Why America will reap in
Iran what it doesn’t expect
By abid Ullah Jan
02/19/06 "ICH"
-- -- Many anti-war analysts believe that Iran has no
nuclear weapons program in place and no one has ever produced a
shred of credible evidence to the contrary. Yet they fear that
the Bush administration’s spurious accusations and subsequent
war will lead to a wider World War.
If Iran
has no nuclear weapons, as concludes Mohammed el-Baradei the
respected chief of the IAEA, the war on Iran, in itself, will
not lead to the speculated World War 3. It will only worsen the
situation worldwide. Instead of directly ending up in a World
War, the war on Iran will only become a next phase in spreading
the World War that is already on without our realizing that we
are passing through its
initial phases. [1]
On the other hand,
a false
assumption that Iran has no nuclear weapons will, in fact,
quickly engulf many more countries and take the
World War that is already on to a quick climax.[2]
Under-estimating Iran’s nuclear capacity is pushing the
extremists in Washington into launching a war that the US
administration has been planning since a long time. The IAEA’s
inspections and confirmation that Iran has no nuclear weapons
and there is no nuclear program in operation are no different
than the confirmation by the United Nations weapons inspectors
in Iraq that Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction.
Confirmation of the absence of weapons actually led to the
United States' final decision to launch a war of aggression on
Iraq.
This
time around, the United States is in for a big trouble. It is
attacking Iran, not for the reason that it has, or it is
planning to have nuclear weapons, but only because it has
assumed that Iran is years away from producing nuclear weapons.
Many
analysts believe that an attack on Iran will turn into a World
War because the Iranian government has a long-range strategy for
"asymmetrical" warfare that will disrupt the flow of oil and
challenge American interests around the world. Certainly, if one
is facing an implacable enemy that is committed to "regime
change" there is no reason to hold back on doing what is
necessary to defeat that adversary. However, the main reason for
escalation of the conflict will be exactly the assumption on the
part of the United States, Israel and Britain that Iran cannot
respond with nuclear weapons.
At a
time when nuclear material—including red mercury and different
forms of Uranium—were
flowing in the streets of Pakistan, a high ranking Pakistani
official, working in the Iranian consulate, told this writer
that Iran is obtaining smuggled nuclear material from its field
commanders in Afghanistan. It was well before the nuclear
testing by India and Pakistan took place. Keeping this fact in
mind, it is simply naïve to assume that the United States or
Israel will launch an un-provoked war of aggression on Iran, and
Iran will remain a sitting duck and not retaliate with what it
must have refined and retooled since mid-nineties.[3]
Even if
we assume that the Iranian government purchased nuclear material
without any intention of putting it to use, it is highly
unlikely that it will still let this material gather dust while
it is being openly and seriously threatened by the United States
and Israel. If scientists in Germany and the United States could
work to develop nuclear weapons from scratch during the World
War II, how long will it take a nation pushed against the wall
and with all the ingredients available to put something workable
together and retaliate with a bang?
So, the
practical chances of Iran’s retaliation with a nuclear weapon in
the face of a war of aggression imposed on it are far more than
the theoretical assumptions that Iranian Intelligence will plan
covert operations which will be carried out in the event of an
unprovoked attack on their facilities.
It is
true that a nuclear response from Iran would mean a definite
suicide when looked in perspective of the nuclear power of the
United States and Iran. But it also doesn’t make any sense that
the United States would keep bombing Iran, the way it has
planned, into the Stone Age, yet despite being able to respond,
Iran will simply turn the other cheek. This chain of inevitable
reactions will in fact lead a wider conflagration that the
warlords in Washington and Tel Aviv have not even imagined.
Emboldened by their adventures in Afghanistan and Iraq, and
deluded by the IAEA conclusion that Iraq has no nuclear weapons,
the warlords are set to go into a war that will definitely lead
to massive bloodshed in the Middle East and the downfall of the
United States as we see it. Despite Bush and company’s claims
that the world is not the same after 9/11, the world remained
more or less the same after 9/11. However, their world will
surely turn upside down with their miscalculation of going into
a third war of aggression in five years.
The
Russian and Chinese stakes in this issue cannot be ignored
altogether. Attacking Iran would prove too much for Russia and
China. Russia has snubbed Washington by announcing it would go
ahead and honor a $700 million contract to arm Iran with
surface-to-air missiles, slated to guard Iran's nuclear
facilities. And after being burned when the US-led Coalition
Provisional Authority invalidated Hussein-era oil deals, China
has snapped up strategic energy contracts across the world,
including in Latin America, Canada and Iran. It can be assumed
that both China and Russia will not sit idly by and watch Iran
being annihilated by the United States.
If Iran
is attacked with lethal force, it will retaliate with the utmost
force available at its disposal; that much is
certain. Remembering my discussion 9 year ago with a well
informed source who was working for the Iranian government, I am
pretty sure that the utmost force in the hands of Iran
definitely includes nuclear weapons. One of the signs for that
is the confidence with which the Iranian government responds to
US threats.
Iranian leaders have acted responsibly and reasonably so far. It
is always the mistake of extremists to misjudge the behavior of
reasonable men. The Iranians tried to avoid purchasing nuclear
material from the Pakistani black market to avoid arousing
unnecessary suspicion. They kept their nuclear program limited
to energy production. It is the United States and its allies
which are provoking it into reaction. As a result, it has been a
mistake of reasonable men in Iran to mistake the behavior of
extremists in Washington and not getting out of NPT or testing a
few nuclear devices to balance its power against its enemies.
Many analysts are
predicting that attack on Iran will be provoked because a
majority of Americans are not in favor of a new war. Although
setting up a
pre-text
for domestic support cannot be ruled
out, one can say with certainty from the track record of Bush
and company that they will hardly bother to engineer another
terrorist attack.[4] In the fits of madness, they have already
made themselves believe that they have enough justification to
wage a war or aggression on Iran.
The Washington Times
has already started beating war drums and promoting "policy
experts" who believe the US must go alone if needed (Feb 6,
2006).[5]
Irrespective of any
pretext and going alone or in a coalition of barbarians, the
signs tell us that the warlords are not going to relinquish
their totalitarian dreams. It is very unfortunate on their part
that they are putting their hands in hornet nest where they may
get stung with nuclear weapons. Their retaliation, for sure,
will lead to total disaster. A disaster, far worse than what the
title "World War 3" can convey.
Abid Ullah Jan's latest book,
The Musharraf Factor was released in December
2005. His book, Afghanistan:
The Genesis of the Final Crusade will be released
shortly.
Notes/links:
1.
http://icssa.org/ICSS%20-%20waronIslam.beginning_of_final.htm
2.
http://icssa.org/ICSS%20-%20waronIslam.world_war_is_on.htm
3.
http://www.icssa.org/mocking_pakistan.htm
4.
http://www.montrealmuslimnews.net/iranheather.htm
5.
http://washingtontimes.com/upi/20060203-044418-1878r.htm