERED 6million people, and wants to see it happen again... letting THIS man get nuclear weapons or any other weapons of mass destruction WOULD BE the dumbest political move in history. Iran WILL use the bomb once they develop it. Now will you want to live in a world where nuclear weapons are handed out to Hezbollah, Hamas, Al-Qaeda, and the Taliban, etc to attack the West? THAT is the situation we are looking at. It's not like the US has not tried diplomacy, we've been doing diplomacy since 2002... DIPLOMACY DOES NOT WORK WITH RADICAL ISLAMIST FUNDAMENTALISTS!! What do you left wing idiots not understand?

  • 2. 0 0
    omissions abound
    • jon
    • 21.12.09
    • 16:17

    "sanctions" are really code word for containment..why is that? because I think it's generally understood, that a) sanctions wont have real teeth, and b) regardless, they wont work, and therefore, proponents of sanctions are actually settling for containment, which I don't believe works in irans case. Boil it down, it's short term gain for long term pain. Iran will use what they develop...bet on it. what no one seems to want to discuss, is if a military strike delays their nuke program, maybe it buys time to topple the regime? maybe it emboldens the reformists? so many leftists seem to think it will rally iranians to the govt and the mad mullahs...why is that? I think it will embolden reformists..and if it buys time, so much the better..the mantra that a military strike accelerates iran's efforts toward nuke development is ridiculous..they are moving there already so it doesn't change that fact if we buy time needed now.

  • 1. 0 0
    What is the dumbest political move in the history of the world?
    • Natallie Durson
    • 21.12.09
    • 16:13

    Attacking a nation on the verge of obtaining nuclear weapons.