Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for October 17/12
Pope to send a delegation to Damascus, Vatican says
Syria crisis likely to set region ablaze: U.N. envoy
Romney launches sweeping critique of Obama's M. East policy
Iran claims 'dozens' of its drones reached Israel
U.N. nuclear chief hopes for new Iran talks soon
All of Iran’s advanced enrichment centrifuges now removed to Fordo
New Iran sanctions target oil and banking
IAF hits Gaza targets amid ongoing rocket attacks
Israeli, PM warns of Syria transferring WMDs to terrorists
Iran car industry suffers as sanctions bite
Bahraini – Iranian tensions intensify
Syria battles rage as both sides weigh truce plan
Rebels forcing Syrian jets to bomb from high altitude: France
Dim hopes for Syria truce as rebels unite in push for aid
France to host talks with Syrian "revolutionary councils"
March 14 Criticizes Hizbullah's Drone, Calls on Iran to Lift Tutelage over Lebanon
Report: March 8 Says Miqati's View on Hizbullah Drone Does Not Reflect that of Govt
Future bloc rejects Hezbollah’s use of Lebanon for regional confrontations
Now Lebanon/A higher calling
Army deploys in Baalbek during security crackdown
Lebanon's Arabic press digest - Oct. 17, 2012
Aoun points finger at government, security chiefs over “scandalous” prison-break incident
Lebanon: Customs agents crack down on corruption
Mikati: Consensus needed to face Israel
Lebanon: Work starts on controversial parts of election draft
Two dead in a Lebanese factory blaze, mayor slams delay in firefighters’ arrival
Lebanon: Bekaa security raids net 3 arrests in first day
Syria conflict deepens sectarian rifts in Lebanon

A higher calling
Now Lebanon/October 15, 2012
Lebanon’s next parliamentary elections are a little over six months away, and the country once again finds itself at a crossroads with no clue in which direction it is headed. The key election issues are essentially twofold: The country must rid itself of the toxic influence of Iran and Syria, and draw up a long-overdue economic roadmap for sustained productivity and, hopefully, prosperity. This would be clear to someone with even a passing interest in Lebanese affairs, and yet to date the only topic of concern appears to be a mind numbing, and apparently never ending, debate on which election law to adopt.
The fight is partisan and sectarian; the end game is to consolidate local power bases. Fought along these lines there will never be a consensus on either the law or national interests. And all the while Lebanon sinks into a more dangerous regional quagmire, and what’s left of its economic carcass is beginning to reek.
The pro-Syrian March 8 bloc—made up of Hezbollah, Amal, the Free Patriotic Movement and its assortment of quasi-criminal bit players such as the appalling Syrian Social Nationalist Party—can be excused for treating the upcoming polls as a straightforward mission to deliver a majority that will hold the fort for their regional masters. The alliance has never had any trouble with polluting Lebanon’s sovereignty, nor has it ever had the inclination, or even the talent for that matter, to run on a ticket of working to create prosperity. (That job was given to the FPM, but after being in government for over a year and holding some of the most important portfolios, it has failed to live up to the boast that it is the can-do party.)
Which leaves us with March 14, the great white hope for Lebanon back in those heady days of people power in the spring of 2005. The grouping was on the side of angels, convincing us that they would work together to create a country of which we could be proud, a country that would realize all its potential, a country of freedom, democracy and sovereignty.
But come polling day, it will have been eight years since those pledges were made and a million or so Lebanese took to the streets, and nothing much has changed, despite winning two elections in 2005 and 2009. Granted, March 14 had to contend with war, strikes, an attempted coup and Syria fighting back in the form of a slew of high-profile assassinations.
The government was in effect in hiding for much of 2007 and 2008. It was hardly a way to run a country. When the coup de grace was applied during a bloodless takeover in January 2011, the Syrian strike back was complete, and March 14 was in disarray.
All is not necessarily lost. March 14 still has credible politicians, while March 8 could never offer much and can offer even less now with the Syrian government on the verge of collapse and the Iranian economy in a tailspin. Crucially, Hezbollah’s position as the bulwark of integrity has been seriously undermined by its stubborn support of the Assad regime and its indifference to the slaughter, despite always selling itself as the party that went to bat for the oppressed. The mask has slipped, and by all accounts the money is drying up.
In this environment, March 14 can regain the momentum if it can genuinely show that it is united behind a common set of values that puts Lebanon first. To do this it must put the election debate behind it. It’s a tough task, especially for a political class whose instincts are more tribal than national, but for the sake of Lebanon’s future—yes it’s that crucial—a new political outlook is needed. If the main issues are addressed, we will all benefit in the long term.
If they aren’t, any number of scenarios could unfold. A spark from the Syrian bonfire could leap over the garden fence and ignite sectarian conflict here. Tripoli is already on tenterhooks. Repeated border violations go unpunished, while the recent drone incident has once again highlighted Hezbollah’s scant regard for the state when it comes to bearding the Israeli lion in its own den.
Then there is the economy. March 14 must pledge to generate public-sector revenues to increase foreign currency reserves in order to protect the Lebanese pound and service the national debt. It must adopt a monetary policy and create a genuine investment environment, with greater focus on neglected sectors such as industry and agriculture. Finally, they must be serious about infrastructure, investment, leading to privatization. We need to clear out the current government, which has defined itself by epic incompetence, dubious loyalty and breathtaking arrogance. March 14 must convince the Lebanese that they can rise above parochial squabbles and aspire to a higher calling to create a functional independent and sovereign state.

The secret channel between Tel Aviv and Damascus
By Emad El Din Adeeb/Asharq Alawsat
The news leaked recently by Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper, and then confirmed by the Israeli Foreign Ministry, about secret negotiations conducted between Tel Aviv and Damascus over the past few months in order to reach a Syrian-Israeli peace agreement is worthy of our contemplation. We all know that, ever since the Syrian occupation of Lebanon, there has been a backdoor channel of communication between Damascus and Tel Aviv, conducted via the military intelligence apparatuses of the two countries. This secret channel has operated efficiently and regularly regardless of the nature – or complete lack – of overt relations between the two countries, and regardless of the level of tension between Syria and Israel. This channel has proven to be “highly efficient and of extreme importance to the security of both sides", after it was first consolidated during the Syrian-Israeli negotiation marathon that took place in Washington under US auspices during the era of President Bill Clinton. At the time the Syrian negotiation team was led by the then Foreign Minister Farouk al-Shara, who is the current Syrian Vice President. On Saturday, Israeli sources revealed that the aim of such negotiations with Syria was to attempt to drive a wedge between Syria one the one hand, and Iran and Hezbollah on the other, and that these negotiations were conducted under the auspices of the US State Department. In my opinion, you don’t need to be a genius to work out that such negotiations are doomed to failure in that regard, and that they will only serve to keep the al-Assad regime "afloat" and buy it more time.
In my opinion, over the course of these negotiations, Tel Aviv and Washington will have quickly discovered that Bashar al-Assad's personal, psychological and security links with the Iranian regime are far stronger than any political flirtation with Washington, or any security yarn spinning with Tel Aviv. These negotiations have been conducted at a time when the Arab Spring revolutions are posing a real burden for Washington, after they once represented the stuff of dreams for the American decision-maker. These secret communications have also been conducted at a time when Ehud Barak, the Israeli Minister of Defense, has been developing his plans to separate Gaza from the West Bank, and subsequently separate the West Bank from the Jewish state. Barak fears the emergence of an internationally-backed project, working on the assumption that a two-state solution is impossible, proposing the establishment of one state that incorporates all Israeli and Arab nationals; whether Jews, Muslims, Christians or Druze. Here we must contemplate the following question: If all Washington's regional projects suffer from repeated failures, who will pay the price in the long run?

Bahraini – Iranian tensions intensify
By Obeid al-Suhaimi/Dammam, Asharq Al-Awsat – Bahrain yesterday summoned the Iranian charge d’affaires to Manama, Mahdi Islami, to protest against Iranian claims that Bahrain had tasked Iran with mediating in its internal affairs. The Bahraini authorities described the Iranian allegations as lies and fabrications. Tensions between Manama and Tehran escalated after the Iranian charge d’affaires controversially met with top Bahraini Shiite cleric Sheikh Issa Qassim. Sheikh Issa Qassim, along with Iranian media, claimed this meeting had taken place in the context of an official Bahraini request to Tehran – submitted during the Mecca Summit last August – for Iranian mediation to resolve the Bahraini crisis. Bahrain strongly denied making any such request, with Bahraini Foreign Minister Sheikh Khalid Bin Ahmed al-Khalifa calling on the Shiite cleric not to repeat false Iranian statements to ensure that he cannot be accused of working for a foreign power. He stressed that Manama had not asked anybody to mediate in Bahraini affairs, confirming that he had repeatedly complained of such claims to Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi and Iranian charge d’affaires to Manama Mahdi Islami. The Bahraini Foreign Minister also asserted that any discussions regarding Bahraini internal affairs must be between national partners as part of open and serious national dialogue, not with foreign diplomats behind closed doors. In this regard, the Bahraini Foreign Ministry on Monday summoned Iranian charge d’affaires Mahdi Islami to protest against interference in its internal affairs. A government statement revealed that Islami had been summoned over Iran’s “deliberately attributing false information to Bahraini officials and promoting it in the media” and “through ties and contacts with specific groups in the Bahraini community.” For his part, Ambassador Hamad al-Amer, Bahraini Foreign Ministry Undersecretary for Regional and GCC Affairs, informed Asharq Al-Awsat that this meeting was limited to the issue of the Iranian media repeating the false claim that Manama had requested that Tehran mediate in its internal affairs.
Al-Amer stressed that “we did not discuss the meetings conducted by the Iranian delegations with some opposition figures…the meeting was solely regarding the broadcast of false information that Bahrain had asked Iranian officials to mediate in its internal affairs.” The Bahraini Foreign Ministry spokesman told Asharq Al-Awsat that he did not thing it likely that Tehran would respond to Manama’s call for it to stop interfering in its internal affairs. He said “Iran is very far from taking such a step and there is much evidence of its actions.”
Ambassador Al-Amer met with the Iranian charge d’affaires in Manama on Monday and expressed Bahrain’s extreme displeasure with regards to Iran putting forward this false information. He asserted that such action only serves to incite sectarian sedition and division in Bahraini society. The Bahraini Foreign Ministry Undersecretary for Regional and GCC Affairs told Asharq Al-Awsat that the Iranian media’s claims that Bahrain had asked Tehran to mediate in its internal affairs is nothing more than “lies and fabrication”, adding that Manama had previously complained to Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi over this issue on more than one occasion.The Bahraini ambassador also revealed that Bahraini Foreign Minister Khalid Bin Ahmed al-Khalifa had strongly rejected this claim during his latest meeting with Salehi in Tehran, as well as during a meeting with Iranian charge d’affaires to Bahrain in Manama on 13 September.
Al-Amer said that Bahrain’s fixed and immovable position is not to accept any foreign intervention in its internal affairs, whether in terms of mediation or anything else. He asserted that “the Kingdom of Bahrain has not asked for any form of mediation in its internal affairs from the Iranian [Foreign] Minister as this represents an encroachment on its national sovereignty and stability as well as its dealings with its own citizens.” He called on the Iranian charge d’affaires to stop interfering in Bahraini internal affairs, particularly in terms of inciting sectarian sedition and division via media and contact with certain forces in Bahraini society. Bahraini Ambassador al-Amer also called on Iranian charge d’affaires to Manama, Mahdi Islami to abide by the rules of diplomacy and international relations and the principles of good neighborliness, not to mention the UN charter which rejects and condemns any foreign interference in a sovereign country’s internal affairs, as well as political or religious or media incitement.
In the context of preparing the ground for national dialogue, Bahraini Minister of Justice, Sheikh Khalid Bin Ali al-Khalifa, revealed that dialogue with political parties is ongoing and that the Bahraini government is sincere in looking for common ground to reach a political solution. He stressed that what is happening in Bahrain is not a crisis but rather a complication, saying that the political situation has reached a standstill.

If only Brahimi would tell al-Assad that!
By Tariq Alhomayed/Asharq Al-Awsat
Speaking from Baghdad yesterday, UN-Arab League envoy to Syria ,Lakhdar Brahimi, urged to “halt the flow of arms to both sides” in Syria, calling on all countries that have influence over certain groups there to encourage them to move towards a peaceful solution, given that the military solution has not yielded any results.
This statement alone is part of the problem, not part of the solution. Firstly it is inaccurate, because the tyrant of Damascus Bashar al-Assad is the one who resorted to a military solution, not the revolutionaries or any external party. Likewise al-Assad is the one who has missed every opportunity, since day one, to implement a peaceful solution, even before the Syrian revolution developed into a crisis that now requires the intervention of the Arabs and the international community. When I say that Mr. Brahimi’s statement is part of the problem, this is not an exaggeration, for his remarks that “the military solution has not yielded any results” should not be addressed to the countries that are keen on Syria and its people, nor to the rebels, but rather to al-Assad face-to-face. The tyrant of Damascus is the one using warplanes, artillery and all types of heavy weaponry against unarmed civilians, whilst the revolutionaries are still pleading for the world to help them politically through the Security Council, or militarily through the provision of weapons, given that Russia and Iran have armed al-Assad throughout the crisis.
The problem with Mr. Brahimi’s statement is that on the one hand it equates between the victim and the executioner. On the other hand, Brahimi made these remarks before the media, but I am yet to find anyone to confirm they heard the same rhetoric from Brahimi personally, during his recent talks with some Syrian parties. So why issue this statement now from Baghdad, instead of from Damascus, for example, with words addressed to al-Assad himself? This is especially pertinent given that my sources confirm a senior official in Moscow delivered a very clear message to officials within al-Assad’s inner circle two weeks ago, saying that Moscow had done everything for al-Assad yet the Syrian regime had not honored its promises or implemented what had been agreed upon, and even when it did respond, it did so either too late or by distorting what had previously been agreed. Incredibly, this Russian official told al-Assad’s representative that they should not expect too much from Russia after the 7th of November, i.e. the second day of the US elections! Moscow of course is aware that there will be new realities to deal with after that date, whether President Obama is re-elected or the Republican candidate Mitt Romney assumes office.Thus, Mr. Brahimi’s statements must be directed towards al-Assad alone if he wants to achieve a genuine solution before the 7th of November, but this is still highly unlikely. If the UN-Arab League envoy is saying what he is saying simply because he is aware that nothing will be achieved before the US elections, and he wants to say that he tried everything he could, then this is another story, and perhaps closer to the reality.

Russia: Al-Assad will never leave
By Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed/Asharq Alawsat
I recently viewed a classified Syrian document written by the Syrian intelligence bureau chief stationed at the Syrian embassy in Moscow which analyzed the Russian position towards his country based on his dealings with Russian officials there. In this document, the Syrian intelligence officer wrote that Russia views the Syrian crisis as an opportunity to reassert its regional role.
Viewing this document analytically – which could be right or wrong – it seems that the Syrian intelligence officer’s analysis is backed up by the majority of the stances taken by Russian President Putin, not to mention what is driving this approach. The Russians are seeking a role in the region and a return to the Middle East, which until just two decades ago was a major area of influence for them. In addition to this, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius revealed that his Russian counterpart had told him that “al-Assad will never leave.” This is something that was confirmed by British Foreign Secretary William Hague, who stated that the Russian position has become increasingly intransigent.
According to my information, the Russians previously attempted to talk about a solution that included al-Assad stepping down from power, but in reality they were only seeking to guarantee their “interests” in Syria. This term is flexible, ranging from guaranteeing the continuation of Russia’s contract for its naval facility at Tartus, to the Syrian people guaranteeing to pay al-Assad’s debts, which are estimated in the billions of dollars. Al-Assad used this money to buy weapons and ammunition to kill thousands of Syrian people and fund the regime.
If we put all our information together, it is clear that the Russians are seeking to play a role in the Middle East by backing the Bashar al-Assad regime and then haggling over the price of his ouster in return for multiple interests and obligations. Following this, we will find ourselves facing an even fiercer struggle than the previous one.
Does this truly mean that al-Assad will never leave, particularly as Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov officially informed European Ministers that al-Assad will stay in spite of them and in spite of the Syrian people? Of course not, as the Russians could take the decision to abandon him tonight and therefore his ouster would certainly take place in the coming days. Yet, Russia cannot decide to keep al-Assad in power just because a handful of foreign ministers met to discuss the situation. Lavrov, as well as President Putin, are quite aware that it is impossible for al-Assad to remain in power and that his ouster is just a matter of time, and that his regime will certainly not survive beyond mid-2013. However this may cost the deaths of another 50,000 Syrians, as well as the destruction of what remains of the country’s cities. Lavrov’s statement means that the price for al-Assad’s ouster is high, yet this does not mean that he will never leave!
It is no longer so easy for foreign states to decide the fate of other countries in the same manner that the map of the region was drawn up by the Sykes-Picot and San Remo agreements more than ninety years ago. Unrest has become more expensive for major countries and this represents a genuine threat to their stability, regardless of where this is. Evidence of this can be seen in the current conflict taking place in Sub-Saharan Africa. Yes, a new Middle East is being formed, and there will be no room for al-Assad here, regardless of the Kremlin’s decision. The question that must be asked here is: Will the Russians have interests in this new Middle East or not? They have chosen the worst paths to seek a return to the Middle East, namely by choosing to support the worst regime, and more than this, a regime that has little chance of survival. In the past, the Russians were welcome as allies and friends on the region's chessboard i.e. in Egypt, Sudan, Iraq, Syria, Southern Yemen and Algeria. However it seems that their alliance with Iran, Syria and Hezbollah has placed them in a tight corner, and this will only serve to push more regional governments and nations towards the West, not the opposite.

Romney launches sweeping critique of Obama's M. East policy
By JPOST.COM STAFF 10/17/2012 03:34 US Republican presidential candidate charges president with putting daylight between US, Israel, being soft on Iran; Obama catches Romney over allegation of misinformation in Libya consulate attack. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney launched a sweeping critique of the US Administration's policy in the Middle East, terming President Barack Obama "weak" and saying that his policies led to negative developments in Syria, Iran, Egypt and Libya.
"The president's policy towards the Middle East began with an apology tour, and this strategy is unraveling before our very eyes," Romney charged. "The president said he was going to put daylight between us and Israel. We have Iran four years closer to a nuclear weapon."
Regarding Libya, where a US ambassador and three other American citizens were killed when terrorists stormed the US consulate compound in Benghazi, Romney attacked the president for failing to put necessary security measures in place. "This was not a demonstration," Romney said in an attempt to attack the administration on what he claims is misinformation over whether or not the incident was a terrorist act. "This was an attack."
Obama responded that the day after the attack, "I stood in the Rose Garden and said this was an act of terror, and I said we were going to get those that were behind this."
Romney challenged that the president actually took 14 days to admit that the attack was a terrorist act, an allegation which was repudiated by the debate moderator Candy Crowley and by Obama.
Obama and Romney also disagreed over the economy, with the president attacking the Republican challenger over his economic plan. "Governor Romney says he's got a five-point plan. Governor Romney doesn't have a five-point plan, he has a one-point plan. And that plan is to make sure that folks at the top play by a different set of rules," he said.
Related: •Iran and Israel feature prominently in US VP debate•#USelections2012: Moment of truthRomney accused his rival of overseeing a stagnant economy. "The middle class has been crushed over the last four years and jobs have been too scarce," the former Massachusetts governor said.
Turning to energy policy, Romney chided the president for what he said was a policy discouraging domestic production. Obama is not "Mr. Coal, Mr. Gas, Mr. Oil," Romney said. "We can get all the energy we need right now in North America without going to the Arabs or Venezuela."
Obama responded that Romney's energy plan would do nothing for US energy independence and would risk destroying thousands of jobs.
Obama seems to have stopped the slide in polls after the last debate. In a Reuters/Ipsos daily tracking poll on Tuesday, he gained a bit more ground on Romney for the third straight day, leading 46 percent to 43 percent.
But a Gallup/USA Today poll showed Romney ahead of Obama by 4 percentage points among likely voters in the 12 most contested states.
The debate at Hofstra University in Hempstead, NY was in a more intimate town hall format, where undecided local voters from New York state's Nassau County ask the questions.
Reuters contributed to this report

All of Iran’s advanced enrichment centrifuges now removed to Fordo
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report October 16, 2012/As US president Barack Obama and his Republican challenger Mitt Romney prepared for their duel on foreign policy in Long Island, Tuesday night Oct. 16, Iran moved was on the move to present them with an accomplished fact: Its nuclear program's high-speed uranium enrichment plant has now been entirely sequestered in the fortified underground Fordo site near Qom, debkafile’s intelligence sources report.
On Iran, the differences between President Obama and Mitt Romney are significantly nuanced: Obama pledges not to let Iran acquire a nuclear weapon, i.e., build a bomb, whereas Romney promises to prevent Iran acquiring a nuclear capability, i.e., attain the capacity for building one – a point which US intelligence believes will upon us in six months.
This estimate may not fully take into account Iran’s accelerating momentum. With the advanced IR-2 and IR-4 centrifuges, its enrichment plants can turn out more 20 percent enriched uranium at greater speed than ever before and so reach Iran's one-ton target before then.
Our sources disclose that, racing against time, Tehran managed to install the last four clusters of 174 centrifuges each inside in “Fordo’s B Chamber” shortly before European Union foreign ministers approved toughened sanctions in Brussels Monday, 15 Oct.
The 27-nation block tightened restrictions on Iran’s central bank, halted the import of natural gas and listed 30 firms and institutions as targets for asset freezes, including the National Iranian Oil Company exporter and the National Iranian Tanker Company.
Tuesday, Iran denounced the new European Union sanctions as “inhuman,” vowing they will not force any retreat on the country’s nuclear program.
The remarks by Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast underlined Iran’s insistence that it can ride out Western economic pressures. The new EU measures will not force Iran to surrender and back down from enriching uranium, he declared. “This sort of act will encourage the Iranian nation to continue on its way, strongly.”
This is in line with Tehran’s consistent response to every form of pressure, financial, economic, intelligence or military, which is to whip up its nuclear program for an extra spurt and leave no assault unanswered.
Saturday, Oct. 6, shortly after Fordo power lines were disabled by sabotage, causing small fires which damaged some centrifuges, Tehran sent Hizballah to launch a stealth drone over Israeli air space and beam back images of the Dimona nuclear reactor. Those images will soon be released. The lesson for the West was this: You may hit the Fordo power supply, but our arm is long enough to reach the Israeli reactor. And our payback for new European sanctions is faster centrifuges.
In Jerusalem, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu thanked the EU for the new sanctions at a reception Tuesday Oct. 16 for European envoys. “We’ll know they are achieving their goal when the centrifuges stop spinning,” he added.
He knew when he spoke that the sanctions had had the opposite effect. And like Obama and Romney, he knows what Iran plans next. debkafile’s military and intelligence sources report that the Iranians are preparing to change the “active formation” of the Fordo centrifuges and adapt them for refining uranium up to the 60 percent level, a short step before the weapons grade of 90 percent. The conversion is expected to be ready to go in the second half of December or early January, 2013.
US and Israeli intelligence experts on Iran recently arrived at a consensual assessment that Fordo was the only site capable of producing uranium enriched to the high 90 percent level.
Iran has therefore leapt across another red line in its steady advance toward a nuclear capability and is about to across its next.
Conscious that a moment of decision was at hand, British Prime Minister David Cameron Monday night informed Anglo-Jewish leaders that he had called Netanyahu to ask him not to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities but allow more time for sanctions to have an impact.
Cameron was undoubtedly acting on a request from the White House in Washington.
But both the British and Israeli prime ministers haven’t forgotten that only a few weeks ago, Israel had marked with a red line a fully operational Fordo which had to be stopped before it was buried out of reach in “an immune zone.”
That line was crossed this week and still Israel has refrained from action.
What this means for Tehran is that, so long as Israel heeds the “advice” coming from Washington and London, and President Obama holds back from the “October surprise” proposed by one of his insiders, Tehran need not be afraid to go forward and start refining uranium up to 60 percent and, from there, all the way up to the manufacture of a nuclear bomb without hindrance.
 

Iran claims 'dozens' of its drones reached Israel
Associated Press Published: 10.16.12/ynetnews
Top Iranian military official says many Iranian-made surveillance drones have managed to enter Israeli airspace undetected since 2006; Israeli official denies claim . A senior Iranian military official claimed Tuesday that Iranian-made surveillance drones have made dozens of apparently undetected flights into Israeli airspace from Lebanon in recent years to probe air defenses and collect reconnaissance data. An Israeli official rejected the account. The Iranian official declined to give further details on the purported missions or the capabilities of the drones, including whether they were similar to the unmanned aircraft launched last week by Lebanon's Hezbollah and downed by Israeli warplanes. It also was impossible to independently verify the claims from the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to brief the media.The Iranian assertions appear to be part of the Islamic Republic's widening strategy to boast about military advances – including warships and longer-range drones – that Tehran says could reorder the balance of power in the region as the West and its allies boost pressure over Iran's nuclear ambitions. Iran's leaders also seek to portray Israel as vulnerable to Tehran and its proxies.
But an Israeli security official rejected the Iranian claims, saying last week's interception of a drone was the first time such an infiltration had occurred. He said Israel spotted the unmanned aircraft well before it entered Israeli airspace, determined it was not "dangerous" and then shot it down over uninhabited desert according to plan. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because an Israeli military investigation is still under way.
The Iranian official claimed drones made by the Islamic Republic have made "dozens of flights over Israel" since the summer 2006 war between Hezbollah and Israel. He said Israeli defenses had been unable to detect the surveillance craft.
"The one that was shot down last week was not the first and will not be the last to fly into Israeli airspace," the official said.
Iran has often used its military moves to send messages to Israel and the US, which has key bases in Gulf Arab states such as the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. Tehran last year sent warships into the Mediterranean Sea for the first time since the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Last month, Iranian military leaders gave details of a new long-range drone and tested fired four anti-ship missiles just before US-led naval drills in the Gulf.
At the time, a senior Revolutionary Guard commander, Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh, also warned that US bases in the Gulf could face retaliatory strikes if Israel attacks Iran's nuclear sites.
'Drones protect against strike'
On Tuesday, Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Rahmin Mehmanparast described Iran's military developments, including drones and missiles capable of reaching Israel, as a safeguard against a possible Israeli attack on nuclear sites.
Prime Minister Benjamin Natanyahu last month urged the international community to set a "red line" on Iran's uranium enrichment, which the West and its allies fear could lead to the development of atomic weapons. Iran says its nuclear efforts are only for energy and research.
"Basically, the possibility of a war breaking out increases when countries don't have the might to defend themselves. But when countries are powerful ... the possibility of aggression decreases," Mehmanparast told reporters.
A member of the Iranian parliament, Abbas Ali Mansouri, said the drone's flight also showed Hezbollah's growing battlefield capabilities as Tehran's main client militia. Hezbollah could take an even higher profile for Iran if Syrian rebels oust Bashar Assad's regime in Damascus, another critical ally for the Islamic Republic.
"It's crucial that Hezbollah is able to gather remarkable intelligence from inside Israel," he said.
At the United Nations, Israeli Ambassador Ron Prosnor called Assad, Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a "trio of terror."
The Hezbollah drone flight took place a month after Iran unveiled a new long-range unmanned aircraft, which has been described by military officials as a key strategic addition to Iran's military capabilities with the ability to carry out reconnaissance missions or be armed with "bombs and missiles."
The Shahed-129, or Witness-129, has a range of 2,000 kilometers (1,250 miles) that can stay aloft for 24 hours, Iranian officials say.
But it's unclear whether the new drone contains any elements of an US RQ-170 Sentinel drone that went down in eastern Iran in December. Iran said it has recovered data from the American unmanned aircraft and claimed it was building its own replica.
Iran frequently makes announcements about its strides in military technology, but it is virtually impossible to independently determine the actual capabilities or combat worthiness of the weapons Iran is producing.