April
28, 2006
Media
Buzz on Invasion of Iran
Going
by the buzz in the media over the past week or so,
one is apt to believe that a US attack on nuclear
installations in Iran is almost imminent.
Lengthy write-ups detailing plans for aerial attacks
on as many as 400 nuclear and military installations
in that country have been published by the Washington
Post, the London Sunday Times, and the premier weekly
of the Jewish community of America, The Forward,
and above all in The New Yorker magazine (4/17)
by the celebrated investigative reporter and author,
Seymour Hersh.
Hersh’s first major work “The Price
of Power: Kissinger in Nixon White House”
drew perhaps as much attention as Kissinger’s
own book “The White House Years”. His
latest book “Chain of Command: The Road from
9/11 to Abu Gharib” was the first to disclose
two years back the abuses of detainees in the US
prison on Cuba.
In his 6,300-word write-up, Hersh reports that the
Bush Administration has already increased clandestine
activities inside Iran and intensified planning
for a possible major air attack. The international
community is convinced that Mr. Bush’s nuclear
confrontation with Iran is calculated to seek a
regime change in that country. For, President Ahmadinejad
had the temerity to declare that Holocaust held
no reality and that Israel must be “wiped
off the map”. On occasions he has also asserted
that Muslim communities had historically been sympathetic
to the Jews who had been mostly persecuted by European
Christians, and as such a homeland for them ought
to have been created on European soil, not in the
Middle East.
If Iran was not stopped in its tracks, it would
acquire a nuclear weapon. Mr. Bush has convinced
himself that he must do soon what has to be done
to rectify the situation and save Iran.
Although the White House maintains that the issue
is being addressed through diplomacy, and Mr. Bush
has called Hersh’s forecast as “a wild
speculation”, a senior Pentagon adviser has
been quoted by Hersh as saying, “the only
way to solve the problem is to change the power
structure in Iran, and that means war.”
So, the inevitable question is: Are we really headed
towards an attack on Iran? Media pundits hold divergent
views on this. A majority feels that the calculations
of Bush Administration having proved wrong in the
case of Iraq and the country’s armed forces
bogged down in the quagmire of the insurgency in
that country, the Administration is unlikely to
repeat its folly by invading Iran.
President Bush has repeatedly pointed out the path
of diplomacy, but he has also underlined the need
to keep all options open including that of war.
And, he has mentioned that Iran was at the center
of all that is evil in its region. He has labeled
Iran “the most serious challenge to the US
posed by any country”. His accusations cause
a de-ja vu of what he had said about Iraq before
he ordered an invasion of that country. Perhaps
his strong statements are calculated to keep increasing
the pressure on Iran to secure a halt to that country’s
nuclear enrichment program, a complete closure of
all its nuclear installations.
Iran maintains that its nuclear program is for the
production of electric power and is not weapons
oriented. It is a signatory to the Non-Proliferation
Treaty (NPT) that admits of the peaceful uses of
nuclear energy. It has an insignificant assemblage
of 164 centrifuges while for weapons grade enrichment
it requires thousands, up to 16,000, hooked up in
a special way. Iran is generally estimated to be
a decade away from the bomb.
The supreme Iranian leader, Ali Khamenei, it is
further pointed out, has given a religious edict
(fatwa) against nuclear weapons and President Ahmadinejad
had, at his inauguration, denounced such arms and
committed Iran to remaining a non-nuclear-weapons
state. In fact, the Iranian regime has gone further,
calling the Middle East to be a nuclear-weapons-free
zone. Only Israel has the bomb in the region and
has not signed the NPT.
The Iranian President’s anti-Israel statements,
his support to Hamas, Hizbollah and all other anti-Israel
elements and his recent contribution of $50 million
to Palestinian Authority to keep it afloat, have
all combined to provoke the wrath of the Bush administration
that is proud of its “unique relationship”
with Israel.
Perhaps no less important is the fact, as mentioned
by Hersh: who is going to control the Middle East
and its oil in the next ten years. Iran produces
400 million barrels of oil and is the third major
supplier of the vital commodity to the world. It
has threatened to shut off its oil wells should
the Security Council impose any sanctions on it.
Its supplies have not decreased at all, yet the
oil prices have spiked to over $70 per barrel, adding
considerably to the pain of the ordinary consumer
at the pump.
If the crisis keeps mounting and the oil giants
keep exploiting the situation in pursuit of their
insatiable greed, the U.S. middle class, the backbone
of the economy, will shrink in an inverted proportion
to the rise in gas prices. America is a country
of distances and availability of inexpensive gas
is a sine quo non for maintaining its economic momentum.
As it is, the national debt and the job and manufacturing
exodus have mounted during the Bush administration.
Public reaction will be known during the coming
November mid-term elections.
Unfortunately, the US policies on nuclear issues
have not always been consistent. Narrow, short time
interests have often weighed more than principles.
While it is denigrating now Iran on its presumed
intention of acquiring bomb-level nuclear capability,
it has never uttered a word against Israel’s
stockpile of N-bombs and has recently signed an
agreement with India turning a blind eye to its
nuclear weapons plants.
A silver lining has, however, just become visible
on the skyline of US-Iran relations. On the very
same day that Bush administration accused Iran of
being the greatest security challenge to the US
the two nations began moving towards direct, though
limited, diplomatic talks. This would be the first
occasion in over 25 years for direct talks, though
the agenda will be limited to the sectarian conflict
in Iraq.
Despite the rumblings of war clouds, the sky is
likely to clear up and sanity will prevail ultimately
- it has to.
- arifhussaini@hotmail.com
