US
Prepares For Tougher Action Against Iran
By Peter Symonds
12 November, 2007
WSWS.org
With
the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) due to report on Iran’s
nuclear programs this week, the US administration has been intensifying
its campaign for stronger action against Tehran. While insisting that
it is still “pursuing diplomacy”, Washington refuses to
rule out a military attack on Iran.
During discussions over the
weekend, President Bush pressed German Chancellor Angela Merkel to back
tougher economic sanctions on Iran. More ominous, however, was the visit
to Washington last week by Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz
during which the two countries agreed to establish working committees
to coordinate their strategy on Iran’s nuclear programs.
Speaking to the media, Mofaz
paid lip service to the current US call for more sanctions, but added
that he also supported “the strategy of declaring without any
doubt that all options are on the table”. While saying military
force was a last resort, he warned that “the opportunity for a
negotiated solution is diminishing if by the diplomatic path we should
not succeed to stop the advancement of the Iranian nuclear program”.
Last Thursday, the London-based
Times highlighted predictions among US military sources that Israel
was reaching “a tipping point” for a military strike on
Iranian nuclear facilities. One defence official told the newspaper:
“Israel could do something when they get around 3,000 working
centrifuges. The Pentagon is minded to wait a little longer.”
Iranian President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad announced last Wednesday that Iran had 3,000 gas centrifuges
operating in its uranium enrichment plant at Natanz. The claim has yet
to be verified by IAEA inspectors. Tehran continues to insist that its
nuclear programs are for peaceful purposes and that the enriched uranium
is needed to fuel its power reactor. Iran is a signatory to the Nuclear
Non-proliferation Treaty and its Natanz facility is monitored by the
IAEA.
The Bush administration claims
that Iran is seeking to build a nuclear bomb, but has provided no evidence
to support its allegations. In fact, IAEA director Mohamed ElBaradei
recently told Le Monde that Iran constituted no immediate threat and
was three to eight years away from being able to produce a bomb. “I
want to get people away from the idea that Iran represents a clear and
present danger and that we’re now facing the decision whether
to bombard Iran or let them have the bomb,” he said.
In August, the IAEA reached
an agreement with Iran to resolve all outstanding questions about the
peaceful nature of its nuclear programs. Far from welcoming the deal,
the Bush administration denounced ElBaradei for exceeding his mandate,
but was forced by Russia and China to hold off imposing any new sanctions
until the IAEA submitted its report. The latest statements from Washington
appear to be something of a pre-emptive strike against an IAEA announcement
this week that Iran has clarified previous issues.
While in the US, Israeli
Deputy Prime Minister Mofaz launched an extraordinary tirade against
ElBaradei, calling on the IAEA to sack its director. “The policies
followed by ElBaradei endanger world peace. His irresponsible attitude
of sticking his head in the sand over Iran’s nuclear program should
lead to his impeachment,” Mofaz said.
Israeli foreign ministry
spokesman Mark Regev also accused “foreign officials”—the
IAEA leadership in particular—of “playing the Iranians’
game by contributing to the Iranian strategy of footdragging”.
Regev went on to imply that the IAEA was in cahoots with Tehran, saying:
“One could ask whether the agency agreed to fulfil the role the
Iranians want it to play, to allow Tehran to implement its strategy.”
The criticisms of ElBaradei
recall similar statements by the US and its allies prior to 2003 invasion
of Iraq. At that time, the IAEA chief earned the Bush administration’s
animosity by publicly contradicting its lies that the Baghdad regime
was seeking to build nuclear weapons. The latest accusations about Iran’s
“footdragging” have far more to do with the Bush administration’s
agenda in the remainder of its second term, than Iran’s capacity
to build an atomic bomb in the near future.
The Asia Times website pointed
out on Saturday that the US National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on
Iran had been held up for more than a year because of the refusal of
the so-called intelligence community to remove from the NIE dissenting
opinions on Iran’s nuclear programs. In another parallel with
the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Vice President Dick Cheney and his hawkish
allies appear to be pressuring US intelligence agencies to provide the
pretext for war against Iran.
Citing an unnamed US intelligence
official, the Asia Times article stated: “There is a split in
the intelligence community on how much of a threat the Iranian nuclear
program poses... Some analysts who are less independent are willing
to give the benefit of the doubt to the alarmist view coming from Cheney’s
office, but others have rejected that view.”
A similar process is taking
place in Iraq where the US military has been insisting for more than
a year that Tehran has been training, arming and assisting anti-occupation
militias. Testifying to Congress in September, the top US commander
in Iraq, General David Petraeus, accused Iran of fighting “a proxy
war” against the US. Last month, the White House unilaterally
branded the entire 130,000-strong Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corp (IRGC)
as a weapons proliferator and its elite Quds Force as a “terrorist
organisation”.
Apart from the occasional
display of allegedly Iranian-made weapons, the Pentagon has provided
no evidence to support its accusations. But as one privately contracted
interrogator, Micah Brose, explained in yesterday’s British-based
Sunday Observer, the heat is on to produce information to feed Washington’s
anti-Iranian propaganda.
“They push a lot for
us to establish a link with Iran,” Brose said. “It feels
a lot like, if you get something and Iran’s not involved, it’s
a let down... My impression is they’re just trying to get every
little bit of ammunition possible. If we get something here it fits
the overall picture. The engine needs impetus and they’re looking
to us to find the fuel—a particular type of fuel.”
A military intelligence official
confirmed Brose’s comments: “The message is, ‘Got
to find a link with Iran, got to find a link with Iran.’ It’s
sickening.” Although not specifically asked to manufacture evidence,
Brose added: “But if a detainee wants to tell me what I want to
hear so he can get out of jail... you know what I’m saying.”
He was pessimistic about the possibility of avoiding war, saying: “If
nothing changes in the current course, I’d say military action
is inevitable.”
In comments yesterday, Major-General
Rick Lynch repeated US allegations that Iraqi militias were “trained
in Iran and they’re conducting operations in our battle space.
They’re Iraqis but they’re IRGC surrogates and they’re
still out there.” He said his troops were chasing 20 “targets”
whom he claimed were Iranian agents. Like other American officials,
however, Lynch provided no evidence to support his bald assertions.
Lynch’s remarks follow
the release last Friday of nine Iranian detainees who have been held
for up to three years without charge by the US military. A brief official
statement blandly declared that the men were no longer considered security
threats and had no further intelligence value. The fact that they were
all released without charge is a tacit admission that their detention
was illegal and they were never a threat.
Two of those freed were among
five Iranian officials seized in a pre-dawn raid by US special forces
on an Iranian liaison office in the northern Iraqi city of Irbil during
January. The US has refused Iraqi government demands for the release
of all five and repeatedly claimed they were IRGC officials who had
been involved in providing weapons and other assistance to Iraqi insurgents.
The release of Brujerd Chegini and Hamid Reza Asgari Shukuh after nearly
a year in detention calls into question all the US claims about the
five.
Whatever the purpose behind
these releases, the Bush administration has no intention of easing tensions
with Iran over allegations of its “meddling” in Iraq. In
the event that Washington is unable to secure UN Security Council backing
for tough measures, including military action against Iran, US propaganda
about Tehran’s “proxy war” in Iraq provides a convenient
alternative excuse for launching a new military adventure against Iran.
Leave
A Comment
&
Share Your Insights
Comment
Policy
Digg
it! And spread the word!
Here is a unique chance to help this article to be read by thousands
of people more. You just Digg it, and it will appear in the home page
of Digg.com and thousands more will read it. Digg is nothing but an
vote, the article with most votes will go to the top of the page. So,
as you read just give a digg and help thousands more to read this article.