Iran Commits to Tit for Tat against New US Policy

On Friday, July 16, former Cuban President Fidel Castro told a gathering of 110 Cuban ambassadors and consular representatives that, in his view, a military attack on Iran would turn into a major military face-off because "the country will strike back within seconds."
He explained that "the US finds itself now in an unsolvable dilemma in the Middle East. It cannot get out, nor can it stay."
A little over two weeks earlier, on June 30, Castro warned that an American or Israeli strike on Iran would trigger the outbreak of a nuclear world war, since both sides would make use of nuclear weapons.
Although most of American media dismiss Castro as an ageing (84), passé leader trying to get back into the headlines, intelligence circles have taken his comments more seriously, particularly the words "Iran will strike back within seconds." In those circles the phrase "within seconds" was not invented by Castro but one he heard from someone he respected, else he would not have repeated it.
So who was his source? One possibility is Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who last visited him in Havana on April 8 after a trip to Managua and a long conversation with Nicaraguan leader Daniel Ortega. Chavez had an even longer conversation of four hours with Castro, their main topic being Latin American relations with Iran.
Since then, Chavez has been in continual contact with Castro. The two speak on the phone at least once every two weeks. Phone conversations also take place, albeit less frequently, between Castro and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Tehran eyes four tit-for-tat options

American intelligence officials believe that either Chavez or Ahmadinejad used this telling phrase when they spoke to the Cuban leader, knowing that sooner or later he would air it in one of his public appearances.
DEBKA-Net-Weekly's military sources note that, in relation to the present military deployment, striking back "within seconds" could come about in four ways:

1. Nuclear reprisal: Given that Iran is expected to have at least one and possibly two atomic bombs by the end of the year or early 2011, Tehran would not hesitate to use a nuclear or radioactive device if attacked.
On Monday, July 19, debkafile's sources cited a senior intelligence source in Washington as commenting that he would not be surprised if "one day we wake up to find that the Iranians are conducting an underground test at a nuclear installation."
This doesn't mean the Iranians will have bombs or nuclear warheads deliverable by aircraft or missiles," said the intelligence source, "but it does mean that they are a lot closer to developing this option than the Americans, and also the Israelis, believe."
He added that since the affair of double spy Shahram Amiri, who fed the CIA false information on Iran's nuclear program, neither the US nor Israel can afford to rule out an Iranian N-test before the end of 2010 – i.e., within the next 5 months.

Preparing for "the most horrendous suicide bombing" ever

2. Payback by missile: With an array of at least 1,000 mid-range and short-range ballistic missiles on operational standby, Tehran could have these weapons homing on target in very short order.
3. Terror: Suicide bombers could be quickly loosed against American and Israeli targets in the Middle East, and also in Europe.
Worth noting in this context are the words of a man identified as "Reza Khalili," a former member of Iran's fearsome Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) turned CIA double-agent, when he addressed a Washington Institute for Near East Policy conference on July 9.
Those words amounted to the direst prediction heard yet about the lengths to which the Islamic Republic is prepared to go.
"This is a messianic regime," he said. "There should be no doubt – they (the Iranians) are going to commit the most horrendous suicide bombing in human history. They will attack Israel, European capitals and the Persian Gulf region – all at the same time."
The former Iranian revolutionary said a preemptive strike on the Islamic Republic's regime in Tehran was mandatory – although it should not be directed against the Iranian people or the country's infrastructure.
He was warning the US and Israel that there is no time to lose; they must not hang around and wait for the Islamic Republic to activate its waiting suicide killers.
It must be said that the prestigious Washington Institute, which maintains excellent ties with US and Israeli intelligence high-ups, would not have given "Reza Khalili" a platform had they doubted the value of his message or personal credibility.

Military option moves forward on Obama's table

4. Iraq. Paying Washington back in Iraq for what Tehran decides is a casus belli must also be counted as a realistic option.
DEBKA-Net-Weekly's Washington and Baghdad sources report that the US and Iran are closer than ever to a military clash in Iraq, with pro-Tehran Shiite militias said to be preparing to strike at US forces in Iraq.
The Iranians strongly object to the Obama administration's plan to leave a number of US troops in Iraq in the capacity of UN peacekeepers after the September 1 pull-out. They suspect that under their blue UN berets, these troops will carry out America's policies and force the Gulf region to knuckle under to the latest UN sanctions against Iran.
Indeed, Tehran believes Obama's commitment to withdraw 95,000 US soldiers from Iraq is a trick for retaining 24,000 combat troops on standby for a potential US strike against its nuclear facilities.
(More details about this in HOT POINTS of July 21 below.)
These various forecasts appear to be the background to the TIME Magazine's July 15 article by its senior political reporter Joe Klein, headed "An Attack on Iran: Back on the Table." It was the first time in five years that an American publication admitted the possibility of the US exercising its military option against Iran, confirming explicitly that it is under serious consideration by the Obama administration.
Klein wrote: "Other intelligence sources say that the US Army's Central Command, which is in charge of organizing military operations in the Middle East, has made some real progress in planning targeted air strikes – aided, in large part, by the vastly improved human-intelligence operations in the region. 'There really wasn't a military option a year ago,' an Israeli military source told me. 'But they've gotten serious about the planning and the option is real now.'"
It would seem that Fidel Castro has got it right. He believes an American-Israeli clash with Iran is getting closer. And he also appears to have an inkling of how the Iranians will fight back.