October 7, 2005
"If Israel takes such crazy actions as attacking our nuclear facilities,
we will give it an unforgettable lesson." Iranian Parliament-Speaker, Haddad
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
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.
Courtesy & Copyright ę Mike Whitney