Iran in the Crosshairs
Washington watched as 2007 came to a violent and inglorious end. U.S. wars raged in Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S.-backed Israeli occupation suffocated Palestinians, U.S.-allied governments in Pakistan and Kenya faced national explosions over false democratization and stolen elections, and U.S. corporate-driven poverty and resource wars ravaged Africa. Powerful forces in the United States had already begun to critically reassess what they saw as the diminishing value of the Bush administration’s reckless global interventionism.
By the end of the year, that elite divide-with the Bush White House increasingly isolated and discredited-had shown up in a leaked story of how Bush’s CIA hid and then destroyed videotapes documenting the interrogation-by-torture of detainees in the so-called “global war on terror.” There was an explosive story documenting how Bush’s billions of dollars in “anti-terrorism” military aid to Pakistan had completely failed to stabilize that war-wracked country. Another leak exposed damning views that the United States and its allies were losing the war in Afghanistan, the invasion and occupation that were supposed to shine as Washington’s “good war”-the war that no one could criticize because of September 11.
But the most important evidence of the split within the powerful elites came with the release of a new National Intelligence Estimate on Iran (NIE) on December 3, 2007.3 The NIE, reflecting the consensus view of all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies, made clear that Iran did not have a nuclear weapon, did not have a program to build a nuclear weapon, and was less determined to develop nuclear weapons than U.S. intelligence agencies had earlier claimed.
How could anyone now claim there was any legal or moral pretext for threatening Iran? But somehow the release of the NIE did not stop Washington’s talk of war. The day after the NIE was released the Washington Post headline read, “U.S. Renews Efforts to Keep Coalition Against Tehran.” The White House, the President, and especially the Vice-President, all continued ratcheting up the rhetoric. In fact, the president had been told of the NIE’s overall conclusions months earlier, back in the summer of 2007.
When Bush arrived in the Middle East in January 2008 for his first trip to the region as president, Iran remained top of the agenda. One of his primary goals was to reassure Israel that the NIE had changed nothing in U.S. policy trajectories towards Iran and that despite the intelligence agencies’ consensus that Iran was not building a nuclear weapon, “all options” remained on the table. According to Newsweek, “in private conversations with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, the President all but disowned the document, said a senior administration official who accompanied Bush on his six-nation trip to the Mideast. ‘He told the Israelis that he can’t control what the intelligence community says, but that [the NIE’s] conclusions don’t reflect his own views.’”
Newsweek went on to recognize that:
“Bush’s behind-the-scenes assurances may help to quiet a rising chorus of voices inside Israel’s defense community that are calling for unilateral military action against Iran. Olmert, asked by Newsweek after Bush’s departure whether he felt reassured, replied: ‘I am very happy.’ … Bush told Olmert he was uncomfortable with the findings and seemed almost apologetic …. But the president may be trying to tell his allies something more: that he thinks the document [the NIE] is a dead letter.”
Just a couple of days before Bush’s January 2008 trip to Israel, the Pentagon reported an “incident” in the Strait of Hormuz. Iranian speed boats had allegedly swarmed between and among three large U.S. warships heading into the Persian Gulf, broadcasting threatening messages that the U.S. ships were about to explode and dropping small box-like objects onto the seas. Just as the sailors were aiming their guns at the provocateurs, the Iranian boats reversed course and sped away.
Reuters described how the boats “aggressively approached” the U.S. ships. The Pentagon called it “careless, reckless and potentially hostile,” the White House “reckless and provocative.” Numerous Persian speakers pointed out that the voice making the threats did not sound like a Persian accent. The U.S. Navy itself acknowledged that they had no idea where the voice making the threats had actually come from. Quickly the words “Tonkin Gulf incident” were on many lips. Many remembered August 4, 1964, the “attack on a U.S. Naval ship” off the coast of Vietnam Lyndon Johnson used as a pretext for sending troops to Vietnam. Years later the world learned that the alleged attack had never occurred at all; it was cooked up. Would the “swarming boat incident” in the Strait of Hormuz serve as George Bush’s Tonkin Gulf?
Despite the NIE, the possibility of a U.S. military strike on Iran remains a very real threat. Neither operative intelligence estimates nor actual facts on the ground would have much sway over the ideologues in the Bush White House.
This is the introduction to the new primer, Iran in the Crosshairs, published by the Institute for Policy Studies. The full report is available here. Print copies can be ordered by calling IPS.
Phyllis Bennis is a Fellow of the Institute for Policy Studies, where she directs the New Internationalism Project and is a contributor to Foreign Policy In Focus.
Copyright © 2008, Institute for Policy Studies
So Bush actually went to Israel to please the real masters of the US of A. I guess this article makes it official that it is really the US of I. Even Hillary and Obama panders to the apartheid nation’s whims.
This administration will no doubt find some excuse (among the many they already feel they have) to bully Iran into war. If the US pre-empts another war, the rest of the world might stand by and watch but if Israel starting bombing Iran, it would surely start a much bigger conflict.
This is “October surprise” material. I’m pleased to see Americans taking such an interest in the nomination process, but I will feel confident in it only when I see a new president sworn in.
April surprise.
What they do not say is the truth.
October surprise. Bye, bye Obama and hello McCain
The difference between what Hitler did in Europe and what Bush is doing in the Middle East is not entirely clear to me. Would some scholar please point that out to me.
I know about the Reischstagg buring and big Nazi crackdowns on everybody, but didn’t Hitler always talk about national security abnd the need to keep order (peace) in the world?
And supposedly the world appeased him after the first invasions so he did more…[the UN judged the Iraq War ILLEGAL] and did absolutely nothing about it.
I thought I heard something about mass arrests across the US too and Halliburton making huge “prison camps” inside the US?
Never a word of truth in our press.
Things are getting very scary around here. Am I dreaming?
No, andrew.herman, you ain’t dreaming none, it’s a nightmare you’re having.
But think twice about waking up — the reality is quite possibly worse.
Yeah, Andrew, and here I thought that America never learned from history but what you say is true. The Bush Admin are copying some of the tricks employed by Hitler, tricks designed to confuse the people, to divide them, to create fear and suspicion. The MSM are willing helpers.
Along with that there are the martial law contingency plans, the ability to brand dissenters as unpatriotic, remove them, take over the country and suspend its democracy.
Yeah, some Americans have learned something from history! The wrong things!
www.dangerouscreation.com
I say let ‘em attack Iran. Gas will hit $10 a gallon and the U.S. economy will tank. The resulting civil unrest will force them to recall the troops and mercenaries to maintain order here (which will probably be impossible, due to the size of the country). China will call in its loans and the dollar will be worth less than the currency of Zimbabwe. Remember, Hitler screwed the pooch by invading Russia and declaring war on the U.S. before he’d even conquered England. Empires collapse in part because of massive miscalculations on the part of their leaders. The U.S. empire will probably be no different.
Senior administration official (via Newsweek) sez: “(Bush) told the Israelis that he can’t control what the intelligence community says, but that [the NIE’s] conclusions don’t reflect his own views.”
Seems par for the course. On one hand: intelligence. On the other: Bush.
And never the twain shall meet.
You have to give these Afrikaner columnists credit for their unalloyed, steely arrogance.
First Ms Bennis glosses over the willful Israeli genocide of the Palestinians as a “US backed occupation” (never once mentioning the equally genocidal 2006 war on Lebanon), then she characterizes the pending assault on Iran as a KG II initiative.
As if AIPAC and its willing 535 slaves across the faux partisan divide on Capitol Hill have no part in this sordid Judaeo-Nazi endeavor. Its all Bush’s and the Republicans crazed scheme.
When are people gonna wake up to the snake oil being sold by the “My Apartheid Israel, Right or Wrong” ilk of Bennis, Nichols, Klein and others? They have poisoned and constricted political thought in this country long enough. Their numerous desperate comments elsewhere on CD all but begging and pleading support for Barak Obama’s candidacy reflect the same.
To paraphrase “Gold Hat” from “Treasure… “: Dubyacrats? We don’t need no stinkin’ Dubyacrats!
It is time Ms Bennis, that you recognize that Palestine will one day be free and that only when it is finally established as a single state for Muslims, Christians and Jews that peace and justice will come to Southwest Asia. And finally too, to the United States.
Bullying into Iran will have to be from the air - McCain’s song. These flim-flammers are crazy talkers, loving how a scared U.S. public will want to be duped again. Our military, CIA, FBI, McCain ALL KNOW how suicidal Iran war mongering is. They KNOW it and they keep yacking. InfraGard anyone?
The government is controlled by zionists and the army by protestant evangelicals who are their allies. Is that cool or what? And Jews are 2% of the population! If that isn’t an excellent performance, I don’t know what is.
Goebbels sez February 29th, 2008 6:35 pm
that same quote grabbed my attention………….
‘He told the Israelis that he can’t control what the intelligence community says, but that [the NIE’s] conclusions don’t reflect his own views.’”
what are mr bushes views? (i mean mr cheney’s views) do they have something to do with saudi/gulf/US-UK oil intrests? maybe? despite rumors of conspiracy theories, it’s interesting the president feels compelled to distance his own assessment of iran’s nuclear ambitions from the official us govt line (irrespective of what the nsa, cia and military intelligence believes). nice…we can’t blame this on the MSM folks. our president represents war and the interests that support war (petrol). the masses and MSM both willingly accept this.
it’s time for the governments in egypt, saudi arabia, kuwait, israel and uae to be scrutinized for human rights violations, hopefully by the next dem president. before we overthrow governments we have little control over (iraq,iran,syria), we should pressure our allies that show little tolerance for representative democracy or human rights. certainly there are enough human rights violations occurring here in the US (guantanamo, renditions, phones tapped) that if we were to adopt a moral agenda (based on international standards) there would be plenty of work to do here in USA. also the perennial point ignored, when did israel sign then NNPT and how many bombs do they have ?? and then the other obvious point, how would US naval craft respond to iranian naval craft 10 miles off the coast of new york or virginia?
the UN, IAEC, and ICC are the legitimate venues to pursue justice (as others should indict US war criminals in these same courts - notice rumsfeld doesn’t hang out in europe for too long at one time…)its time we willingly participate with and listen to those who participate in these international institutions.
….peace…………….
Re: horrified “So Bush actually went to Israel to please the real masters of the US of A.”
Jews run the world? Hardly. The U.S. actually acts in ways that are in direct opposition to the majority of Israelis. It is Israel’s location (smack dab in the middle of Islam and their oil fields) that drives the American MIC and Big Oil interests there. U.S. aid is military in nature (as usual!) despite pleas from Israelis for over 50 years that it is ‘other forms of aid’ that they really need.
Meanwhile the Christian Evangelists have embraced the Jews recently to give the neo-cons a false image of embracing different religions while ratcheting up the war rhetoric for Israel’s Islamic neighbours like Syria and Iran. AIPAC has influence in Washington, but its influence is greatly exaggerated and it caters to the ‘Jewish conspiracy theorists’ who conveniently like to blame Jews for all of the worlds woes.
By the way… who are these Jews? Bill Gates? Warren Buffet? The Walton’s? Maybe Rockefeller, Ford, Morgan and Carnegie? The Bush and Cheney families? The CEO’s of Boeing, Northrop and Lockheed? The CEO’s of Kaiser Permanente and other HMO’s? The mafia perhaps?
When it comes to REALLY big money, the Jews are on the periphery at best. Their campaign contributions are higher than the national average and they’re politically more vocal and participatory, but beyond that their influence is greatly exaggerated.
Israel strangles Gaza till she squeaks. Then they promise a Holocaust in retaliation. Like the US, 65% of the Israeli people support direct discussions with Hamas… and like the US, the government forges ahead with it’s juggernaut of War escalation. Unlike the US, Israel still has something that resembles a free media. Who will come to Palestines aid? Hezbollah. Who do we blame for funding Hezbollah? Iran… one more link in the chain of justification.
It’s just a matter of time and like a previous poster, I must admit… I think April is more likely than October.