Linda S. Heard
Online
Journal
Thursday, January 18, 2007
Rather than adhere to the Baker-Hamilton recommendations urging
dialogue with Iran and Syria, US President George W. Bush has
come out swinging.
As part of his Iraq "Surge" speech last week he promised
to "interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria"
and to "seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced
weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq." British military
heads, however, say they've seen no evidence of this.
Shortly afterwards, the president authorised a raid on an Iranian
government mission in northern Iraq where six legitimate Iranian
diplomats were abducted. Iran has demanded their release and compensation
for the destruction of its offices.
Last week, US Vice President Dick Cheney characterised the Iranian
"threat" as "growing, multi-dimensional and of
concern to everybody in the region," while warning that the
US would take steps against any party out to destabilise Iraq.
Couple these snippets with the US aircraft carrier strike groups
and nuclear submarines congregating in the neighbourhood and the
appointment of a neocon, pro-Israel admiral to command US forces
in the Middle East.
Add a slew of newspaper reports that Israel is planning to attack
Iranian nuclear sites using low-level nuclear bunker-busters and
Sherlock Holmes would have a field day.
At the same time the US has sent 16 or more F16s to the Incirlink
Airbase in southern Turkey, along with refuelling planes and an
early warning system.
Patriot anti-missile missiles are being deployed at American
bases in the region, which indicates these may soon be vulnerable
to attack.
Also suspect are the 21,500 extra US troops headed for Iraq.
The consensus among the military is these are not enough to break
the insurgency or tackle the sectarian conflict. They could, however,
be used to contain Iraq's pro-Iranian Shiite militias, who would
probably side with Tehran in any all-out US-Iranian war.
It's also worth noting that Israel has warned the 25,000-strong
Iranian Jewish community to quit the country as a matter of urgency.
Most have chosen to stay put.
Threat
White House Press Secretary Tony Snow wrote off any threat to
Iran's sovereignty as an "urban legend." He was trained
by the best obfuscating school in the world, Fox News.
Perhaps he can explain why US Secretary of State Condoleezza
Rice is currently doing the regional rounds, attempting to woo
America's Sunni Arab allies on board the White House anti-Iranian
bandwagon with nebulous promises of US re-engagement in the abandoned
Israel-Palestinian peace process.
These are dangerous times. Yesterday, the caretakers of the Doomsday
Clock moved the hands closer to midnight. We should all be concerned.
A Russian former fleet commander, Admiral Edward Baltin, says
he believes the presence of US nuclear submarines in the region
implies a likely strike on Iran. In this case, Tony Snow's "urban
legend" is fast gaining legs.
If the Bush administration is bluffing in the hope Tehran will
roll over by severing its links with Iraqi Shiites and offering
up its nuclear ambitions on a platter, it could backfire with
terrible consequences.
But given that the Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has said
he views a nuclear-armed Iran as an unacceptable existential threat
and the US president is a chronic bungler with Messianic leanings,
it's likely the US is prepared to go the whole hog.
From Bush's perspective there is just one problem. How can he
legitimise attacking Iran? The UN route is certainly closed to
him. Russia and China have made their positions plain and had
no hesitation using their powers of veto during a recent UN Security
Council vote relating to Myanmar.
Then how could he possibly sell the idea of war with Iran to
an already jaundiced and war-weary American public, let alone
a Democratic-led Cong-ress clamouring to bring "our boys"
home? Put simply, he can't.
However, if Israel ignites the fire, as it did in 1981 when it
bombed Iraq's Tuwaitha facility in the hallowed name of its security,
the US will have a clear road to weigh in. From Israel's perspective,
though, this option is fraught with peril due to its proximity
to Iran's allies Hezbollah and Syria, which have recently been
strengthening their arsenals.
So what's left? Could it be that the US is deliberately goading
Iran in the hope of being given an excuse to let fly? What happens
if Iran refuses to take the bait? Another Gulf of Tonkin-type
false flag event?
Finally, I would like to leave you with a précis
of an Arab legend, recently quoted in a fine article by Mirza
Yawar Baig, titled The Black Bull Died Today.
Three bulls lived in harmony in a forest. In the forest roamed
a tiger but each time he tried to attack one of the bulls the
others came to his aid.
The tiger came up with an idea. When one of the bulls was grazing
far away, the crafty beast persuaded the others that their lives
would be better without their friend. Seduced by the thought of
extra grass, they agreed to let the tiger do his worst. Then there
were two.
Of course it wasn't long before the tiger approached another
bull and persuaded him to ditch the other. Soon the last bull
left standing received another visit from the tiger. He looked
in the creature's eyes and knew that this time he was the target.
Too late, he realised the death of his brothers had sealed his
own fate.
Enough said!
Email
