Janaury 9, 2006
A
recent Raw Story report by Larissa Alexandrovna suggests that
the notorious Office of Special Plans didn’t just stovepipe cherry-picked
"intelligence" to the White House and press. It also sent teams into Iraq
after the invasion began, which, after it became apparent that there were
no abundant WMDs, examined the possibility of planting such weapons
in order to help the resident avoid embarrassment.
Citing "[t]hree U.S.
intelligence sources and a source close to the United Nations Security
Council," Alexandrovna indicates that the OSP planned "off book" missions
that were dispatched by Stephen Cambone, Defense Department intelligence
chief, from March 2003. (Cambone now occupies the # 3 post in the Defense
Department.) Teams sent to Iraq included "CIA, FBI, Green Berets, Delta
Force operators, and commandos from the Navy’s Special Warfare Development
Group." Their first priority was to investigate an allegation made by
disinformation master Ahmad Chalabi that a USN pilot shot down in 1991 and
proclaimed KIA soon afterwards was being held as a POW in Iraq. (That was
bogus.) The second was to deal with the WMD issue. The third was to get
Saddam.
During the summer
and fall of 2004, one unnamed team, according to the UN source,
interviewed many Iraqi intelligence officers, telling them, "Our President
is in trouble. He went to war saying there are WMD and there are no WMD.
What can we do? Can you help us?" The Iraqis understood they were being
asked to cooperate with a deception. "But," the UN source continues, " the
guys were thinking this is absurd because anything put down would not pass
the smell test and could be shown to be not of Iraqi origin and not using
Iraqi methodology."
The Senate Select
Intelligence Committee, which is supposed to at some point investigate the
OSP, has asked the Pentagon’s Inspector-General to
probe the office and Douglas Feith’s role in it. Feith and the other
neocons have shown themselves shameless purveyors of disinformation again
and again. Somebody among or close to them must have fabricated the Niger
uranium documents. Jacques Chirac, as I recall, once opined that if the
U.S. didn’t find WMD in Iraq it would probably stage a discovery. But the
report that they actually considered doing just that to justify their war,
to further hoodwink the American people and the world, beats everything
I’ve heard so far. Talk about chutzpah.
There’s no end to
it. Before the Iraq attack, the disinformationists had succeeded in
convincing the majority of Americans that Iraq had WMD threatening the
world. Before the Iran attack, they have probably succeeded in convincing
most Americans that Iran has become a nuclear threat. They’ve gotten the
media to routinely refer to "Iran’s nuclear weapons program" even though
IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei has repeatedly said he finds no evidence of
one. Despite ElBaradei, the Bush administration has been able to organize
its allies in the IAEA to find Iran in violation of the Non-Proliferation
Treaty on the grounds that it kept aspects of its nuclear program secret
up to 2003, despite the fact that it’s opened itself to an unprecedented
level of IAEA inspection since. Washington has successfully conflated
Iran’s non-binding agreement with the UK, Germany and France with the NPT
itself. Thus when Iran ends its voluntary suspension of uranium enriching
activities, the administration pretends it’s doing something illegal, even
though the Treaty itself specifically allows it to enrich uranium for
peaceful purposes.
The neocons have
helped create an environment in which Syria is simply assumed to be
responsible for political assassinations in Lebanon, in the absence of
decisive evidence. While you’d think "the international community" would
recognize and reject U.S. efforts to attack more countries in "the Greater
Middle East," instead we find neocon successes in diplomacy. They’ve
brought Europe aboard the program. They may well seek UNSC sanctions
against both Iran and Syria, and resolutions that could be construed as
allowing U.S. attacks on these countries. These efforts will likely meet
with Chinese and Russian vetoes but the Bush administration, expressing
disappointment in the UN, will proceed to bomb more Muslim countries on
more false pretexts, even while evidence of their Iraq deceptions mounts.
The proponents of an
expanded war, including Vice President Cheney, must feel under a lot of
pressure to get the project done as soon as possible. The ongoing
Franklin/AIPAC and Plame investigations, the indictment of Libby and
impending trial, the inquiry into Feith and the OSP, the multiplying
revelations about executive lawbreaking at home and abroad, popular
discontent with the Iraq War, increasingly serious talk about impeachment
hearings -- all must lend a sense of urgency to the neocons’ enterprise.
Last month, CIA
director
Porter Goss visited Ankara, Turkey where he argued to Turkish
officials that "Iran has nuclear weapons and this situation was creating a
huge threat for both Turkey and other states in the region." This is the
former Senator Goss who has cooperated with the administration’s efforts
to depict the
neocon lies leading up to the Iraq War as honest "intelligence
failures" and to scapegoat the CIA as somehow incompetent. Once again the
experts like ElBaradei, Gordon Prather, Scott Ritter and others
say there is no evidence that Iran is anywhere near producing nukes.
But those guys are in the "reality mode" so despised by the empire-mode
neocons, and as a high official once lectured David Suskind, "We create
our own reality." Have the latter planned better this time? Have they
prepared the evidence to plant in the Bushehr rubble?
* * * *
"I don’t have any
doubt that at the right time, a time of our choosing, we’re going to go to
the Security Council if the Iranians are not prepared to do what they say
they want to do, which is to pursue peaceful nuclear energy," Condoleezza
Rice tells the
Washington Post, adding confidently, "When it’s clear that
negotiations are exhausted, we have the votes. There is a resolution
sitting there for referral. We’ll vote it."
With equal
confidence, Jephraim P Gundzik of
Asia Times states that, "Facing almost certain veto by Russia and
China, any US-EU attempt to impose sanctions on Iran in the Security
Council will fail -- a situation both Washington and the EU-3 [UK,
Germany, France] are aware of."
These aren’t
contradictory statements. Rice is confident that the U.S. will be able to
get a slim majority on the IAEA board of 35 members to agree, that since
Iran is in violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (even though it’s
not), to refer Iran to the UNSC for punitive action. The UK, France and
the U.S. will vote for sanctions; Russia and China will veto the
resolution. U.S. UN Ambassador Bolton will pronounce that the UN has
become "irrelevant" while President Bush will emphasize to the American
people that our freedom-loving allies (including France) are with us this
time in a clear-cut confrontation between good and evil. "The regime of
President Ahmadinejad denies the Holocaust, and calls for Israel to be
wiped off the map," he’ll fume. "Iran poses a threat to its neighbors,"
he’ll warn, even though Iran has friendly relations with Afghanistan,
Pakistan, the current Iraqi U.S.-client government, Syria, Turkey, etc.
"Iran hid a secret nuclear weapons program for 18 years!" he’ll preach,
failing to note that it came clean on clandestine aspects of its nuclear
program, started in the 1970s with U.S. support, in 2003. Since then, it
has signed IAEA protocols allowing extraordinary monitoring of a program
it says is for purely peaceful purposes, and which IAEA chief and Nobel
Peace Prize laureate Mohamed ElBaradei says he finds no evidence is a
military program.
The point is not to
necessarily get a UNSC resolution that would validate new measures against
Iran, but to stage a show for the American public. The French were deeply
skeptical about U.S. reasons to attack Iraq; so now have Americans become
skeptical. But if both the French and Germans on the Security Council are
willing to stand with John Bolton in pressing for anti-Iranian action,
such action might be more marketable to the American people. Once again
the distortion of facts and some allied arm-twisting will pave the way for
a criminal attack. Or maybe an awakened American people, outraged
at all the uncovered deceit to date (torture, "special renditions,"
illegal domestic spying, vindictive moves against opponents) makes it
politically impossible for the warmongers to proceed.
Gary
Leupp is
a Professor of History, and Adjunct Professor of Comparative Religion, at
Tufts University and author of numerous works on Japanese history. He can
be reached at:
gleupp@granite.tufts.edu