The Showdown with Iran
"If Israel takes such crazy actions as attacking our nuclear facilities, we will give it an unforgettable lesson." Iranian Parliament-Speaker, Haddad Adel
By Mike Whitney
-- -- The prospect of war breaking out between the United States and Iran is more likely by the day. Still, for the most part, the American public seems strangely unaware of the growing danger. In late September Iran began conducting major military exercises in the southwestern province of Khuzestan, where officials claim that US agents have infiltrated and are carrying out destabilizing activities. Tehran has deployed 100,000 soldiers to the oil-rich region to address the growing unrest and to carry out maneuvers which anticipate a preemptive invasion by the US.
These signs of mounting tensions are further amplified by a resolution that was passed by the UN's nuclear watchdog agency (IAEA) two weeks ago. The agency voted by a slim majority to bring Iran before the UN Security Council for "non-compliance" with its treaty requirements under the terms of the NPT (Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty)
The US-backed resolution was pushed through the IAEA to make it appear as though Iran is conducting a secret nuclear weapons program. No evidence of such a program has ever been verified and the agency's chief, Mohammad Elbaradei, has repeatedly given Iran a clean bill of health on all matters related to its compliance with treaty obligations.
The "nuclear weapons" issue is a red herring similar to the WMD ruse prior to the war with Iraq. It provides the US and Israel with some cover of legitimacy for future attacks on Iranian weapons-sites. By disarming Iran, the Bush administration will have eliminated a long-term regional competitor to Israel and will be able to proceed with the neocon master-plan to redraw the map of the Middle East to suit US interests.
Tehran, of course, is taking these threats seriously and is increasingly moving towards a war-time footing.
The resignation of one of Iran's most prominent diplomats, Mohammad Javad Zarif, from Iran's nuclear negotiating team, is an indication that positions are hardening and that a war may be forthcoming. Zarif was seen as a moderating influence and was in favor of improving relations with the West. That has changed with the increasing saber-rattling from across the Atlantic and with the threat of censure from the IAEA.
If Washington intended to provoke another war, they have certainly succeeded. In fact, it was the Bush administrations' tough-talk that that gave rise to Iran's current hard-line President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Ahmadinejad has responded to Bush's incendiary rhetoric by putting the suspected-nuclear program under military control. The administration, impervious to their repeated policy failures, continues to blunder ahead paving the way to Armageddon.
At present, both the British and American high-commands are claiming that Tehran is directly involved in providing the Iraqi resistance with bomb-making capability. BBC is reporting that "British officials have linked the type of bombs used in the attacks to Iran's Revolutionary Guards." The charges reiterate the earlier claims by Rumsfeld that Iran was providing military hardware and roadside bombs to the resistance.
Iranian spokesman Hamid Reza-Asefi has vehemently denied the charges saying, "This is a lie. The British are the cause of instability and crisis in Iraq..From the very beginning, we have stated our position very clearly - a stable Iraq is in our interests and that is what the Iraqi authorities have said themselves on many occasions."
It is impossible to imagine how fueling the unrest in Iraq would serve Iran's interests especially since the resistance is overwhelmingly Sunni
(Iranians are Shi'ites) There's also the possibility that Iran's involvement would prompt a nuclear strikes from the United States; hardly the reaction that the wary Mullahs might covet. So far, not one Iranian fighter has been captured in the ongoing conflict in Iraq, nor is there any proof that Iran is providing bomb-making material to the resistance. It is impossible to exclude the possibility that these are just more baseless claims intended to justify a preemptive attack.
The Bourse; Iran's death-warrant
Iran's future oil and natural gas wealth foreshadow its growth into a regional competitor to Israel as well as an energy-independent powerhouse. Their stated intention to sell resources via their own, homegrown bourse, is a direct threat to the existing economic system. It would greatly increase trade in petro-euros and send the dollar into a downward spiral. The importance of this cannot be overstated. The heart-and-soul of the empire is the Greenback; that flaccid, debt-ridden hoax that props-up the entire rickety structure of state-terror. The $8 trillion dollars of accumulated debt that underwrites the greenback requires that the world continue to buy oil in dollars. The transition from dollars to petro-euros is a direct assault on a system that forces the lavish debt of the wealthiest nations onto the shoulders of the world's poorest people. If the dollar falls from its place of prominence then the global power-structure would shift dramatically from the hands of western elites to the nations with the most resources. America's corporate and financial giants will never allow that to happen, not as long as there's one missile left in an American silo.
If Cindy Sheehan wants to know "what the noble cause her son Casey died for in Iraq"; this is it; to maintain the current economic system. Ultimately, this is why Iran will be bombarded in a flagrant display of unprovoked aggression.
Enter Israel: "Time is running out"
Last week three members of the Israeli Knesset issued a terse warning that an attack on Iran may be imminent. Arieh Eldad, a member of the right-wing National Union Party said ominously, "Iran will not be deterred by anything but force."
Yoseph Lapid, head of the Shinui Party echoed Eldad's sentiments saying, "We feel we are obliged to warn our friends that Israel should not be pushed into a situation where we see no other solution but to act unilaterally." The appearance of three Israeli politicians dispatched to Washington to reiterate the same message can only mean trouble. We should presume that the details of an upcoming attack are currently being ironed-out and that hostilities will probably take place in the very near future.
It is strangely ironic that Israel would have the audacity to send politicians to Washington in the very same week that a top Pentagon analyst has confessed to handing over highly classified intelligence to members of the pro-Israeli lobbying group AIPAC. It's always difficult to defend the "special friendship" when one of the friends is stealing top secret information from the other.
The issue of Israel's disloyalty, of course, won't disrupt the plans for the attack on Iran. That strategy was worked out long ago in documents like the Project for the New American Century and represents the mutual interests of the Israeli leadership and the White House globalists. Their aims are to consolidate control over diminishing resources and to establish a dominating military presence over the fragmented and greatly weakened Islamic states.
The upcoming attack is predicated on the belief that Iran will not strike back, but that is far from certain. What is certain, however, is that stable supplies of crude, major cities in Israel, and 140,000 American servicemen and women will be deliberately put in harms-way to achieve the elusive objectives of political fantasists and radicals. It is a reckless roll of the dice that moves the world ever-closer towards a global catastrophe.
(In accordance with Title 17
U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to
those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational purposes.
Information Clearing House has no affiliation whatsoever with the
originator of this article nor is Information Clearing House
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)