Backtracking: Jim Lobe's January 18th post about Bush's failed efforts to form an anti-Iran coalition in the Gulf

A must-read: "Anti-Iran Coalition in the Gulf? Read This,"posted by Jim Lobe on January 18th. From this article, it appears that President Bush’s main purpose in visiting the Gulf a couple of weeks ago – to build a containment and isolationist strategy against Iran – not only failed but also was counterproductive.

In the last paragraph, there’s a link an article at the Royal United Services Institute of Defence and Security Studies (RUSI)*, "Dire Straits: U.S. Mid-East Policy: The Gulf Arab States and US Iran Relations" my next must-read.

*RUSI was founded in 1831, the oldest such institute in the world, at the initiative of the Duke of Wellington. Its original mission was to study naval and military science, what Clausewitz called the ‘art of war.’

(photo of Jim Lobe from LobeLog.com)

Understanding the relationship between the U.S. and Iran: I'm casting a wide net

Last February, after I had been blogging for a couple of weeks, I posted "Writing and bouillabaisse soup," describing the similarities between writing and making this famous fish soup. I wrote, "First, you take a big fishnet and, standing on a rock jutting out into the sea, cast it as wide as you can. After you gather the net and pull it up on the rock, you begin a careful examination of everything caught in it.”

I’m throwing my net wide to try to gather as much information as possible about why the relationship between the U.S. and Iran is so difficult and even scary. The recent National Intelligence Estimate that Iran stopped its nuclear weapons program four years ago has not dispelled Bush's fear that Iran remains a threat and cannot be trusted with even the scientific knowledge to enrich uranium for peaceful civilian use.

This fear has trickled down to many ordinary Americans, and some of this fear is expressed as hatred for Iran. I was saddened yesterday to read TomDispatch.com's "Nick Turse, The Holiday Gifts from Hell (on Earth)": “You might also think about the ‘Give Peace a Chance - Bomb Iran' fitted t-shirt from SnafuGear. Or slip over to ConservativeBuys.com to pick up that ’Tic Tac Toe Anti-Iran’ T, featuring the snazzy game-board motif, with Afghanistan and Iraq already Xed out and all those bombs heading Iran-wards. Or what about the ‘Tehran Forecast’ t-shirt that reads: ‘15,000 degrees, high radioactive winds.’

“Had enough of shirts? Feelin' a tad sad because the latest National Intelligence Estimate wrecked that plan to take out Iran? How about a trucker hat emblazoned with a picture of Iranian President Ahmadinejad's face on toilet paper and the phrase ‘Shiite Head’ in faux Arabic script?

“And, for goodness sake, don't forget the Xmas cards you'll need to accompany your gifts. Perfect for the T's and the hat are DareWare's ‘Funny Anti-Iran Anti-Muslim Greeting Cards’ with a lovely image of a mushroom cloud and the classic all-seasonal line:‘Nuke Iran for Peace.’ "

So far my net has caught the excellent The Great War for Civilisation - The Conquest of the Middle East by Robert Fisk. His first-hand description of US support for Iraq in its war of aggression on Iran in the 1980’s is mind-boggling. This 1000+ page book has helped me understand the animosity the US has felt for Iran since the revolution unseated the Shah Mohamed Pahlavi in 1979, an event described in Chapter Four, “The Carpet-Weavers.”

Another catch is Trita Parsi’s Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealngs of Israel, Iran, and the U.S. I now have a better understanding how Israel’s and Iran’s relations have shifted from covert cooperation (even when Ayatollah Seyyet Ruhollah Khomeini was in power) to Israel's conviction today that Iran is an existential threat.

Since last January, I’ve read a lot of articles and blogs on Iran and wrote 41 posts, which I've listed below. By following my “recipe” in "Writing and bouillabaisse soup," I hope to write knowledgeably about this important subject in future posts.

Posts:
January 25
February 1
February 8
February 13
February 26
March 26
March 28
April 4
April 7 - guest blogger Jim Stoops
May 23
May 24
May 25
May 26
May 27
June 2
July 3
July 5
August 24
August 25
August 30
August 31
September 3
September 3
September 5
September 6
September 6
September 14
September 17
September 20
September 21
September 22
September 25
September 28
October 2
October 3
October 9
October 11 (about Trita Parsi’s Treacherous Alliance)
Oct. 18 (Iran hasn’t launched a war in 222 years)
October 24 (a great photo, even if you don’t read the post)
October 25 (I highly recommend you check this one)
December 5

(Persian miniature: Iran Chamber Society, also worth checking to learn more about Iranian culture)

"On the Eve of Destruction"

On the “eve of destruction,” I recommend you watch “Video Postcards from Iran”:
Then look at these photos, which I found linked at Juan Cole’s blog, Informed Comment.

Recommended: Have your sound on for both the video postcards and the photos.

Next, I recommend that you read Scott Ritter’s "On the Eve of Destruction," posted at Truthdig on October 22nd.

Read about the “Hadley Rules,” promulgated by National Security Advisor, Stephen Hadley: “Hadley is a long-established neoconservative thinker who has for the most part operated ‘in the shadows’ when it comes to the formulation of Iran policy in the Bush administration. In 2001, following the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States, Hadley (then the deputy national security adviser) instituted what has been referred to as the “Hadley Rules,” a corollary of which is that no move will be made which alters the ideological positioning of Iran as a mortal enemy of the United States. These ‘rules’ shut down every effort undertaken by Iran to seek a moderation of relations between it and the United States, and prohibited American policymakers from responding favorably to Iranian offers to assist with the fight against al-Qaida; they also blocked the grand offer of May 2003 in which Iran outlined a dramatic diplomatic initiative, including a normalization of relations with Israel. The Hadley Rules are at play today, in an even more nefarious manner, with the National Security Council becoming involved in the muzzling of former Bush administration officials who are speaking out on the issue of Iran….” [emphasis mine]

Ritter goes on to describe Hadley as the …[B]ureaucratic ‘grease’ to ease policy formulated elsewhere down the gullet of a national security infrastructure…” and concludes that …”[P]olicy formulation is more and more concentrated in the person of Vice President Cheney…”

Moving on to the president, Ritter discussed Bush’s relationship with God: “The president himself has stated that “God speaks through me” (he acknowledged this before a group of Amish in Pennsylvania in the summer of 2004)….According to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, President Bush told him and others that ‘God told me to strike at al-Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did.'” I wonder what message God is whispering in Bush's ear about Iran.

You may want to go back and look at the video postcards and photos of Iran because these scenes may not be around much longer.

(Video post cards from Elegant Bay – photos from Lucas Gray)

U.S. demands tougher sanctions against Iran while the IAEA is asking the U.N. to take a sanctions "timeout."

Yesterday morning, the Washington Post published an article on page A14, U.S. Starts a Push for Tighter Sanctions on Iran - Promotion of New U.N. Resolution Comes as Tehran's Influence in Iraq is Called Surprisingly Deep: "The Bush administration has begun mobilizing support for a third U.N. resolution that would impose tougher sanctions against Iran, as the top U.S. military and diplomatic officials in Baghdad said yesterday that one of the biggest and still unfolding surprises in Iraq has been the depth of Iran's intervention….

“In a briefing at the National Press Club, Petraeus said arms supplies from Iran, including 240mm rockets and explosively formed projectiles, "contributed to a sophistication of attacks that would by no means be possible without Iranian support. . . . The evidence is very, very clear…."

Is Iran meddling in Iraq? I don’t know. Can we trust what we are being told? I don’t know. However, I do know that International Atomic Energy Association [IAEA] is making progress on increasing verification of Iran's nuclear program.

Posted at Informed Comment Global Affairs on September 11, The IAEA Board of Governors Meet to Talk about Iran Again: At the meeting this week, “… Mohammad ElBaradei, the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Director General, is asking the Board, despite American objections, to give the IAEA time to implement the work plan the Agency has negotiated with Iran. ElBaradei’s hope is for the Security Council to take a "timeout'' from sanctions and for Iran to pause its uranium enrichment to avert a crisis over the country's nuclear program…..

“But Iran has already stated that it will not accept a suspension under any conditions and will halt its newly agreed upon cooperative work plan with the Agency if new sanctions are pursued at the Security Council.”

The article on the IAEA Board of Governors' meeting describes what the IAEA has already been able to accomplish:

“First, the Agency has been able to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material in Iran. Iran has continued to provide the access and reporting needed to enable Agency verification in this regard.

"Second, Iran has provided the Agency with additional information and access needed to resolve a number of long outstanding issues. In particular, Agency questions regarding past plutonium experiments in Iran have been satisfactorily answered, and this issue has been resolved. Questions about the presence and origin of high enriched uranium particles at the Karaj Waste Storage Facility have also been resolved….

“Third, contrary to the decisions of the Security Council, calling on Iran to take certain confidence building measures, Iran has not suspended its enrichment related activities, and is continuing with the construction and operation of the Fuel Enrichment Plant at Natanz. Iran is also continuing with its construction of the heavy water reactor at Arak. This is regrettable.

"Fourth, despite repeated requests by the Board and the Security Council to Iran, the Agency has so far been unable to verify certain important aspects relevant to the scope and nature of Iran´s nuclear programme…. However…it was agreed that Iran would work with the Agency to develop a work plan for resolving all outstanding verification issues.

“

This is the first time that Iran has agreed on a plan to address all outstanding issues, with a defined timeline, and is therefore an important step in the right direction.”

Iran’s decision not to suspend its enrichment related activities is described as “regrettable,” but it doesn’t appear to be a deal killer to the IAEA. Iranian Ambassador Javad Zarif has stated that Iran is committed to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and, "Iran insists on its right to have access to nuclear technology for explicitly peaceful purposes. We will not abandon that claim to our legitimate right."

If Iran is enriching uranium within its rights under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, I wonder why the US wants the U.N. Security Council to impose sanctions that would doom the IAEA’s efforts to implement the work plan that would provide the transparency regarding Iran's nuclear program that the whole world wants.

(Photo: At left, IAEA Director General ElBaradei, before the opening of the Board meeting 6 January. At right, Ambassador Nabeela Al-Mulla, Chair of the IAEA Board, consults with Mr. Kwaku Aning, Secretary of IAEA Policymaking Organs. IAEA, Credit: Calma/IAEA)

Is the New York Times leading us to (another) war?

The most important article I read yesterday was by Glenn Greenwald, commenting on the New York Times article, Michael Gordon trains his stenographer weapons on Iran. Late in the day, Greenwald updated his post to report that Gordon's article had been substantially edited, undoubtedly due to Greenwald’s comments.

In yesterday's post, Greenwald refers to a “Camp Victory Press Release,” which is described in a previous post, Our rotted press corps - a division of Camp Victory.

Bottom line: The New York Times is stating as fact what the military is telling it without checking or verifying the information. Greenwald describes Gordon’s article, U.S. Ties Iran to Deadly Iraq Attack, “…[T]he most war-fueling article yet with regard to Iran.”

We’ve been here before. This is what the New York Times did to build public support for attacking Iraq. If Glenn Greenwald and other bloggers continue to challenge the media’s unsubstantiated and unverified reporting of the military’s position that Iran is directly involved in “killing our soldiers” in Iraq, there’s a chance we won’t attack Iran.

Sidebar: Earlier today I posted What do skateboarding and blogging have in common?. I thought I ought to check out on blogging for the reasons I stated in my post, but my friend Janie Sheppard encouraged me to at least point to articles that I find worthwhile.

(photo: The Heretik)

Today's Must Read: Intellience Community's Assessment of IRAN on Eve of 2003 Invasion

In yesterday’s post, I referenced the Washington Post and New York Times articles about the January 2003 CIA assessment of the chaos likely to ensue in Iraq if attacked. Until I checked Jim Lobe’s blog late yesterday, I had no idea that assessments produced at the same time also discussed the likley consequences of an attack on Iraq on our relationship with Iran. A quick online news check this morning didn’t turn up anything.

The post, Intelligence Community’s Assessment of Iran on Eve of 2003 Invasion is a must-read. It opens with. “In an analysis that may still be pertinent on the eve of the long-awaited U.S.-Iranian talks next week on stabilizing Iraq, the U.S. intelligence community concluded just before Washington’s invasion more than four years ago that Tehran was prepared to cooperate with occupation authorities so long as its interests were given due regard.”

Jim Lobe describes this assessment as “…contained within a January 2003 report prepared by the NIC and widely distributed to senior officials throughout the Bush administration, was contained within a larger study, entitled ‘Regional Consequences of Regime Change in Iraq’, a partially redacted version of which was released Friday as part of a 226-page report by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence."

I urge you to read Lobe’s report in its entirety. Then ask yourself why the mainstream media isn’t covering this important information.

(photo of Jim Lobe, courtesy of the Scott Horton Show)

Steve Clemons interviewed today on Cheney's "end run" strategies re a hot conflict with Iran

Steve Clemons of The Washington Note, whose recent reports about Cheney as the cheerleader-in-chief for a “hot conflict” with Iran have spread through the blogosphere, will be talking about Vice President Cheney, Iran, and "end run" strategies at 2 pm EST on "Ian Masters' Background Briefing" and then at 5 pm EST on the new "Sam Seder Show."

Ominous news regarding US plans to attack Iran

I’ve posted about the possibility of the U.S. starting a war against Iran four times in the last five months, here, here, here, and here, plus my friend Jim Stoops described the evidence of the likelihood that the Bush Administration will attack Iran here.

Today, however, is the first day I recall getting four articles from four different sources that are collectively persuasive that the Bush Administration is planning military action against Iran.

In the order in which I read them:

1. Nine US Warships Enter Gulf in Show of Force, a Reuters article that described “Nine U.S. warships carrying 17,000 personnel entered the Gulf on Wednesday in a show of force off Iran's coast that navy officials said was the largest daytime assembly of ships since the 2003 Iraq war… The move comes less than two weeks after U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney, speaking aboard the Stennis [one of the nine US warships]during a tour of the Gulf, said the United States would stand with others to prevent Iran gaining nuclear weapons and "dominating the region."

2. Neo-Cons to Plot Iran Strategy Amid Caribbean Luxury, posted at Jim Lobe’s blog. Jim is highly respected as the Washington Bureau Chief of the international news service agency, Inter Press Service (IPS).

The conference, to be held May 30 to June 1 at a luxurious hotel in the Grand Bahamas, is sponsored by “The Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), a neo-conservative group created two days after the 9/11 attacks on New York and the Pentagon. The title of the “policy workshop” is “Confronting The Iranian Threat: The Way Forward,” [and] “is to include ‘30 or so leading experts who will analyze the implications of Iran’s activities, the diplomatic challenges, military and intelligence capabilities, the spread of its ideology within and beyond its borders’…. The purpose will be ‘exploring policy options …and consider solutions to one of the most significant policy issues of our day.’”

Lobe then goes on to describe who will be attending, including “Bernard Lewis, the Princeton emeritus professor who just received the American Enterprise Institute’s annual award, presumably for having done so much to lay the intellectual foundation for the U.S. invasion of Iraq and the subsequent transformation of the Islamic world, [who] is expected to open the proceedings by addressing Iran’s historic, as well as contemporary, ambitions in the region.”

3. Bush Authorizes New Cover Action Against Iran, an ABC News report from yesterday, which opens with, “ The CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert "black" operation to destabilize the Iranian government, current and former officials in the intelligence community tell the Blotter on ABCNews.com.The sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the subject, say President Bush has signed a ‘nonlethal presidential finding’ that puts into motion a CIA plan that reportedly includes a coordinated campaign of propaganda, disinformation and manipulation of Iran's currency and international financial transactions.”

This article appears to support the idea that "nonlethal" covert action in Iran means the Bush Administration isn't planning an attack, but take a look at the people are alleged to be involved with this plan.

4. "Buying the War," Now it's Iran, by William Bunch, who is the senior writer for the Philadelphia Daily News and its former political writer, who blogs here. Bunch is justifiably alarmed about how newspapers are lapping up “…unsupported, high-level but anonymous and bellicose allegations about Iran (or anyone else).

(photo: A Persian miniature from PersianMirrors.com)