U.S. won't block Israeli attack on Iran nuke sites: Biden
U.S. Vice-President Joe Biden has signalled that Washington would not stand in the way if Israel chose to attack Iran's nuclear facilities, even as the top U.S. military officer said any attack on Iran would be destabilizing.
In an interview on ABC's This Week, Biden was asked whether Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was taking the right approach by indicating that Israel would take matters into its own hands if Iran did not show a willingness to negotiate by the end of the year.
"Look, Israel can determine for itself — it's a sovereign nation — what's in their interest and what they decide to do relative to Iran and anyone else," Biden replied. He added that this was the case, "whether we agree or not" with the Israeli view.
Biden was then asked more pointedly whether the U.S. would stand in the way if the Israelis decided to launch a military attack against Iranian nuclear facilities.
"Look, we cannot dictate to another sovereign nation what they can and cannot do," he said.
Pressed on this point with a reminder that the U.S. could impede an Israeli strike on Iran by prohibiting it from using Iraqi air space, Biden said he was "not going to speculate" beyond saying that Israel, like the U.S., has a right to "determine what is in its interests."
No comment from Israel
Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Sunday he has been "for some time concerned about any strike on Iran."
He also said military action should not be ruled out and that a nuclear-armed Iran is a highly troubling prospect.
In Jerusalem, the Israeli government had no comment on Biden's remarks.
White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said Biden was not signalling any change of approach on Iran or Israel.
"Our friends and allies, including Israel, know that the president believes that now is the time to explore direct diplomatic options," he said.
The Netanyahu government said it prefers to see Iran's nuclear program stopped through diplomacy but has not ruled out a military strike.
Israel, within range of an Iranian ballistic missile, has been skeptical of the U.S. administration's aim of engaging in dialogue with Iran rather than threatening sanctions and military action.
The New York Times reported in January, shortly before Barack Obama took office, that former president George W. Bush had deflected an Israeli request in 2008 for specialized U.S. bombs that it would use for an airstrike on Iran's main nuclear complex at Natanz.
And it reported that Bush was persuaded by aides, including his defence chief, Robert Gates, that a U.S. strike on Iran would probably be ineffective. Obama retained Gates as his defence secretary.
Iran insists its nuclear program is only for peaceful purposes.
There are many reasons for Washington to oppose an Israeli attack on Iran now, including the presence in neighbouring Iraq of about 130,000 American troops, who could become targets for Iranian retaliation. The security consequences could be much broader.
Mullen said he worries about unpredictable consequences of an attack on Iran.
"I worry about it being very destabilizing, not just in and of itself but the unintended consequences of a strike like that," he told CBS's Face the Nation. "At the same time, I'm one that thinks Iran should not have nuclear weapons. I think that's very destabilizing."
Most experts believe that wiping out the Iranian nuclear program is beyond the ability of Israel's military.
In 1981, the Israeli air force destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor in a lightning strike. But Iran's facilities are scattered around the country, some of them underground.