Global Islamic politics expert says Israel's claims about Iranian nuclear weapon 'at odds' with intelligence reports as Netanyahu 'desperate' to involve Trump in war
An Australian global Islamic politics expert has urged the world to be "sceptical" of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claims after numerous intelligence reports concluded that Iran is not "close at all" to building a nuclear weapon.
Professor Greg Barton from Deakin University told Sky News Netanyahu's strategy to close down Iran's nuclear program may not be as "clear cut and simple", as he would present it to be to President Donald Trump, in an attempt to persuade the US to join the Israeli assault.
"I think that the way that Benjamin Netanyahu will sell it to Trump is that you just send in a couple of B2s over Fordow and it's done," Mr Barton told Sky News host Steve Price.
"You've closed down the nuclear program and we're good.
"But of course, it is not likely to be so clear cut and so simple."
According to Axios, President Trump believes the US has leverage over Iran due to its bunker buster munitions – which Israel does not have – that are capable of destroying the Fordow nuclear enrichment facility that sits deep under a mountain.
Mr Barton added the bunker buster bombs are unlikely to demolish Iran's nuclear program and could instead result in dangerous escalation of war in the Middle East.
'First of all, those B2 strikes with massive ordnance, penetrator bombs over Fordow, 90 metres underground, that likely wouldn't finish Iran's nuclear program,' he said.
'They'd probably scramble to take what they have left and actually move towards nuclear weapons.
'In the meantime, they're likely to strike out against US targets all around the Middle East and use their proxies to do so.
'So a very dangerous risk of escalation and a prolonged conflict.'
When questioned about the validity of Netanyahu's claims about Iran's existential threat to Israel, Mr Barton said they were 'at odds' with other publicly available intelligence reports have said, including what Trump was briefed on by his own security adviser.
Mr Barton highlighted Israel's remarkable capabilities at penetrating Iranian society and its defence apparatus, but noted other intelligence reports suggest 'Iran is some way off, it's not close at all' to building a nuclear weapon.
'It is possible they know something that no one else knows, but what all the other intelligence reports are saying is that Iran is some way off, it's not close at all,' he said.
'We can't know, we're sort of making a claim from Netanyahu who is desperate to involve Trump and America in this programme, and on balance you sort of want to be a bit sceptical about what he's saying for that reason.'
Israel has been trading missiles with Iran since last Friday in an attempt to shut down any efforts of Tehran building an atomic weapon to wipe out the existence of the Jewish state.
Netanyahu said the operations were to "strike the head of Iran's nuclear weaponisation program".
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told a media briefing on Thursday, local time, she had been asked to pass on a 'direct quote' from President Trump on the possibility of US intervention in the Israel-Iran war.
'Based on the fact that there is a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks,' she said, quoting the President.
Ms Leavitt also urged sceptics of US involvement to 'trust' in President Trump's judgement, before emphasising his 'top priority' was to prevent Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
an hour ago
- Sky News AU
‘Majority of Australians' see Welcome to Country as divisive
Sky News host Danica De Giorgio discusses the overuse of Welcome to Country ceremonies. 'A new poll out today has found the majority of Australians, about 56 per cent of us believe Welcome to Country ceremonies are divisive,' Ms De Giorgio said. 'Are they really necessary?'
Sydney Morning Herald
an hour ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
The art of the lie: Why Trump is taking issue with Iran's alternative facts
Before Trump did it, with an assist from the Supreme Court on Friday, it was Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld who worked to erode checks and balances and hoover all the power into the executive branch. With the malleable George W. Bush in the Oval Office, Cheney and Rumsfeld were able to create an alternative universe where they were never wrong – because they conjured up information to prove they were right. The two malevolent regents had a fever about getting rid of Saddam Hussein, so they hyped up intelligence, redirecting Americans' vengeful emotions about Osama bin Laden and 9/11 into that pet project. Tony Blair scaremongered that it would take only 45 minutes for Saddam to send his weapons of mass destruction westward. But there were no WMDs. When it comes to the Middle East, presidents can't resist indulging in a gasconade. Unlike Iraq, Iran was actually making progress on its nuclear program. Trump did not need to warp intelligence to justify his decision. But he did anyway, to satisfy his unquenchable ego. He bragged that the strikes had 'OBLITERATED' Iran's nuclear capabilities. Loading 'I just don't think the president was telling the truth,' Senator Chris Murphy, a Democrat from Connecticut, told reporters. He believes Iran still has 'significant remaining capability'. When CNN's Natasha Bertrand and her colleagues broke the story that a preliminary classified US report suggested the strikes had set back Iran by only a few months, Trump, Pete Hegseth and Karoline Leavitt smeared her and The New York Times, which confirmed her scoop, as inaccurate, unpatriotic and disrespectful to our military. On Friday afternoon, CNN revealed that the military did not even use bunker-buster bombs on one of Iran's largest nuclear targets because it was too deep. Though Trump likes to hug the flag – and just raised two huge ones on the White House North and South Lawns – he ignores a basic tenet of patriotism: it is patriotic to tell the public the truth on life-or-death matters, and for the press to challenge power. It is unpatriotic to mislead the public in order to control it and suppress dissent, or as a way of puffing up your own ego. Although he was dubbed the 'daddy' of NATO in The Hague on Wednesday, Trump clearly has daddy issues. (Pass the tissues!) He did not get the affirmation from his father that could have prevented this vainglorious vamping. For Trump, it was not enough for the strikes to damage Iran's nuclear capabilities; they had to 'obliterate' them. It could not simply be an impressive mission; it had to be, as Hegseth said, 'the most complex and secretive military operation in history'. (Move over, D-Day and crossing the Delaware.) The president was so eager to magnify the mission that he eerily compared it to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Trump has always believed in 'truthful hyperbole', as he called it in The Art of the Deal. But now it's untruthful hyperbole. He has falsely claimed that an election was stolen and falsely claimed that $US1.7 trillion ($2.6 trillion) in cuts to the social safety net in his Big, Unpopular Bill 'won't affect anybody; it is just fraud, waste and abuse.' Loading He's getting help on his alternative universe from all the new partisan reporters in the White House briefing room who are eager to shill for him. 'So many Americans still have questions about the 2020 election,' a reporter told Trump at the news conference on Friday, wondering if he would appoint someone at the Justice Department to investigate judges 'for the political persecution of you, your family and your supporters during the Biden administration'? Trump beamed. 'I love you,' he said to the young woman. 'Who are you?' She was, as it turned out, the reporter for Mike Lindell of MyPillow fame, who has his own 'news' network.
The Age
an hour ago
- The Age
LNP's ‘wait and see' policy black holes count for zero
To submit a letter to The Age, email letters@ Please include your home address and telephone number below your letter. No attachments. See here for our rules and tips on getting your letter published. OPPOSITION ENERGY POLICY Dan Tehan's latest commentary (' Tehan maintains rage over Labor's green agenda that is 'trashing our economy' ', 28/6 ) is a masterclass in political hedging. He attacks Labor's clean energy plan as too costly without offering any serious alternative – and without saying what he would spend, or do instead. Apparently, it's too soon to say what the Coalition's policy will be. But it's not too soon to throw stones. Tehan is trying to have it both ways: Acknowledging climate change is real, and we must act, but also undermining Australia's existing pathway to net zero – one endorsed by 195 countries and backed by growing investment, jobs and global momentum. Instead of proposing a credible, costed alternative, Tehan points to nuclear power – a decades-away, taxpayer-funded gamble that voters in proposed host communities clearly rejected. Meanwhile, his own Coalition partners, the Nationals, are openly discussing ditching net zero altogether. If the Coalition really believes in climate action and affordable energy, it needs to stop hiding behind scare campaigns and internal reviews. Tehan's 'wait and see' approach isn't leadership– it's delay dressed up as strategy. The public deserves more than recycled talking points and policy black holes. Alan Richardson, Warrnambool Pace for renewables after Coalition inaction Has it ever occurred to Dan Tehan (29/6) why the federal government has to move so quickly on rolling out renewable energy? May it have something to do with 20 years of Coalition governments' climate change denial and inaction? Geoff Wescott, Northcote Time for action is now I am surprised that Dan Tehan expects voters to be turned on by his plan to let Labor make all the running on climate for '18 months and two years and then work out what we can do'. There are indications enough that the Australian public knows that real emissions have to come down. We know that more severe climate deterioration can be expected as world average surface temperatures approach and exceed 1.5oC above their values in pre-industrial times. We are already effectively at this threshold – and emissions, instead of coming down, continue to rise. Human-induced climate change will only ease if, and when, global action is effective in bringing the concentration of heat-trapping greenhouse gases in the atmosphere back down towards levels prevalent in pre-industrial times. The concentration of carbon dioxide in pre-industrial times was 280 parts per million. It is now 420 ppm and rising. The responsible thing for the Coalition to do would be to work with the government in implementing the most cost-effective ways of reducing emissions, not in 18 months' or two years' time, but now. John Gare, Kew East More from the LNP policy wasteland Angus Taylor believes quotas for women in his party would 'subvert democracy' (27/6). This is what subverts democracy, Angus: Imposing false debts on half a million social security recipients, causing horrific stress and hardship (Robodebt); providing tax breaks and other benefits to wealthy individuals and companies in the hope some crumbs will eventually trickle down to everyone else (supply side economics – a bedrock LNP principle); ignoring the science of climate change for decades resulting in untold personal, financial and environmental damage (climate denialism). From the same policy wasteland, Dan Tehan, in an accompanying article, suggests the opposition might have some ideas for a climate policy in a few years' time, while railing against the Labor government's commitment to renewables. Meanwhile, the gap between the 'haves' and 'have-nots' is at a 20-year high. Democracy has already been subverted under your watch Angus. Please make way for someone – preferably a woman – with some caring, careful and better crafted policies. Peter Thomson, Brunswick THE FORUM Who is really responsible? Oh dear, Angus. No quotas for women have worked so well for the Liberals. So who was responsible for failing so spectacularly? The 'men' can't blame quotas (there were none). Nor can they blame the women (as there were too few). Jenny Bone, Surrey Hills Merit in quotas It's worrying that quotas in politics is somehow an undemocratic idea (28/6). The insistence on 'merit' seems like a way of effectively shutting women out of politics. It means that a male-dominated party will be the on-going pattern, to the exclusion of female voices and sensibilities. Quotas lift opportunity for a fair representation in politics and isn't this the soul of democracy? The trouble with the 'merit' ideology is that women have to compete with men on men's terms, disadvantaging many women from the outset. Would that we could see the merit in quotas. Ian Hill, Blackburn South
