Mark Perry has published another powerful expose of covert Israeli intelligence activities against Iran. This segment in his series deals with Azerbaijan, a subject I’ve written about here after the recent announcement of a $1.6 billion arms deal between Israel and that nation. Perry expands and amplifies the story, revealing that Israel may use Azerbaijan as a “forward aircraft carrier” in its offensive against Iran. Perry’s sources are high level U.S. military and intelligence officials.
One of the logistical nightmares of an attack on Iran is getting Israeli planes to and from their target, a flight of 2,000 miles. The IAF simply doesn’t have the refueling capability that’s required. Thanks to Perry, we’ve just learned one of the ways Israel plans to eliminate the problem:
…Four senior diplomats and military intelligence officers say that the United States has concluded that Israel has recently been granted access to airbases on Iran’s northern border. To do what, exactly, is not clear. “The Israelis have bought an airfield,” a senior administration official told me in early February, “and the airfield is called Azerbaijan.”
Though the country’s foreign minister recently dismissed the notion that his country would serve as a base for an attack on any other country, Perry writes:
…Even if his government makes good on that promise, it could still provide Israel with essential support. A U.S. military intelligence officer noted that Azeri defense minister did not explicitly bar Israeli bombers from landing in the country after a strike. Nor did he rule out the basing of Israeli search-and-rescue units in the country. Proffering such landing rights — and mounting search and rescue operations closer to Iran — would make an Israeli attack on Iran easier.
…The U.S. intelligence and diplomatic officials told me they believe that Israel has gained access to these [Azeri] airbases through a series of quiet political and military understandings. “I doubt that there’s actually anything in writing,” added a senior retired American diplomat who spent his career in the region. “But I don’t think there’s any doubt — if Israeli jets want to land in Azerbaijan after an attack, they’d probably be allowed to do so. Israel is deeply embedded in Azerbaijan, and has been for the last two decades.”
Perry notes that Azerbaijan’s rampant corruption has allowed Israel to exploit the situation to its advantage. In return for military hardware and joint production deals, Israel gets these landing rights, the right to place sophisticated listening posts targeting Iran on Azeri soil, and maybe even the right for its assassins to use Azeri territory on their way to and from Iran to assassinate nuclear scientists. If this reminds you of a Graham Greene or John Le Carre novel, it should. The only difference is that the characters’ features are more Middle Eastern and the languages spoken are different.
Perry raised an interesting historical note about a mysterious joint Israeli-Romanian military exercise about two years ago. There were rumors that it was meant as a preparation for an Iran operation though it was hard to see how a war game exercise in central Europe would connect to attacking Iran. But here’s the answer:
This officer pointed to a July 2010 joint Israeli-Romanian exercise that tested Israeli air capabilities in mountainous areas — like those the Israeli Air Force would face during a bombing mission against Iranian nuclear facilities that the Iranians have buried deep into mountainsides. U.S. military officers watched the exercises closely, not least because they objected to the large number of Israeli fighters operating from airbases of a NATO-member country, but also because 100 Israeli fighters overflew Greece as a part of a simulation of an attack on Iran. The Israelis eventually curtailed their Romanian military activities when the United States expressed discomfort with practicing the bombing of Iran from a NATO country, according to this senior military intelligence officer.
This same senior U.S. military intelligence officer speculated that the search and rescue component of those operations will be transferred to Azerbaijan — “if they haven’t been already.”
The issue of drones has become a hot one as well with the Iranian downing of a U.S. drone a few months ago. Israel has apparently been quite busy exploiting its drone capabilities to spy on not just Iran, but likely Turkey as well:
The centerpiece of the recent arms deal is Azerbaijan’s acquisition of Israeli drones, which has only heightened Turkish anxieties further. In November 2011, the Turkish government retrieved the wreckage of an Israeli “Heron” drone in the Mediterranean, south of the city of Adana — well inside its maritime borders. Erdogan’s government believed the drone’s flight had originated in the Kurdish areas of northern Iraq and demanded that Israel provide an explanation, but got none. “They lied; they told us the drone didn’t belong to them,” a former Turkish official told me last month. “But it had their markings.”
All of this equals a major projection of Israeli power right into the heart of two of the region’s major Muslim powers, Turkey and Iran. Frankly, it reminds me of the history of U.S. interventionism around the world–in Central America (1950 and 70s), Latin America (1960s and 70s), Asia (1960s and 70s), and now the Middle East (1990s and 2000s). All of this aggressive projection of American power for objectives and values almost impossible to quantify, has led us to much grief. It can only lead Israel to a similar fate. What the Middle East does NOT need is Israeli air bases on Cyprus and Azerbaijan. It does not need Israel doing its level best to rile up regional powers like Turkey and Iran.
It is precisely belligerent acts like this which convince the nations of the area that they need nuclear weapons to defend themselves. Israel doesn’t mess around. If it wants something, it gets it. If it doesn’t want you to do or have something, it’ll do its damndest to stop you, or barring that to make you pay for your defiance. Israel makes the neighborhood even tougher than it is or has to be. Under such conditions, it’s no wonder Iran might feel the need to explore a nuclear option.
A modified version of the old saying–be careful what you wish for because you might get it–holds true in this situation. The more threatening Israel’s policy becomes, the more likely there will be a major and possibly/likely uncontrollable escalation that would lead to a shooting war. Wars in the region tend not to be short or containable (viz. Iraq and Afghanistan), especially when there are so many proxies and allies on one side or the other. In other words, there’s enough kindling in the Middle East to burn the whole place down three times over. In this environment, do we really want Israeli F-16s careening across the skies enforcing a Pax Israeliana?
The irony here is that even if Israel lays perfect groundwork logistically, it still may not succeed. The Congressional Research Service reported today that Iran has done such a thorough job of dispersing its centrifuge workshops that Israel can’t possibly locate them all and that doing substantial damage to this part of their nuclear program is difficult. The document estimates Israel may only set back Iran by a relatively short period of time after such an operation:
A former official said the same day that Iran probably could rebuild or replicate most centrifuge workshops within six months, the researchers said.
Such a failure would leave the region in the same situation it is now (or worse): with Iran conducting nuclear research (possibly openly and for weapons production), Israel seeking to ever expand its sway in the region. All that awaits is for the next chance to perform “root canal” or “mow the grass”–for these enemies to have a go at each other. Next time, presumably with even more lethal weapons and more dangerous allies/proxies fighting alongside them. To paraphrase an old TV commercial: Is this any way to run a region? You bet it’s not.
Israel deserves to be a small country that offers much to the world. But does it deserve to be an aircraft carrier in the Middle East? Sparta on the Jordan? I say No. And the only party, if any, which can reign in this megalomania is the U.S. Barack Obama has shown little willingness to do so in his characteristically vacillating way. But there may come a point at which the guns have fired, the missiles have launched, and all we’ll be able to do is count the bodies on either side. Then it will be too late. Obama will’ve had his chance to turn things around and missed it. All because he didn’t have the toughness to face down Bibi and Barak.
Azerbaijani press and leadership is denying this.
Azerbaijani Defence Ministry denies foreign countries’ airfield rumour
http://en.trend.az/news/politics/2008059.html
Baku says Azerbaijan’s territory will not be used against Iran
http://en.trend.az/regions/scaucasus/azerbaijan/2008027.html
Who are you going to believe? Mark Perry or your lyin’ eyes? In other words, Azerbaijan is a corrupt feudally run country where everything is for sale, including the truth. I prefer to believe Mark Perry and his U.S. Sources.
There was also this from the Associated Press:
Iran sure no attack will go through Azerbaijan
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Iran is confident that neighboring Azerbaijan would not allow attacking forces to pass through its territory, Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Monday, according to the official IRNA news agency.
Ahmadinejad told visiting Azerbaijan Defense Minister Gen. Safar Abiyev, “We are sure that no problem will take place against Iran from (the land of) our friend and brother, Azerbaijan.”
Earlier, Abiyev, told reporters Azerbaijan will not act against “great Iran” or allow an attack using its territory. This came after he met his Iranian counterpart, Gen. Ahmad Vahidi.
http://news.yahoo.com/iran-sure-no-attack-azerbaijan-193848873.html
Iran doesn’t seem to be concerned based on those comments.
Bob, don’t be ridiculous. Are you being disingenuous or do you really believe what you’re peddling? Of course Iran is petrified Azerbaijan will allow its territory to be used for an attack. It puts a polite & brave face in public & speaks as if it expects the Azeris to do the right thing. In the meantime, it is doing everything it can to stop this from happening. You’re quite naive my friend.
I was just quoting the relevant parties directly.
On the Azerbaijan side, the leadership has clearly and explicitly stated that there will be no attack on Iran from their territory.
On the Iranian side, the leadership has clearly and explicitly stated that they are not at all concerned with the possibility of any attack originating from Azerbaijan.
The Azeris are feudal chieftains, Mafiosi crooks, and thieving liars. Believe them at yr peril.
Spot on Richard. The leadership of that squalid torture state would climb into bed with anyone. Until there’s a Central Asian Spring, that is.
What makes the state so squalid? That seems a little harsh.
Did you know that “horse” in Azerbaijani is “poni?” I won’t say what “bok” means in Azerbaijani, but LogoPhere is calling this report poni bok.
The main point is that Iran has over 200 fighter jets and thousands of short and medium range missiles, all of which would be in play at taking out every single one of the 8 Azeri airfields should an Israeli jet ever appear on an Iranian radar screen. Baki, the Azerbaijan capital would be fried toast in a matter of seconds — even before Russia got into the mix.
This whole idea is absolutely ludicrous. It is the next installment in Israel’s attempts to divert attention away from the annexation of Area “C”.
The Pentagon must really not want this. Both Y-Net and the Jerusalem Post have stories up about how the US military is trying to block the Iran strike by leaks:
Y-net: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4209836,00.html
Post: http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=264052
And of course the US military IS trying like crazy to stop the Bibi-bombing since the Israeli strike only makes sense as a detonator and the major effort would have to be US, as would almost all of the casualties, at least the non-Iranian ones. Since the US gets nothing out of such a war (except joint billing in the war crimes indictments for launching a premeditated war of aggression–Nuremburg anyone?), their stand makes sense. I’m a bit amused that the 2 Israeli journalists are shocked, I tell you shocked.
Guess who made yet another short-run calculus on who they should lay in bed with? What are the criteria? Hey, if the means justify the ends… hug someone who wants to use you as a spark plug for Armageddon. Embrace murderers like yourself of a different stripe with a common enemy. But, don’t look too deep into it. No, the MEK couldn’t have possibly learned things from 1979. No, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei is not an Azeri Iranian. No, you aren’t idiots.
If you look at a map you’ll see that Azerbaijan is in the wrong direction i.e. just *getting* those F-16s there requires an overflight of either Turkey (yikes!) or Iran itself (double yikes!!).
I guess its theoretically possible for Israel to use Azerbaijan as a base for “shuttle missions” i.e. bomb Iran on the way to Azerbaijan, refuel and rearm, and then bomb Iran on the way back.
The USAAF 8th Air Force tried that in WW2, shuttling between England and Russia and bombing Berlin on both legs.
But they found that Soviet air defences were pathetic compared to RAF Fighter Command, and so the Germans simply waited until the B-17s landed and then shot them all up as they sat on the runways.
That’s the same problem that Israel would have i.e. Azerbaijan air defences are crap, and so if the IDF uses Azeri air bases then it risks losing all those F-16s to Iranian air attack.
So using Azerbaijan is akin to going out on a limb, and that runs the very real risk that Iran could cut down the IDF in one fell swoop.
Basically, if they do this *and* Iran is ready and waiting for it (and I would bet that they are) then Israel could lose the war within an hour of starting it.
If only Israel would leave the Iran alone, they would drop all plans to make Nuclear Bombs? Right? After all, Iran’s 4% nuclear enrichment is for peaceful energy purpose only. Right? When Iran gets its 20% enriched Uranium it needs for medical isotopes, it will certainly stop enriching Uranium. Right? And when you wake up one morning and Iran just tested a nuclear device, they will be within their right to have a nuclear device. Right?
I have no better or worse feeling about Iran having a bomb than I have about Israel having one. Israel hasn’t used its bombs since 1967 & I have every confidence Iran’s record would be the same or better. If you’re certain Iran will use its bomb, then I’m certain Israel will use its bomb–and we’d both be wrong.
Um . . . Meir threatened to nuke Cario in 1973 if Nixon/Kissinger didn’t get on board and take out some of those MiGs that were causing so much trouble. I call that “using” its bomb. They use it every day merely by having it.
But I agree, I cannot see any reason to fear a bomb in Iran’s hands more than one in Israel’s. Au contraire, Israel is more of a rogue than Iran. At least Iran has signed the NPT. Any nuclear country that has not ought to be treated as a pariah. When will the US and EU understand that simple truth?
Israel’s problem is that Israel too small and too flat to hide or protect its stockpile, whilst Iran has lots of real estate and solid mountains to protect its stockpile if it ever gets one. And Iran doesn’t need 400 warheads; 10 should be more than enough.
And so Israel would have a lop-sided MAD, which is no MAD at all. Israel’s huge stockpile would become its biggest liability — drop a nuke on a nuke stockpile and what’ve ya’ got? Armageddon.
If Bibi had any brains, he’d see the writing on the wall, dispose of all his nukes, sign NPT, and demand a nuke-free Middle East before it’s too late. That will be when Iran tests its warhead. At about that point Bloomberg will adopt the Law of Return and 8 million Israeli Jews will be packing up and moving to Brooklyn. (And Bibi wonders why more American Jews don’t migrate to Israel…)
You’re on the right track, Israel Advocate. If the West would leave Iran alone, then I have no doubt that Iran will abide by its fatwa that prohibits the production of nuclear weapons. Conversely, there is no surer way to get Iran to rescind that fatwa than to keep sending out a “We’re going to foist another Shah on you” vibe.
This Azerbaijan story is so full of holes and inaccuracies no one with even the slightest bit of regional expertise takes it seriously. The description of Israeli refueling capabilities contradicts every known publication on the matter, most of the Iranian nuclear infrastructure (not Tehran) is actually just as far from Azerbaijan as it is from Israel, and the way in which Turkey is supposedly involved – given that Turkey and Azerbaijan are close allies – makes no sense.
For cryin’ out loud, even the photo is wrong – it was taken in Kazakhstan, not Azerbaijan. Sorry, this isn’t serious journalism.
Sorry fella, every known publication that I’ve read on the subject of refueling says that Israel hasn’t enough tankers or capacity to do it. The only way they can is by having a place to land after bombing Iran, refueling there & going home. Can you show us a single credible publication that claims Israel has enough refueling capability to carry out an Iran attack & get its planes back safely?
The picture had nothing to do with Mark Perry. It was chosen by the photo editor at Foreign Policy. Besides, what’s your problem? Shimon Peres was actually in Azerbaijan. Are you arguing that Perry made that up too?
The photo editor in at Foreign Policy did not include the erroneous caption that is included with the photo in this post.
The caption above reads, “Shimon Peres in Azerbaijan” when, in fact, the photo does not depict Shimon Peres in Azerbaijan but rather in Kazakhstan.
The caption added here also includes a reference to Peres as an “Israeli Alexander on path to Middle East empire”.
The photo, however, was taken in 2009 in Astana, Kazakhstan’s capital. Peres was there attending third Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions.
The point of the forum was to discuss way to reduce religious friction internationally and promote peace and understanding across different faiths.
At the forum, Peres suggested that a discussion of the Arab Peace Initiative be convened in Astana.
The Iranian delegation walked out of the conference when Peres began speaking.
I have asked Mark Perry to look into the photo. If I made an error it is one based on an error by Foreign Policy’s photo editor. There are many photos of Peres in Azerbaijan & I will change it if necessary.
It’s entirely irrelevant that Shimon Peres was peddling his hasbara wares in Kazakhstan. He was porting empire & hegemony when he visited Azerbaijan.
Great! I’d be curious to know the response from Mr. Perry when you receive one.
Was there any response about the photo? I notice your caption still indicates that it is a picture of Peres in Azerbaijan. Did you get confirmation of this?
No. No confirmation from Mark Perry & it’s still displayed on the Foreign Policy site as well. No one has presented any real evidence that this picture is taken in Kazakhstan. I prefer not taking people on their word that something is so. Evidence is always useful.
Thanks for the update.
In terms of evidence, how about this:
http://centralasiaonline.com/en_GB/articles/caii/features/2009/07/04/feature-05
[comment deleted–stop beating a dead horse]