|
Iran 'accused of attacks in
Iraq to bolster US strategy'
By Anne Penketh and Eric Silver in Luxembourg
05/25/07 "The
Independent" -- -- -The Bush administration may
be highlighting accusations that the Iranian government is
behind attacks in Iraq in order to strengthen its hand in
preparing for military strikes on Iran, according to a leading
British think-tank.
In a report sifting the evidence produced by US authorities
against Iran, the independent think-tank Basic cast doubt on the
strength of the intelligence, saying that proved links between
the Tehran regime and militia inside Iraq remained "sketchy".
Given the close ties between Shia Muslim Iran and Iraq, which
has a dominant Shia population in the south, the report warned
of the dangers of conflating "legitimate acts of foreign
relations and cross-border movements of people" with the alleged
Iranian involvement in violence.
The UK and US governments have frequently accused Iran of aiding
militant groups in Iraq who are attacking coalition forces.
However, the report said that "despite efforts by the Bush
administration to confirm the strength of evidence presented,
doubt still surrounds the case against Iran, particularly with
regard to the degree of direct involvement of the Iranian
leadership.
"Whatever the true extent and nature of Iranian military action
in Iraq, few independent analysts believe Tehran is playing a
decisive role in the sectarian warfare and insurgency," said the
report.
Turning to the US strategic motivation for highlighting the
Iranian role in Iraq, Basic (British American Security
Information Council) suggested that Iran could be a "useful
scapegoat to divert the blame" for failures in Iraq away from
the occupying powers. But also, "if Tehran can be cast as a
source of regional instability in the eyes of the international
community, then the US administration's hand will be
strengthened as it seeks support for stronger measures to oppose
Iranian nuclear ambitions".
Mohamed ElBaradei, the director general of the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), warned of a "major confrontation"
with Iran over its nuclear weapons programme unless negotiations
eased tensions. He denied as a "misinterpretation" reports that
he was suggesting that the Western policy of demanding full
suspension to prevent Iran obtaining nuclear knowledge had been
"overtaken by events" because Iran now appeared to have
enrichment expertise.
The head of the UN nuclear watchdog told journalists in
Luxembourg: "I was simply expressing concern that we are moving
towards Iran building the capability, Iran building the
knowledge, without the IAEA being in a position to clarify the
nature and scope of that programme. If we continue in that
direction, we will end up with a major confrontation and we
reduce the possibility of a peaceful resolution."
Mr ElBaradei reported to the UN Security Council on Wednesday
that Iran was continuing to defy UN calls for a suspension of
uranium enrichment, which can be used for nuclear power - as
Iran says - or as fuel for a nuclear weapon if enriched to
weapons grade.
President George Bush said he was instructing the US Secretary
of State Condoleezza Rice to press for tougher sanctions against
Iran. "The world has spoken and said ... no nuclear weapons
programmes. And yet they're constantly ignoring the demands," he
said.
William Perry, a former American defence secretary, was critical
of the Bush administration's unwillingness to get involved
directly in negotiations, though he admitted they might not
solve the problem. "We have to be prepared to offer a package of
serious sanctions and serious positive incentives, like security
guarantees," he said. While not ruling out a military option, Mr
Perry said it had to be a "very, very last resort". "One would
never consider a military option until all diplomatic options
are exhausted. We should be focusing on diplomatic options now."
Click here
to comment on this and other articles
Send Page To a Friend
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 ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
|
