A new U.S.
intelligence report, representing the consensus of all 16 intelligence
agencies, comes to the same conclusion many have known for a long time:
The Iraq War isn’t making us safer. It’s putting us all at greater risk.
It's making another terrorist attack more likely. The report is another
piece of evidence that the Bush administration is lying about the war.
And now they’re
telling more lies to justify another possible war – this time in Iran.
Everybody – even the Bush administration – admits that Iran doesn’t have
a nuclear weapon. Everybody agrees that even if Iran wanted a nuclear
weapon it would be years before it could build one. Of course, it would
be great if Iran stopped enriching uranium. Actually, it would be great
if ALL countries stopped enriching uranium, including our own! But in
the meantime Iran is producing nuclear power, not weapons.
And yet the Bush
administration and its supporters in Congress continue to lie about an
Iranian “threat.” A recent Senate report on Iran, drafted by a top
former assistant to U.N. Ambassador John Bolton, claimed that Iran is
enriching uranium at the level of 90 percent – the level needed for
nuclear weapons. It was such an egregious lie that even the U.N. nuclear
watchdog agency, the IAEA, responded with a harsh rebuke. It reminded
Washington that it is watching Iran’s enrichment, and that Iran’s
enrichment is in the 3.5 percent range, the level needed for nuclear
power. It’s nowhere close to 90 percent.
Even those cheering
for a U.S. attack on Iran agree it would have devastating consequences –
human, economic, environmental and political – not only for the people
of Iran but for the whole Middle East. And it would be especially
damaging to U.S. interests. As anger against the United States surged
following an attack on Iran, U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan would
face even greater risks than they already do. Oil supplies would be
slashed. Gasoline prices in the United States could easily top $5.00 a
gallon. Israel could be a target. And U.S. influence in the region,
already at a low point, would sink to non-existent. The consequences
could easily become worse than those caused by the Iraq War quagmire.
And yet, key Bush
administration officials continue to threaten military strikes against
Iran’s nuclear power facilities. “Time” magazine recently reported that
U.S. naval warships have been issued “prepare to deploy” orders. The
Navy command is looking at plans for a naval blockade against Iranian
oil ports. This would be a very dangerous move. A naval blockade can
constitute an act of war – which would give Iran the legal right to use
military force for self-defense under Article 51 of the United Nations
Charter. Iran wouldn’t necessarily respond militarily, but Tehran would
have the right to use military force against us.
A U.S. attack on Iran
is still far from certain. Even faced with a military provocation, Iran
might respond with diplomacy rather than military force, perhaps
challenging the United States in the International Court of Justice. The
anti-Iran campaign may be part of an effort to keep the “war on terror”
and the resulting fear factor at the top of the agenda in the run-up to
the November elections. The White House might even be making threats to
bolster European diplomatic efforts.
Growing opposition to
the prospect of an Iran War might lead some members of the Bush
administration to decide the political cost of such a reckless adventure
is too high. Many military officials are opposed to attacking Iran. The
army is already over-stretched. Army commanders have just announced they
will have to deploy more National Guard troops to Iraq because of a
shortage of troops, despite the Army’s having a 504,000 active-duty
force. War with Iran is not inevitable.
But this
administration has shown us, and shown the world, it is willing to carry
out reckless, illegal actions that violate U.S. and international law
and put us all at greater risk. We must say “no” to a U.S. military
strike on Iran now, before the troops are put in harm’s way for a lie
once again.
Phyllis Bennis is a fellow of the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington, D.C. Her latest book is “Challenging Empire: How People, Governments and the U.N. Defy U.S. Power” (Interlink, 2005). The Institute for Policy Studies is a progressive think tank in Washington, D.C. www.ips-dc.org
###