Iran tested more missiles in the Gulf on Thursday, state media said, and the US reminded Tehran that it was ready to defend its allies.
Washington, which accuses Tehran of seeking nuclear arms, said after Iran test-fired nine missiles on Wednesday there should be no more such tests if Iran wanted the world's trust.
US leaders have not ruled out military options if diplomacy fails to assuage fears about Iran's nuclear programme, which Tehran says is only to produce electricity.
Israel, long assumed to have its own nuclear arsenal, has sworn to prevent Iran from emerging as a nuclear-armed power. Last month it staged an air force exercise that stoked speculation about a possible assault on Iranian nuclear sites.
Iran has vowed to strike back at Tel Aviv, as well as US interests and shipping, if it is attacked, asserting that missiles fired during wargames under way in the Gulf included ones that could hit Israel and US bases in the region.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said on a visit to the former Soviet republic of Georgia that no one should be confused about Washington's commitment to protect its allies. "We are also sending a message to Iran that we will defend American interests and . . . the interests of our allies," she said after meeting Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili.
'Lesson for enemies'
Rice said a planned US missile defence shield, to be partly based in the Czech Republic and Poland, would dampen any threat of an attack from Iran. Russia opposes the project.
"We also are able to look to the future of a missile defence system that will make it more difficult for Iran to threaten (and) and be bellicose and say terrible things because their missiles won't work," Rice said.
Iranian state TV and radio said the Revolutionary Guards - the ideologically driven wing of Iran's armed forces - had fired ground-to-sea, surface-to-surface and sea-to-air missiles overnight. Long-range missiles were also launched.
"The . . . manoeuvre brings power to the Islamic Republic of Iran and is a lesson for enemies," Guards Commander-in-Chief Mohammad Ali Jafari was quoted as saying.
Iran has threatened to shut the Strait of Hormuz, a vital route for Gulf oil exports, if it is attacked. Thursday's exercises involved divers and speedboats, as well as the launch of a high-speed torpedo called Hout, state media said.
Rattled markets
Commenting on Iran's Gulf manoeuvres, Kuwait said it hoped wisdom would prevail on all sides. "The region has had enough of continuous wars," Kuwaiti Foreign Ministry Undersecretary Khaled Jarallah was quoted by state news agency KUNA as saying.
On Iranian threats to close the Strait of Hormuz, he said: "We hope it does not come to this."
Wednesday's tests rattled global oil markets, pushing up the price of oil. Crude prices have dipped in recent days but have hit a series of record highs this year partly because of Iran tensions.
China urged restraint in the row over Iran's nuclear plans, but did not echo Western rebukes over the missile firings.
"We express our concern about these developments," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said of the tests.
Negotiations planned
He welcomed the prospect of fresh talks on the nuclear programme being pursued by Iran, the world's fourth largest oil producer and China's third biggest crude supplier.
The US, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China have offered Iran incentives to curb its nuclear work. Tehran rejects their demand that it suspend uranium enrichment.
European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana, acting for the six powers, is expected to meet Iranian officials for talks on the package, but no time or place has been announced.
China and Russia, which is building Iran's first, and so far only, nuclear power plant, have been resisting US-led calls for expanding UN sanctions on the Islamic Republic.
Sanctions have made Western firms increasingly wary about investing. France's Total said on Thursday it would not invest for now in a big gas deal due to the political risk.
Iran has brushed off the impact of Western caution saying it has a big enough cash pile from windfall oil earnings to carry out the project itself or find other interested parties. "This is our message. We will proceed with development with or without them," Iranian Oil Minister Gholamhossein Nozari told journalists when asked about the latest comments from Total.
Weapons Technology - Keep up with the latest innovations in our cutting edge special report.
If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.
Have your say
Iran
Thu Jul 10 17:51:16 BST 2008 by Dr. Robert S. Kiken
We still think we can cajole regime's like Iran to join the family of western civilization. They have no interest to give in any way. They are always interested in taking but wish to eventually do evil to their neighbors and especially Isreal. We have not come so far as to be very different from Gengis Khan, Attila the Hun, Hitler, Khomeini, Stalin, etc ,etc. They are out to destroy the rest of us and we should NEVER be fooled. We just have to STOP the wishful thinking and treat them accordingly. Then, they may stop acting like a spoiled teenager.
Iran
Thu Jul 10 18:06:52 BST 2008 by Della
Iran has not invaded anywhere since the early 1700s.
What you say is just a bunch of propaganda you picked up some place, and are repeating.
Iran
Thu Jul 10 18:40:24 BST 2008 by Bobbo
In more recent times Iran has come under the domination of colonial power, had a western puppet regime imposed on it, gone through a revolution and a long war with a neighbour...
I don't want any one to attack them or them to attack anyone else. Don't see why they can't have nuclear power, or how anyone can stop them.
Iran
Thu Jul 10 18:56:58 BST 2008 by Jamie Jones
To be honest, I don't think 'stopping them' is the main aim here. It's to take control of and sell off their government, their government-run companies and traipse over the human rights of anybody who gets in the way.
Iran
Thu Jul 10 19:27:18 BST 2008 by Cynthia
"Iran has not invaded anywhere since the early 1700s."
I guess that may be true if you ignore the storming of the American Embassy in 1979. And perhaps if you also ignore the sponsorship or direct involvement of terrorism in places like Argentina, Lebanon, etc. Under the cover of diplomatic immunity and including the supply of weapons and explosives and training by IGRC personel.
Iran
Thu Jul 10 20:23:16 BST 2008 by Nick
Let's not forget that the US Administration supplied Saddam Hussein with tens of millions of dollars worth of arms during the 1980s.
Funny old world, isn't it?
Iran
Thu Jul 10 21:28:24 BST 2008 by Rj
What fantastically selective vision you have. In 1952 BP, British and American interests overthrew a liberal democratic Iranian government, freely elected in fair and open elections. When this government attempted to nationalize their oil production, the US and its lackey, Britain decided it had to go. They replaced that democratic government with the most vicious dictator the region had ever seen. The Shah remained in power till 1979, when we was forced out and fled to his sponsor's state, the US. So, yes, they took the US embassy in 1979, but I'd say that had good reason to. As for funding terrorism, well, try that holier than thou crap on someone from El Salvador or Nicaragua, see how far you get.
Iran
Fri Jul 11 02:23:45 BST 2008 by Cynthia
So am I to understand that two wrongs make a right? In that case what do three wrongs make? A wrong or a right? At some point logic like that will result in an odd or even number that ends up with someone getting nuked.
So I assume that the invasion of the US embassy grounds and occupation of its sovereign soil still successfully disputes the claim that Iran has not invaded anywhere since the early 1700s?
Iran
Thu Jul 10 19:32:20 BST 2008 by Brad
Funding Hezbalah and other violent groups which have quietly invaded many sovereign territories including Lebannon, Palistine and Iraq would seem to some not all that 'nonviolent' as your post is implying.
Iran
Thu Jul 10 20:44:33 BST 2008 by Jamie Jones
Oh the irony. If only I could count the number of states who have been over-run both directly through force or indirectly through funding by the US.
If there is one country in the world that should never be allowed to be armed or trusted, it is the United States of America.
Iran
Fri Jul 11 03:28:08 BST 2008 by Vendicar Decarian
"Funding Hezbalah " - Brad
And the U.S. Is funding the primary terrorist state in the world.
Israel.
Iran
Sat Jul 12 00:49:42 BST 2008 by Ronnie
Jamie!!! No one lets anybody have power!!! It wasn't you or anyone else that allows America to have guns or power. Mistakes are always made but the last time America wasn't involved in world affairs much we got a world war. Now I know theres America hating people out there that can't find anything we ever do to have a positive effect. If you want someones power they either hand it over "I pray not" or you take it. Which one are you proposing??? Ronnie
Iran
Thu Jul 10 18:18:52 BST 2008 by Jamie Jones
"Dr" Kiken...
Do you realise there are people in Iran saying pretty much the same about the west?
And do you realise that if both sets of people sat down and shut up, there would be far fewer missiles being thrown around, far fewer people being killed, far fewer countries being invaded and far cheaper fuel for your car?
Iran
Thu Jul 10 19:40:34 BST 2008 by Brad
Iran the same as the west?????
so a totalitarian state with state media control says something on their news station and you think its the same as the west????? wow that's ignorant if you ask me.
I wonder what you think of Iran's human rights abuse which includes intolerance to gays, atheists, polytheists, jews, political disention ect............. Same as the west, huh
there would be far fewer people killed if they weren't training their population in martyrdom and stopped sending poor people and women and children packed with explosives into marketplaces.
Iran
Thu Jul 10 20:41:20 BST 2008 by Jamie Jones
I don't know if you're talking about Iran or the Fox News Network there.
And why do you think people feel so desperate that all they have left is to kill as many people when they kill themselves?
Iran
Fri Jul 11 03:29:52 BST 2008 by Vendicar Decarian
"so a totalitarian state with state media control says something on their news station and you think its the same as the west?????" = Brad
Fox news.
Need I say any more?
Iran
Sat Jul 12 01:04:26 BST 2008 by Ronnie
Hey VD!!! Why can't you ever actually address someones comment?? And why do you do that annoying "print what they said"??? Its not necessary but because you never answer what the person said with a comment back it may be necessary. Whats wrong won't NS let you rant your KKK stuff no more/lol. As to this missile test the USA watched it all & guess who lied to make their tests look better, yes the Iranians military. Maybe they really can't count/lol. Maybe they really couldn't tell how far they actually when??? It is a matter of technology & the 7th century ideology can't win the day unless its the UN army. They got routed by 100 guys on horseback with rusty AK 47's. Yes lest trust the Iranians & the UN. How you going to beat the west with 7th century ideas??? Ever going to let your women work??? Hell thats 50% of the American work force. They can be trusted & don't need your male relatives around 24-7.Youre a funny guy Vendi!! Ronnie
Iran
Thu Jul 10 18:38:45 BST 2008 by Machete
What a ridiculous statement. You are actually suggesting that the shoot first and diplomacy later method is successful?
What you are forgetting is that every nation has the right to nuclear power AND arms. It's only a ridiculous treaty that says "we've got them, so now you can't have them" that si causing the problems.
I don't remember there being any issue about Israel getting nukes... Why no problem for them and not Iran?
Iran
Thu Jul 10 19:09:55 BST 2008 by Cynthia
"I don't remember there being any issue about Israel getting nukes... Why no problem for them and not Iran?"
For starters you could look up what governments did or did not sign up to the Nuclear Non-proliferation treaty which was opened for entry in 1968.
Iran
Thu Jul 10 21:53:29 BST 2008 by Rj
Since when has an international treaty EVER stopped the US from doing what it wants? One need only check out its behaviour with one of its closest clients, Canada, to see what sort of attitude it has towards treaties that arenââ¬â¢t serving its interest. The US government stole billions of dollars from Canadian softwood exporters ââ¬â despite the fact that their justification for doing so had been shot down many times in a process they agreed to. If that is how they treat their friends ââ¬Â¦
Iran
Fri Jul 11 02:11:22 BST 2008 by Cynthia
North Korea also withdrew from the NPT. There's nothing stopping Iran from withdrawing either, nor does the treaty stop them from clandestinely developing nuclear weapons. It's a very interesting interesting game that Iran is playing.
Iran
Thu Jul 10 19:54:43 BST 2008 by Brad
NO problem if Iran get nuclear weapons! yeah, lets just let all the countries in the world have the most powerful destructive weapon on earth, great Idea Machete.
Iran only has one man with his hand on the button- so to speak- and he's Mullah for life!
the US and Israel both have checks and balance systems in place- you need two keys and a directorate from the president who is held accountable for his actions by congress.
Iran on the other hand...................you wanna find out??? I don't.
The world needs to get rid of nukes not let any two bit religious hack control them.
Iran
Thu Jul 10 21:37:27 BST 2008 by Rj
Checks and balances in the US? Huh? You mean like the ones that are not even able to maintain the rule of law and prosecute telecoms that helped the current US government violate its own laws? I am surprised your sort still has the audacity to show their conservative faces given how soundly your ridiculous beliefs about the world have been discredited by the Bush administration.
Iran
Fri Jul 11 03:56:55 BST 2008 by Vendicar Decarian
"NO problem if Iran get nuclear weapons! " - Brad
No state should have nuclear weapons.
When are you going to dissarm?
"lets just let all the countries in the world have the most powerful destructive weapon on earth, great Idea"
Wrong. The most powerfully destructive weapon on earth is biological, not nuclear, and just how do you intend to prevent the development of biological weapons when they can be developed in a tiny lab the size of an average home?
Do you have the slightest iota of evidence that Iran has a nuclear weapons program?
No, you got nothing. Just like you had nothing but lies with Iraq.
America is now the primary enemy of all good people, and the time has now come to eradicate the American state.
Iran
Fri Jul 11 03:38:31 BST 2008 by Vendicar Decarian
This comment has been found to be in breach of our terms of use and has been removed.
Iran
Thu Jul 10 18:54:33 BST 2008 by Bobbo
Like Hasham, I can't see a land war on any scale being likely but I wouldn't be surprised by a raid like the one on Iraq's nuclear facility in 1981. What the consequence of that might be is another matter.
Iran
Fri Jul 11 04:00:11 BST 2008 by Vendicar Decarian
The most likely scenario is that Israel will drop the deep penetrator bombs that the U.S. Supplied it with a couple of years ago, and do so sometime in the new year, just before Bush leaves office. Or perhaps just before the U.S. Federal election.
Iran
Sat Jul 12 07:07:57 BST 2008 by Mike
Good idea. I hope they do, and we shall give you full credit for that excellent idea.
Iran
Sat Jul 12 15:00:11 BST 2008 by Ronnie
Mr Decarian!!! I did a Yahoo search last night. You are there with many pages. The first one had to do with " Children's rights sexual & otherwise". I was afraid to go to the link as I don't know if this is a child sex site or what?? Please explain your thoughts!!! Do you think children have sexual rights??? Simple ??? VD. Ronnie
Iran
Fri Jul 11 01:57:12 BST 2008 by Rj
That's great. So you have a doctorate and you want to advertise it. Nice. Now, if only you could say something that had something to do with your area of expertise because, clearly, here you're a little baffled. I mean, come on! You're using terms like "do evil" and invoking Hitler? Then you claim to have special knowledge of motivations, motivations that you clearly have no way of knowing for certain?
Frankly, I don't care what the convention is; you're using your title irresponsibly. You may be an expert at something but this isn't it.
Iran
Fri Jul 11 03:20:25 BST 2008 by Vendicar Decarian
This comment has been found to be in breach of our terms of use and has been removed.
Iran
Fri Jul 11 17:31:23 BST 2008 by Dr Kia Balali-mood
Well Dr Kiken,
You have two notable omissions in your list of
Gengis Khan, Attila the Hun, Hitler, Khomeini, Stalin, etc ,etc. George Bush (jr and snr). I seem to recall that both of the Bushes were responsible for war in the middle east.
Treat them accordingly, well according to your Texan oil baron (sorry meant president) treating them accordingly means war.
Iran
Sat Jul 12 03:32:45 BST 2008 by Ronnie
Kuwait doesn't see it that way! Ronnie
There Will Be No War With Iran
Thu Jul 10 18:28:21 BST 2008 by Hasham
The US is overstretched in manpower and financial terms in Iraq - somewhere Iran could easily cause mayhem if it came to war. Moreover, the price of oil is so high that no economy could tolerate the massive increase that would come from war, especially given that we are now in the grip of a very big and likely very long global recession.
Enjoy the sabre-rattling because that's all that will come of this.
There Will Be No War With Iran
Thu Jul 10 20:34:27 BST 2008 by John D.
1)America invades Iraq in a oil-grab, 100 000 Iraqi civilians die at the hand of the US Armed Forces
2) As a consequence, the price of oil approaches $150 per barrel.
One gets the impression that the US Govt didn't think this one through. How the Saudis must be laughing.
There Will Be No War With Iran
Thu Jul 10 21:45:20 BST 2008 by Rj
The war in Iraq was never about getting their hands on cheap oil. It was about gaining control over a diminishing and subsequently more and more valuable resource. This allows them to not only further enrich their real friends and allies (the economic elite) but it allows them to deny this critical resource to their competitors, i.e.: China, Russia and some European interests. It was never about weapons of mass destruction, freedom, order or anything else they mentioned. It was about power, just as their current interest in Iran is about power.
There Will Be No War With Iran
Thu Jul 10 22:53:09 BST 2008 by Jamie Jones
It was not about oil full stop. It was about giving out big contracts to weapons providers and Halliburton to demolish a country, and even bigger contracts to (U.S.) companies to rebuild it under the protective wing of Blackwater mercenaries.
There's bigger money in creating and clearing up after an invasion than the traditional spoils of war.
There Will Be No War With Iran
Fri Jul 11 03:47:16 BST 2008 by Vendicar Decarian
This comment has been found to be in breach of our terms of use and has been removed.
There Will Be No War With Iran
Sat Jul 12 03:34:56 BST 2008 by Ronnie
I don't think Israel sees it that way! Ronnie
No Reason Why Iran Shouldn't Have The Bomb
Thu Jul 10 20:27:43 BST 2008 by Anon
If nothing else, it'll stop the Americans invading.
Take the example of North Korea:
No bomb = 'axis of evil', GWB rattles sabre
Bomb = millions of dollars of US aid
All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.
If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.
PRINT
SEND
