Our righteous president and those paranoid Iranians
by Tom Maertens
The Neocons and right-wing pundits are beating the drums for a war against Iran. You'd think they learned nothing from their miscalculations about the invasion of Iraq.
Instead, they are using the same script, arguing that Iran must have a nuke program; diplomacy won't work; they are duplicitous and threatening; we have to attack right now.
Iran has almost four times the population of Iraq, a much better military force, and apparently a dispersed/buried nuclear program. What is it the hawks think an attack can accomplish?
They are certain Iran is building nuclear weapons based on a pound of evidence -- some of it misstated -- and a ton of suspcion. Contrary to assertions in a report by Peter Hoekstra and the House Intelligence Committee, the IAEA did not find highly enriched uranium. They found low-enriched uranium, the kind that is used as fuel in nuclear reactors.
The administration and its echo chamber assert that Iran doesn't "need" a nuclear energy program. There are some ironies here. First, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld argued during the Ford administration that Iran and the Shah DID need a nuclear energy program because their oil would one day run out. They succeeded in getting approval to export a nuclear power program to Iran, only to have it fall apart when the Shah was overthrown by Ayatollah Khomeini.
Second, the Non-Proliferation Treaty REQUIRES the five, named nuclear-weapons states (The US, China, France, Russia, and the UK) to assist the Non-Nuclear Weapons States (NNWS) develop nuclear power programs. That was the tradeoff for the NNWS giving up their right to develop nuclear weapons...that and the NWS promise to achieve complete nuclear disarmament. Of course, the Bush administration has no intention of giving up nuclear weapons, and in reality, don't like the idea of Iran or any other NNWS developing a nuclear program. Treaty obligations? You mean like the Geneva Conventions? How quaint.
Are the Iranians developing nuclear weapons? They deny it and nobody else really knows. What the administration has is mostly suspicions, in part, because Iran is openly hostile to Israel and to US interests. Since everybody "knows" that Israel has nuclear weapons (see The Samson Option, by Seymour Hersh), it would not be surprising if Iran developed an "Islamic Bomb," as it is sometimes referred to.
But there are other factors at play, as well.
George Bush has identified Iran as part of the axis of evil, and, the Iranians are not stupid. Let's see...Iraq was labelled part of the axis of evil and then the US attacked. We are labelled part of the axis of evil...oh, oh! So what are our options...should we capitulate preemptively? Or should we attempt to defend ourselves, maybe by developing nuclear weapons... or with deliberate ambuiguity about nuclear weapons? Has anything bad happened to North Korea because of its program? India and Pakistan developed nukes, and the U.S. has improved relations with both, despite years of opposing their programs.
In the black and white world of George Bush, where he automatically wears the white hat, how could any country possibly believe itself threatened by the U.S, just because Bush called them evil.
The U.S. on the other hand, has developed the One Percent Doctrine, according to Ron Suskind, that justifies military action on a threat that might be calculated as low as a one percent likelihood. In other words, the U.S. can act on suspicion alone -- an evidence-free environment. How unreasonable that the Iranians should be worried. They should just ignore any similarities between the leadup to the Iraq invasion and now, and never mind those wingnuts who are openly arguing for Bush to attack, and even suggesting that he use nukes. The fact that the U.S. has invaded countries on both sides of us is no reason to think they might attack us.
The Neocons and right-wing pundits are beating the drums for a war against Iran. You'd think they learned nothing from their miscalculations about the invasion of Iraq.
Instead, they are using the same script, arguing that Iran must have a nuke program; diplomacy won't work; they are duplicitous and threatening; we have to attack right now.
Iran has almost four times the population of Iraq, a much better military force, and apparently a dispersed/buried nuclear program. What is it the hawks think an attack can accomplish?
They are certain Iran is building nuclear weapons based on a pound of evidence -- some of it misstated -- and a ton of suspcion. Contrary to assertions in a report by Peter Hoekstra and the House Intelligence Committee, the IAEA did not find highly enriched uranium. They found low-enriched uranium, the kind that is used as fuel in nuclear reactors.
The administration and its echo chamber assert that Iran doesn't "need" a nuclear energy program. There are some ironies here. First, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld argued during the Ford administration that Iran and the Shah DID need a nuclear energy program because their oil would one day run out. They succeeded in getting approval to export a nuclear power program to Iran, only to have it fall apart when the Shah was overthrown by Ayatollah Khomeini.
Second, the Non-Proliferation Treaty REQUIRES the five, named nuclear-weapons states (The US, China, France, Russia, and the UK) to assist the Non-Nuclear Weapons States (NNWS) develop nuclear power programs. That was the tradeoff for the NNWS giving up their right to develop nuclear weapons...that and the NWS promise to achieve complete nuclear disarmament. Of course, the Bush administration has no intention of giving up nuclear weapons, and in reality, don't like the idea of Iran or any other NNWS developing a nuclear program. Treaty obligations? You mean like the Geneva Conventions? How quaint.
Are the Iranians developing nuclear weapons? They deny it and nobody else really knows. What the administration has is mostly suspicions, in part, because Iran is openly hostile to Israel and to US interests. Since everybody "knows" that Israel has nuclear weapons (see The Samson Option, by Seymour Hersh), it would not be surprising if Iran developed an "Islamic Bomb," as it is sometimes referred to.
But there are other factors at play, as well.
George Bush has identified Iran as part of the axis of evil, and, the Iranians are not stupid. Let's see...Iraq was labelled part of the axis of evil and then the US attacked. We are labelled part of the axis of evil...oh, oh! So what are our options...should we capitulate preemptively? Or should we attempt to defend ourselves, maybe by developing nuclear weapons... or with deliberate ambuiguity about nuclear weapons? Has anything bad happened to North Korea because of its program? India and Pakistan developed nukes, and the U.S. has improved relations with both, despite years of opposing their programs.
In the black and white world of George Bush, where he automatically wears the white hat, how could any country possibly believe itself threatened by the U.S, just because Bush called them evil.
The U.S. on the other hand, has developed the One Percent Doctrine, according to Ron Suskind, that justifies military action on a threat that might be calculated as low as a one percent likelihood. In other words, the U.S. can act on suspicion alone -- an evidence-free environment. How unreasonable that the Iranians should be worried. They should just ignore any similarities between the leadup to the Iraq invasion and now, and never mind those wingnuts who are openly arguing for Bush to attack, and even suggesting that he use nukes. The fact that the U.S. has invaded countries on both sides of us is no reason to think they might attack us.
Powered by Blogger
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home