Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, March 2005, pages 32-33

Special Report

Neocons Concentrate on Promoting U.S.-Iran War

By Andrew I. Killgore

Steven P. Weisman wrote in The New York Times of Nov. 19 that the “biggest challenge” in President George W. Bush’s second term is “how to contain” Iran’s nuclear program. In fact, however, Iran constitutes no threat to the United States. Its “threat” is to Israel, according to “some” (read neocons) in the administration who believe that Iran supports violence against Israel and helps the resistance in Iraq.

In 1996 the Zionists put Iran back in the American doghouse by means of Hezbollah, the Lebanese Shi’i guerrilla group which Iran was helping to fight Israel’s illegal occupation of south Lebanon. With the Zionists charging that Hezbollah was a terrorist group, the United States passed legislation imposing sanctions against any company spending $20 million on Iran’s or Libya’s oil or gas industry. In 2001 the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act (ILSA), which effectively meant that no oil or gas pipeline could transit Iran from the Caspian region, was extended for five years.

Since Hezbollah eventually forced Israel to withdraw from south Lebanon in 2000, Weisman, a neocon/Zionist front man, now claims that Tehran is supporting Hamas and Islamic Jihad. One can only express disappointment that the neocons’ latest tactic—self-serving as always, of course—is so lacking in subtlety and imagination.

During the American war on Iraq, Israel has been free to expand its settlements in the West Bank and to build its apartheid wall. With Washington effectively encouraging Israel, the other “Quartet” members—Russia, the European Union and the United Nations—likewise have been unable to stop Israel from its campaign to ethnically cleanse all of Palestine.

The ultimate neocon goal is a U.S. war with Iran over the nuclear issue. That would serve to postpone indefinitely Washington’s attention to the Palestine question. In “A Clean Break: A New Strategy For Securing the Realm,” the 1996 white paper prepared for Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu by the neocons/Zionists Richard Perle, David Wurmser and Douglas Feith, the authors envisaged America fighting Israel’s enemies in the Middle East. It contained not a word about the consequences for the United States—raising a question about the judgment, if not the loyalty, of the three authors.

In November Iran finally agreed that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) could inspect its nuclear sites with no prior notice. Japan, which had withheld its agreement, then signed a contract to develop Azadegan, Iran’s largest oil field. The New York Times on Nov. 23 reported that Iran had “frozen” its nuclear activities in an effort to persuade the world that it does not seek nuclear weapons. Accusing Iran of lying, the National Council of Resistance in Iran, the political front of the People’s Mojahedin resistance organization, which works closely with Israel-firsters in Congress, claimed Iran was running a secret uranium enrichment program in Tehran. Dr. Mohamed El Baradi, head of the IAEA, charged the Mojahedin with making accusations with no proof.

When Iran was secretly allied with Israel from 1972-1979, Muhammad Reza Shah Pahlavi declared, without objection from the U.S. or Israel, that Iran planned to build 10 nuclear power plants. Now, however, Iran faces a threat of U.S.-sponsored sanctions, if not war, if it doesn’t “prove” itself innocent of seeking nuclear weapons.

If Iran is determined to get the nuclear bomb it may go ahead and risk military attack—a formidable challenge for any military adversary. China is a long-time friend of Iran, and one potential attackers would not want to offend. More importantly, perhaps, Iran’s size (628,000 square miles), topography and weak neighbors render it geopolitically nearly impregnable. An attack from the south—which could only be mounted by the United States—would be launched 500 miles from Tehran, and troops and supplies would have to traverse the rugged Zagreb Mountains.

With Washington’s tepid approval, Britain, France and Germany have been negotiating with Iran to stop processing uranium to the “bomb” level. Tehran finally has agreed to cease—but only temporarily. The Europeans see Iran’s agreement as progress, but the U.S. charges Iranian deceit. Nevertheless, the temporary agreement means the U.S. will be unable to get European approval to impose U.N. sanctions against Iran.

A Nuclear Iran Inevitable

It is probably inevitable that, sooner or later, Iran will get the atomic bomb. The Persian Cyrus the Great became head of the then-largest empire stretching from the Mediterranean to the Hindu Kush in the 6th century BC. The Iranians are proud of their history and of themselves. The most populous country in the region, it has always been important. So we can count on Iran becoming a nuclear power. This does not mean, however, that it will constitute a danger to Israel—which, according to informal speculation, possesses 200 nuclear weapons.

Nevertheless, Israel will continue to harp on the danger to the Jewish state of Iran getting the bomb, and the necessity of a U.S. attack to prevent it. This would tie up the United States and divert American efforts to address Israel’s occupation of Palestine.

But as settling the Palestinian issue would go far to removing the main cause of hatred and violence against the United States, Americans must not fall for the neocons’ agenda of permanent U.S. war against Israel’s enemies. In a Dec. 13 Washington Post op-ed article signed by former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and the former foreign ministers of Britain, France, Italy, Canada, Denmark, Spain and the Netherlands, the diplomats urge the United States to support, as a first step, the agreement concluded between Iran and the European powers.

Entitled “How to Approach Iran,” the article recommends that Washington consider launching commercial and diplomatic engagement with Iran. “Some in Washington hope and expect the Euro-Iranian talks will collapse altogether,” the diplomats note. Again, the “some” are the neocons/Zionists who fanatically refuse to abandon their campaign to promote an Iranian-American war.

The Dec. 15 Financial Times reported that Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi is willing to talk to the U.S. about his country’s nuclear program. One thus still can hope that the neocons will not succeed in igniting an Iranian-American war.

Andrew I. Killgore is publisher of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs.

SIDEBAR 2 Mordechai Vanunu Nominated for Nobel Peace Prize (AFP photo/Menahem Kahana).   On Dec. 19, 2004 over 40 journalists, including seven TV cameras, attended a standing-room-only press conference in East Jerusalem to hear Nobel Peace Laureate Mairead Maguire, Mordechai Vanunu and Knesset member Issam Makhoul. Below is the press release issued afterward by the International Campaign to Free Mordechai Vanunu. At a press conference held in East Jerusalem on Dec. 19, Irish Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Mairead Corrigan Maguire (pictured at right, holding Mordechai Vanunu’s hand) announced that she is nominating the Israeli nuclear whistleblower for the 2005 prize. Vanunu has been nominated for the prize every year since 1989. Maguire received the Nobel Prize in 1976, in recognition of her work for peace in Ireland. “Mordechai Vanunu has paid a heavy price in order to protect us all from nuclear weapons. We are all indebted to him for telling the truth to power and I have come to thank him on behalf of his human family,” Maguire said. Explaining that she had arrived in Israel from a women’s peace conference in Jordan, Maguire urged Israelis and Palestinians to work nonviolently for peace. The Nobel Peace Prize Laureate urged the Israeli government to free Vanunu from the restrictions that keep him hostage in Israel and to “let Mordechai come home for Christmas.” Maguire added that she would continue to nominate Vanunu for the award “until he gets it.” Issam Makhoul, member of the Israeli Parliament (Knesset), who in February 2000 initiated the first parliamentary debate on nuclear policy ever to be held in Israel, stated: “Only those who struggle for total disarmament of the Middle East, including Israel, of all weapons of mass destruction—nuclear, biological and chemical—have the moral right to condemn Iran for its nuclear project. The countries that equip Israel with the means to launch nuclear warheads, that supply it with submarines and enable it to develop its missiles, do not have the moral right to condemn the Iranian nuclear project. Anyone who opposes the Iranian project must also oppose the Israeli nuclear arsenal. “Along with Mordechai Vanunu, I and other Israeli activists refuse to be silenced. We continue to demand that our government reveal the truth about its WMDs, enable a full international inspection of all WMD sites and dismantle its arsenal. To this end, we are currently involved in organizing an international conference on a nuclear-free Mediterranean area, to be held in April 2005. This date marks the first anniversary of Vanunu’s release from prison. This date will hopefully mark the beginning of an anti-nuclear movement in Israel. “Mordechai Vanunu is not a traitor, he is an Israeli hero. The nuclear bomb does not protect Israel, it endangers Israel.” Mordechai Vanunu, recently elected rector of Glasgow University in Scotland, described the restrictions that were imposed on him when he was released from 18 years’ imprisonment in April 2004, the subsequent police harassment and threats to which he has been subjected, and the impact that they have on his ability to rebuild his life. Asked why he refuses to speak to the Israeli media in Hebrew, Vanunu answered—in Hebrew: “The government of Israel refuses to recognize my human rights. I am prohibited from speaking to foreigners. I say to the Israeli public: I am not your enemy. All I want is for Israel to abolish its nuclear weapons, to respect the rights of the Palestinian people and to let me go free.” Continuing in English, Vanunu stated that he has no further secrets to reveal about Israel’s nuclear reactor and that he demands the right to express his anti-nuclear views, to speak freely to the media and to write his prison memoirs. All he wants for Christmas, Vanunu said, was to be free to leave Israel and celebrate with his adoptive family in the USA. Mordechai would love to hear from his friends and supporters.You can write to him c/o Cathedral Church of St. George, 20 Nablus Road, PO Box 19018, Jerusalem 91190, Israel and e-mail him at <vanunumvjc2@yahoo.com>.