Author: Jonathan Wachtel

A draft United Nations resolution aimed at halting Iran’s nuclear program would severely restrict the sale of heavy weapons to the Islamist government in Iran, but critics say a loophole in the document could allow Tehran to obtain a deadly weapon.

Ever since Moscow and Tehran cut a deal for the sale of S-300 surface-to-air system, Israel and the United States have worried about the deployment of the hi-tech weapon in Iran, where it could be used to guard its nuclear program from air strikes. Russia has so far held off from shipping the weapon to Iran, but concerns are mounting that the latest Security Council sanctions resolution under negotiation leaves open the possibility of Iran getting hold of the missile system that was originally to be delivered in March 2009.

A key element in the resolution introduced into the Security Council on Tuesday by U.S Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice calls upon countries to block sales and transfer of tanks, combat aircraft, warships and “missiles or missile systems as defined for the purpose of the United Nations Register of Conventional arms.”

Fox News checked the U.N Register and discovered that the section pertaining to missiles “does not include ground-to-air missiles.” This means that Iran would be allowed to complete its purchase of Russia’s S-300.  The truck-mounted S-300 ground-to-air system has a 90-mile range and can shoot down U.S. made cruise missiles and fighter jets.

According to former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton, “once this system is deployed and operational in Iran it will effectively preclude an Israeli military option against Iran’s nuclear weapons program, and that’s something that could affect the United States, too. If we at some point were threatened and we needed to attack Iranian air bases, those systems would be there to defend against us.”

The Russian Mission to the U.N. confirmed the resolution does not prohibit the sale of the S-300. A Western U.N. diplomat says that loopholes such as this one in the draft resolution was likely required to prevent a Russian or Chinese veto when the text comes up for a Security Council vote.

Rep. Mark Steven Kirk, an Illinois Republican running for the Senate, has circulated a letter calling on President Obama to close the S-300 loophole.

After many months of negotiations with Iran’s economic partners China and Russia, it is unlikely the loophole will be closed. U.N. experts are now working on an annex to the resolution that calls for asset freezes and travel restrictions of certain Iranians tied to the controversial nuclear program. A Security Council vote on the final draft of the resolution is expected in June.

President Obama’s principal military advisor said Sunday that all options are the table for dealing with the Iran nuclear threat and if the President calls for military action, the U.S. is prepared.

At a forum at Columbia University in New York, Admiral Mike Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff stressed, however, that “use of the military should be the last option” should diplomatic engagement and sanctions fail, because any attack against Iran would entail serious “known and unknown consequences.”

Responding to press reports that Defense Secretary Robert Gates has warned in a memo to top White House officials that the U.S. lacks an effective policy for dealing with Iran, Admiral Mullen said, “We at the Pentagon, we plan for contingencies all the time and certainly there are [military] options which exist.” He said he has worried about a nuclear armed Iran for a long time because of President Ahmadinejad’s unbridled threats against Israel and “worry that other countries in the region will then seek to, actually, I know they will seek nuclear weapons, as well.”

When asked whether giving more time to diplomatic efforts to resolve the crisis put the U.S. military at a disadvantage in maximizing any potential strike against Iran, Admiral Mullen said, “it is being taken into consideration in the decision calculus, if you will, to strike.” He said that clearly there is “not much decision space to work in,” because Iran “having a weapon and striking [against Iran] generate consequences that are unpredictable.”

The destruction surrounding our live position in the Chilean coastal town of Constitucion looks like a Hollywood set.

Rescue workers just removed the body of a missing elderly woman from ruins, onlookers weep, home after home has been ripped from its  foundation and thrust in the air by the force of the 14-foot tsunami that plowed through this once tranquil town after Saturday’s 8.8 magnitude earthquake.

Tractors and cherry-pickers scoop up debris and drop it onto flatbed trucks. Since early morning, volunteers have joined firemen, piling planks, broken concrete, broken furniture, crushed refrigerators and TVs. They work tirelessly, as if building a barricade to ward off another attack from the sea.

A fireman shook his head as he told us he has seen this scene replicated in villages and cities along hundreds of miles of coast. The cleanup in Constitucion will take years.

But the Pacific Ocean’s waves now roll in rhythmically a few hundred yards away, as they meet the mouth of the Maule River. We just had another aftershock to raise the drama here. There have been so many, about two hundred.The small ones no longer trouble us. Yesterday’s 5.0 and 6.2, however, reminded us of how we are at the whim of nature.

Fear and survival instincts immediately kick in. It is a way of life for people who live in earthquake zones. And though we are not from these shaky parts, it has now become part of our reality, too.