Image of the Emerald when it was owned by Libyan oil company
חשיפה: ישראל היא שגרמה לאסון הזפת. שייטת 13 תקפה את המכלית “אמרלד” שהייתה בדרך לסוריה, אך הפיצוץ גרם לנזק גדול בהרבה מהצפוי ולדליפה ענקית של נפט גולמי
با خرابکاری در کشتی نفتی ایران، اسرائیل ناحیه وسیعی از ساحل خود را آلوده کرد
Today, US officials reported that Israel had been mining Iranian oil tankers in retaliation for similar Iranian attacks on shipping in the Persian Gulf:
Since late 2019, Israel has used weaponry including water mines to strike Iranian vessels or those carrying Iranian cargo as they navigate toward Syria in the Red Sea and in other areas of the region.
The US reports did not offer details about specific attacks. But a high level Israeli government official told me that Israel not only had done this, but he offered details on one of the attacks. But before saying more about this, some background is in order.
A few weeks ago, a then-unknown tanker deposited 1,000 tons of oil into the Mediterranean close to Israeli shores. The oil eventually washed up on Israel’s beaches causing the worst environmental disaster in the country’s history. Sea animals were coated in sludge and turtles and a whale died as a result. Thousands of Israeli volunteered to clean up the mess. Israel’s famous beaches have been off limits for weeks.
At first, Israel blamed a Greek oil tanker which had been in the vicinity of the original oil spill. But later it admitted that this identification was wrong. Then the Israeli environment minister, Gila Gamliel, blamed Iran for the catastrophe. She purportedly did so without consulting Israeli intelligence officials, . She claimed that a, Iranian ship, the Emerald, had left an Iranian port loaded with oil. Its destination was Syria, which maintains regular trade with Iran. Because of international sanctions, Iran’s ability to sell its oil is limited and it must resort to these sorts of ad hoc commercial relationships.
When Gamliel pinned the blame, there was something like consternation within the Israeli intelligence apparatus. Officials told the press they knew nothing about her claim and that she hadn’t consulted with them. It made her look lame and I reported as such here. But my Israeli source tells me that she was indeed correct. The Emerald did cause the oil spill. But how did it happen? The information conveyed to me by the source is under Israeli military censorship, as you will see below.
This was not a deliberate attack by Iran on Israel as Gamliel claimed. In fact, It was precisely the reverse. It was a deliberate attack by Israel on the Iranian vessel. Israel’s naval commando unit, Shayetet 13 (they were the ones who murdered 10 Turkish citizens on the Mavi Marmara) covertly attached a mine to the Emerald. The intent was to cause minor damage that would send a message to Iran that its own attacks on Gulf shipping would bring a cost. This Times of London report written by Haaretz columnist Anshel Pfeiffer confirms my source:
They [Israeli attacks on the Emerald and other Iranian vessels] would have been planned jointly by Mossad, Israel’s external intelligence service, and military intelligence, which together have responsibility for tracking Iranian targets, and would have been carried out by Flotilla 13, the special operations unit of the navy.
However, the commandos didn’t realize that the Emerald was a rusty old hulk in desperately ill-repair. Here’s how the Wall Street Journal characterized some of the ships used to skirt Iran sanctions:
Shippers often declare false destinations, use old, rusted tankers to avoid notice, and sometimes transfer oil from one ship to another at sea to avoid detection, regional military officials said.
The Israeli mine, which was supposed to cause minor damage, actually ripped a hole so big that much of the contents of the ship’s hold leaked into the Mediterranean. This is what caused the Israeli environmental disaster: Israel itself.
The WSJ article in fact, whether intentionally or unintentionally, referred implicitly to the Emerald oil shipment and the sabotage:
In an episode last month, suspected Israeli operatives attached a limpet mine to attack an Iranian vessel as it anchored near Lebanon to deliver Iran oil to Syria, according to the first shipping professional. Israel’s military declined to comment on the incident.
It’s worth nothing that Gamliel, in pointing the finger of blame at the Iranians and the Emerald said that after its oil leaked into the sea it continued on to a Syrian port. After which, it returned to Iran.
The Times of London also adds this telling detail:
The [Israeli] attacks [on Iranian shipping] caused at least one big oil spill, in the Red Sea in October 2019, according to reports from Washington. Another spill, along the Israeli and Lebanese coasts in the past month, was blamed by Israeli politicians on a tanker carrying crude oil from Iran to Syria but will now be viewed in a different light.
Pfeffer published his story in The Times rather than Haaretz, because the military censor prohibited him from doing so. So he evaded the censor by publishing with a foreign news outlet. This is a further sign that the Israeli military does not wants its own citizens to know that it caused a national environmental catastrophe. And the censor does so under the false guise of protecting national security.
My Israeli source offered his characterization of the disaster:
“Yes, Israel is responsible for its own environmental catastrophe. Like the Beirut explosion, a planned “small” sabotage operation ended in a disaster. Shayetet 13 sabotaged The Emerald intending to cause a small hole that would prevent it continuing on its way to Syria, but Israeli intelligence had no idea about how old and rusty the tanker was. The result: a giant oil spill that hit Israeli -and also Lebanese – shores.”
Israeli intelligence is supposed to be among the best in the world. But remember the Lillehammer fiasco, where Mossad assassins murdered an innocent Moroccan waiter instead of the intended target, an alleged Palestinian plotter of the Munich massacre. There, Israeli hubris and determination to exact revenge against its enemies led to false assumptions and eventual disaster. So regarding Iran, Israeli intelligence has an incessant need to thump its chest to show, like a gorilla, dominance over the rest of the pack. This hubris led to the oil spill disaster.
There is a historical echo of this tragedy in the story of the SS Patria, a ship carrying 1,800 Jewish refugees from Holocaust-era Europe in 1940. It was docked in Haifa, but British authorities refused to permit its passengers to disembark. The Yishuv leadership strongly opposed the British refusal. It decided it would sabotage the ship so that it could not leave the harbor and return to Europe. Haganah fighters attached an explosive charge to the hull. But they erred in calculating the power of the device. Instead of disabling the navigation system, it tore off an entire side of the vessel, which actually sank in sixteen minutes. This caused the deaths of nearly 300 refugees.
It’s worth emphasizing as well, that the Emerald story would never have leaked without the involvement of US intelligence, which presumably is the source of today’s story. This is the second such leak which is damaging to the Netanyahu government. Biden knew that eventually the media would connect the dots and tie the story leaked today to the Emerald itself. He knew it would damage Israel’s reputation and discredit the Israeli prime minister’s entire rejectionist approach to Iran.
Though the US hasn’t exactly been Johnny-on-the-spot in terms of fulfilling its promise to return to the JCPOA, it knows that when it does so it will face a ferocious backlash from Republicans and from Israel. This leak is a pre-emptive attack. Such a scandal will set Netanyahu back on his heels. It will also potentially embarrass in the run up to the elections happening in the next two weeks.
If my suggestion about US motives is wrong and it was instead intending to threaten Iran, and remind it that this country continues to support Israel in its barely concealed war against it, then this leak (in both senses of the word) will be quite damaging to that effort.
I asked the Department of Defense to comment on reports that US intelligence has coordinated with Israel in these maritime attacks. Instead of commenting, the press officer referred me to the Israeli government. I thought it quite odd considering I wasn’t asking a US government official about Israel’s role. I was asking if the US had played any role in the attacks.
Can you reveal your sources
@ Dan: My source is anonymous. The story is under military censorship. Sources who violate censorship can face serious consequences.
Your report leaks bilge.
First, assuming the reports of Israeli sabotage is true, these sabotages was carried out in the Red Sea, or close enough to Iran that damaged ships could return to Iranian waters.
The Emerald would have had to have been targeted within miles of her port of call in Syria, thus allowing her to offload her cargo.
How does Israel accomplish her mission when she allows a contraband laden ship sock in Syria? Answer: She doesn’t. Makes no sense.
Here’s where it gets good.
To quote you, Richard, “In an episode last month, suspected Israeli operatives attached a limpet mine to attack an Iranian vessel as it anchored near Lebanon to deliver Iran oil to Syria, according to the first shipping professional. ”
According to a single, “shipping professional” (who could well be an Iranian).
Maybe this “shipping professional” is IRGC.
To be clear, this “shipping professional”, is not the U.S. official who leaked this story.
The only confirmation, comes from Richard’s “source”, who is standing by his libel that Israel caused he Beirut port explosion. Absolutely no one, other than Richard’s “source” has made that claim, must less backed it up with a shred of evidence.
Where’s the secret, underground port city your “source” claimed Israel had targeted. The one ran by Hezbollah.
@ Alice:
How do you know where the mines were attached? They could have been attached by naval commandos anywhere within reach of Israeli naval vessels including the Red Sea or Mediterranean itself. And why would the commandos have cared where they attacked? And what does returning to Iran have to do with where it occurred?
Not at all. The damage to the Emerald occurred just outside Israeli waters 30 miles off its coast. Confirmed by Israeli media reports. Nowhere near Syria.
The Wall Street Journal used a source it characterized as a maritime professional. It’s not in the habit of using IRG commanders as maritime professional sources. If you don’t trust WSJ’s sources that’s your problem. Not mine or my own sources.
As for no other source confirming my own source, you haven’ been paying attention. Anshel Pfeiffer published a new story in the Times all but confirming my own source. Why did he publish in the Times instead of Haaretz? Military censorship. Why is there such censorship on this story? Because it’s as my source reported: a major Israeli intelligence fuck-up. Now go fight with City Hall and Anshel Pfeiffer (quoted now in my post).
False. In the 10 posts I wrote about the Beirut disaster each one contained either direct or circumstantial evidence of Israeli involvement AND the statements by Hezbollah, Lebanese officials and Israelis as well pointing to Israeli involvement.
I never claimed there was an “underground city” in Beirut. My source said there was an underground Hezbollah missile storage site at the Port.
Do not mischaracterize my words. Quote them carefully and accurately. If you don’t you will disappear here so fast your head will spin.
Another considerable problem with this article is that it flies in the face of Science.
Everyone knows that the water currents off Israel’s coast travel northwards.
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Regional-bottle-distribution-on-a-map-of-the-eastern-Mediterranean-Sea-with-major_fig1_325247523
“In an episode last month, suspected Israeli operatives attached a limpet mine to attack an Iranian vessel as it anchored near Lebanon to deliver Iran oil to Syria, according to the first shipping professional.”
The Emerald was anchored North of Israel, near Lebanon, to deliver oil to Syria.
If Israeli had detonated limpets and caused an oil spill, than how could the oil have traveled south to Israel’s coasts?
Now, taking this quote at face value, Israel may have launched a revenge attack on the Emerald AFTER she deliberately dumped oil on Israel’s beaches. This would better explain why the Emerald was already anchored near Lebanon when the alleged limpet mine attack occurred.
@ Alice: Again, the oil was dumped nowhere near Syria or even the Lebanese coast. It was dumped off the Israeli coast south of those locations. So yes, the Currents would have washed the oil northward towards Lebanon, precisely what happened.
And again, the explosion and damage did not happen near Syria.
You have had your 2 comments in this thread. Do not publish any further comments in this thread. You may publish in other threads if you choose.
Richard, there was quite a severe storm at the time/just before the spill which will account for it washing up on most of the coastline
“…the oil was dumped nowhere near Syria or even the Lebanese coast.”
But it was reported that, “..suspected Israeli operatives attached a limpet mine to attack an Iranian vessel as it anchored near Lebanon to deliver Iran oil to Syria.”
Maybe the limpet mine was attached ‘near Lebanon’, but detonated after the tanker off-loaded her oil and was returning home near the Israeli coast.
@eighth man: That was a different Iranian tanker more recently attacked than the Emerald.
Okay, thanks, Richard.
So where exactly was the Emerald when the limpet mines detonated?
All I can figure, is that if the mines were attached near Lebanon, and the oil spilled near Israel, than the Emerald would have to have been sailing southward.
I see the Zionists don’t like your story. That probably is the clinching proof!
Shades of the Patria disaster. They do have a knack.
They finally got some blowback with all their constant meddling it seems!
Last time someone sent me to read your article, it was when you claimed that Israel is responsible for bombing the Hezbollah’s weapon storage. No serious news channel followed that, and not even the Lebanese people believed that story…
Stop spreading hate without proof, and hiding behind a source you can’t reveal doesn’t count for proof.
@ George: No serious news Channel? Except for Al Jadeed, Lebanon’s most popular TV channel which interviewed me. So I guess your claim that not even Lebanese believed me is bullshit. Ah well.
And except for the Lebanese former interior minister who blamed Israel; and except for Moshe Yaalon who suggested Israeli responsibility; and except for an almost exactly identical attack on a Hezbollah missile storage facility in another part of Lebanon a week later. All of which I reported in my blog & which you appear to have missed. You mean except for all that, right?
BTW, both Anshel Pfeiffer writing in the Times of London and other sources now confirm 12 Israeli commando attacks on Iranian ships. The same source who reported Israeli responsibility for the Beirut attack also reported the same regarding the Emerald. He was right about the Emerald and he was right about Beirut.
I have a source, what do you have? Bupkes.
This week: A part of the ship’s hull was damaged after an explosive device hit the Iranian container ship Shahrekord in international waters in the Mediterranean Sea.
Where are all the pictures?
If your story was true, all the world was
” bomb” with tens of pictures of the event. But even no one picture especially at your article? It sound so mistorical and strange.
@ Roie: So you’re claiming that Israeli naval commandos would have taken pictures of the attack? Or that news media would have known of the attack and taken pictures themselves when no one has identified that the commandos perpetrated it till now, a month after it happened? Or that the Iranians on board the Emerald would have taken pictures and given them to the media? Or that Iran would have wanted the world to know Israel was attacking its oil tankers and endangering its oil shipments and exports? Gee I wonder why none of these groups publicized such pictures?
Iran would have wanted the world to know except for these shipments are illegal under international law which you are so fond of. \
@ Dan: No, Iranian oil shipments are NOT “illegal under international law.” They violate sanctions, not international law. But the only two parties to these oil deals are Iran and Syria. Frankly, I don’t think either one cares a fig about sanctions supported by Israel and the US. Not to mention that if Iran has a choice between dying and living, I think they’d choose to violate sanctions and live as a country. You may wish for Iran to lay down and die, but I think they have other ideas.
These are not US sanctions but UN sanctions, and they worth as much as international law.
IMO, neither worth much, and are mechanisms invented by humans to try and settle things. But like every human institution, it is more political above all.
It is incredible to watch people who consider themselves moral and humanitarian, weaponize morals against one group while giving other groups a complete pass.
חכמינו אמרו – כל המרחם על אכזרים, סופו שיתאכזר אל רחמנים.
@ Dan: It doesn’t matter whether the sanctions are US or UN, they’re not international law. And there is no such thing as being “worth international law.” They either are or they aren’t, and they aren’t.
And if we want to talk about violating international law, let’s focus on the far more frequent & flagrant Israeli violations of such. Which may result in a full-fledged international war crimes prosecution against Israeli leaders and generals. You might want to offer such attention to that before casting stones at Iran.
There are today no international sanctions against Iran to sell its oil. The UN sanctions against Iran do not include oil exports from Iran. There are no international UN sanctions against Syria, only those US and EU sanctions.
US sanctions are not international sanctions. US sanctions’ “legality” are based only on the CLAIMED use of US dollar in trade. Only a total nut believes that Syria would (or could) pay in US dollars the oil it purchased from Iran or Iran accepting the payment to be made in USD. The effect of these US sanctions are based purely on cruel economical blackmail and US ability to control/follow the international banking system.
Finnish companies buy most of the raw oil from Russia. Nowadays Russia demands trades to be made using anything else except USD. USA is fast destroying with all these sanctions against numerous countries and organisations its position having the world reserve currency. And then USA can not any more finance its huge trade deficit and debts simply using printing machines.
What is hilarious is that one of US slogans against China is the Freedom of Navigation (especially on South China sea) and Israel is fiercely resisting any boycotts, divestment and sanctions towards Israel. Behave as we say, not as we do.