JERUSALEM, Aug 10, (Agencies): Israel’s prime minister and defence minister would like to attack Iran’s nuclear sites before the US election in November but lack crucial support within their cabinet and military, an Israeli newspaper said on Friday.

The front-page report in the biggest-selling daily Yedioth Ahronoth came amid mounting speculation — fuelled by media leaks from both the government and its detractors at home and abroad — that war with Iran could be imminent even though it might rupture the bedrock ties between Israel and the United States.

“Were it up to Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak, an Israeli military strike on the nuclear facilities in Iran would take place in the coming autumn months, before the November election in the United States,” Yedioth said in the article by its two senior commentators, which appeared to draw on discussions with the defence minister but included no direct quotes.

Spokesmen for Prime Minister Netanyahu and Barak declined to comment.

Yedioth said the top Israeli leaders had failed to win over other security cabinet ministers for a strike on Iran now, against a backdrop of objections by the armed forces given the big tactical and strategic hurdles such an operation would face.

“The respect which in the past formed a halo around prime ministers and defence ministers and helped them muster a majority for military decisions, is gone, no more,” Yedioth said. “Either the people are different, or the reality is different.”

Israel has long threatened to attack its arch-foe, seeing a mortal menace in Iranian nuclear advances and dwindling opportunities to deal them a blow with its limited military clout. Washington has urged Israel to give diplomacy more time.

The war talk is meant, in part, to stiffen sanctions on Tehran — which denies seeking the bomb and says its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes — by conflict-wary world powers. Israel and the United States have publicly sought to play down their differences, the latter saying military force would be a last-ditch option against Iran.

A Reuters survey in March found that most Americans would support such action, by their government or Israel’s, should there be evidence Iran was building nuclear weapons — even if the result was a rise in gas prices.

Re-election
But US President Barack Obama, seeking re-election in November, has counselled against what he would deem premature Israeli unilateralism. He recently sent top officials to try to close ranks with the conservative Netanyahu.

Obama’s Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, an old friend of Netanyahu who casts himself as a more reliable bulwark for Israeli security, also visited Jerusalem last month.

The Yedioth article said, without citing sources, that some government advisers in Israel and the United States believed a pre-November strike might “embarrass Obama and contribute to Romneys chances of being elected.”

Yedioth said the aim of an initial Israeli attack on Iran could be to trigger an escalation that would draw in superior US forces — but described Barak as dismissive of this theory.

“He believes that America will not go to war, but will do everything in its power to stop it. It will give Israel the keys to its emergency (munitions) stores, which were set up in Israel in the past. Israel needs no more than this,” Yedioth said.

Netanyahu, apparently trying to avoid being seen as meddling in US politics, has voiced gratitude for cross-partisan support of Israel in Washington, while insisting his country remains responsible for its own security.

Haaretz, an influential liberal Israeli newspaper, quoted an unnamed senior official in the Netanyahu government as saying the Jewish state — widely assumed to have the region’s only atomic arsenal — potentially faced a greater danger from Iran than on the eve of its 1967 war with several Arab neighbours.

That thinking seems to be gaining ground domestically.

A poll published on Friday by the mass-circulation Maariv daily found that 41 percent of Israelis saw no chance of non-military pressure on Iran succeeding, versus 22 percent who thought diplomacy could work.

While 39 percent of Maariv’s respondents said dealing with Iran should be left to the United States and other world powers, 35 percent said they would support Israel going it alone as a last resort — up from previous polls that found around 20 percent support for the unilateral option.

Eyes
The United States said Friday it had “eyes” and “visibility” inside Iran’s nuclear program and would know if Tehran had made a “breakout” move toward acquiring a nuclear weapon.
The comment by White House spokesman Jay Carney followed Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak’s remark that new US intelligence suggested that the threat from Iran was becoming more “urgent.”
Carney declined to comment on intelligence matters in detail but said that Washington and Israel were agreed on Iran’s ambitions and its nuclear program.

“I would also say that we have eyes — we have visibility into the program, and we would know if and when Iran made what’s called a breakout move towards acquiring a weapon.”
Breakout capability is commonly understood to be the point when a state acquires the knowledge, capability and materials to build a nuclear bomb if it wants to.
Carney said later in his briefing that he was referring to International Atomic Energy Agency officials mandated to inspect Iran’s nuclear sites because Tehran is a signatory to the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
But many experts believe there has been substantial infiltration and sabotage of Iran’s nuclear program by Western and Israeli intelligence agencies.
Military sites in Iran that do not have confirmed nuclear activities are off-limits to inspectors unless provided for by agreement or under the terms of an Additional Protocol to the NPT that Iran dropped in 2006.
Carney’s comments came on a day on which speculation about a possible military strike on Iran’s nuclear program ran rampant in the Israeli press.
The White House spokesman said however that Washington still believed that “there is time and space to pursue the diplomatic option that includes extremely and increasingly aggressive sanctions.”
The United States has however said it has not taken a military option off the table.
A series of visits by high-ranking US defense officials to Israel has raised speculation that Washington is trying to dissuade Israel from a preemptive military attack.
In an interview on Thursday, Barak said a recent US intelligence report made the Iranian issue more “urgent” and had moved closer to the US position.
The United States has not said publicly if it has changed its intelligence assessment on the state of Iran’s nuclear program.
Nuclear
The United States still believes that Iran is not on the verge of having a nuclear weapon and that Tehran has not made a decision to pursue one, US officials said on Thursday.
Their comments came after Israeli media reports claimed US President Barack Obama had received a n ew National Intelligence Estimate saying Iran had made significant and surprising progress toward military nuclear capability.
Later, I sraeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak suggested that the new US report, which he acknowledged might be something other than a Nat ional Intelligence Estimate, “transforms the Iranian situation into an even more urgent one.”
But a White House National Security Council spokesman d isputed the Israeli reports, saying the US intelligence assessment of Iran’s nuclear activities ha d not changed since int elligence officials del ivered testimony to Congress on the issue ear lier this year.
“We believe that there is time and space to continue to pursue a diplomatic path, backed by growing international pressure on the Iranian government,” the spokesman said. “We continue to assess that Iran is not on the verge of achieving a nuclear weapon.”
US officials would not directly comment on whether there was a new National Intelligence Estimate on Iran, which is a compilation of views of the various US intelligence agencies.
The last formal NIE on Iran in 2007, partially made public by the administration of President George W. Bush, became highly controversial because it said Tehran ha d halted nu clear weaponization work in 200 3, a lthough other aspects of the overall program continued. A l ater update to that report retained that central assessment, sources have previously said.