Warnings to avoid Iran attack suspicious

Washington and its Western allies ideally would like to see Iran brought to its knees for a number of reasons. Iran’s nuclear capability, for all the hype, isn’t one of them.

There is no proof that Tehran is working toward a nuclear bomb—and even if has a clandestine weapons program, nukes are only useful for their deterrent value. North Korea has them, Pakistan has them, both anti-Western loose cannons, but as long as the US has a bigger and better nuclear arsenal, the leaders of those countries would have to be suicidal to strike first, in the knowledge that retaliation would be merciless.

The actual goal of the US is regime change. Iran has been an enemy of America and Israel since 1979 and has since become militarily powerful. It’s a thorn in the side of Washington’s ambition to dominate the oil-rich and strategically important Gulf region, thus being in a position to deprive hegemonic competitors like China of energy.

When America’s man, the Shah, became too big for his boots, he was easily unseated. The ruling ayatollahs have proved to be far more tenacious and are peddling influence throughout the area, using non-state actors to disseminate their ideology in order to consolidate a Shiite crescent. It’s no accident that Iran featured in Bush’s puerile ‘Axis of Evil’ long before it had developed a nuclear capability. It’s a slightly different ball game for Israel which views Iran as an existential threat. Iran’s leaders, including President Ahmadinejad, have made no secret of their wish to see the Jewish state disappear into the sea. Again, Israel is using the nuclear issue as a pretext. Iran is of deep concern to Israel due to its military and financial support of Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas at a time when Tel Aviv’s Camp David peace treaty with Egypt is fragile. Camp David could break at any minute. Most Egyptians see it as an embarrassment and some leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood, now dominating Parliament’s lower house, are champing at the bit to quash it.

Moreover, tensions are being exacerbated by officials in the Obama administration and senators in Congress. They have warned Egypt that the US $1.5 billion in annual US aid may be withdrawn in answer to Cairo’s impending trial of employees of NGOs, including 19 Americans, accused of illegally receiving foreign funding to sow anti-military dissent. Having just thrown-off dictatorship from within, Egyptians are in no mood to take their marching orders from the US, even though their nation’s economy is wilting.

Waiting in the wings is Iran. It is offering full diplomatic relations, jobs for Egyptian laborers and is willing to make up any cash shortfall should the US make good on its threat. Iran has also offered to send 5,000 Iranian tourists to Egypt daily to boost its flagging tourist industry. Should Egypt fall into Iran’s embrace, Jordan is likely to follow suit. In that case, Israel really will have something to worry about; for one thing, the Palestinians would be emboldened to launch a third Intifada, especially since they’ve been continuously let down by the US broker and Israeli Prime Minister Binjamin Netanyahu is refusing to sit at the peace table with any Palestinian government involving Hamas. There’s no doubt that Israel has the most to gain (or lose) from striking Iran’s nuclear sites. Israel’s hawks have been poised to enact that scenario for years, despite any consequences that might ensue; for them it’s a life and death issue. Others, including former Mossad chiefs, are more circumspect. Iran is not Iraq. Taking out the Iraqi nuclear reactor was a walk in the park. Iran has by some estimates over 90 nuclear sites scattered all over the country, some buried deep in the bowels of the earth and within mountains. Air attacks would only be capable of destroying some of them, succeeding in setting back Iran’s nuclear ambitions by a few years. Besides, no one knows for sure whether or not Tehran has bought off-the-shelf nukes from Eastern Europe, Pakistan or North Korea.

If Israel decides to act, the US, the UK and France won’t be able to sit on the sidelines. Iran will hit back with all its might targeting both Israel and Western interests in the Gulf. It has threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz to shipping and ignite Gulf oil fields. What that would do to the global economy is enough to make everyone shudder. In the worst case scenario, China and/or Russia could join the fray on the side of Iran. Just because those powers stood back, permitting the US-led invasion of Iraq doesn’t mean they will adopt a similar stance on Iran. Certainly, in recent months, they have proved to be obdurate over anti-Syrian United Nations Security Council Resolutions in a face-off against all their fellow UNSC members. Russia and China have their own geopolitical and economic interests to preserve.

Western capitals are doing their utmost to heap pressure on Tehran with biting sanctions against financial institutions, exports and its oil industry. They’re hurting, the Iranian currency has plummeted but as long as Tehran has allies and eager customers for its oil, they won’t do the trick. In fact, they are only creating a ‘them against us’ sentiment within the Iranian population, making any Arab Spring-type uprising unlikely. Iran’s answer to the EU’s proposed cessation of Iranian oil imports in the summer was to cease exports to the UK and France forthwith.

For sure, we’ve been hearing that an imminent Israeli attack on Iran is on the cards for years. The latest brouhaha might be beginning to sound like the boy who cried wolf. But, on this occasion, it might be for real. In recent days, there appears to be a concerted effort by Western government officials to downplay the possibility, which seems object defeating. On the one hand, they are trying to frighten Tehran into succumbing; and on the other, they are going out of their way to discount military action.

The chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff says “it is not prudent at this point to attack Iran . . . a strike at this time would be destabilizing.” British Foreign Secretary William Hague says attacking Iran is “not wise at this moment.” Former US Defense Secretary Robert Gates told CNN, “If Iraq and Afghanistan taught us anything in recent history, it is the unpredictability of war and that these things are easier to get into than to get out of.” Strangest of all is a statement by America’s current defense secretary, Leon Panetta, who said he’s worried that Israel could strike Iran in the spring. Surely, announcing that removes any element of surprise. Can he really be that loose-lipped?

It seems to me that the US and its allies are attempting to get themselves off the hook with the UN, international law, not to mention their own war-weary populations. Then, once Israel is embroiled, they will be forced to engage. This is one time, I hope I’m wrong.

Linda S. Heard is a British specialist writer on Middle East affairs. She welcomes feedback and can be contacted by email at heardonthegrapevines@yahoo.co.uk.