US on a collision course with Iran
Irfan Asghar
Speculations are rife that US is secretly planning an attack on Iran .
The provocative statements and veiled warning shots made by certain
quarters close to the White House are symptomatic of the fact that the
deep-seated rancour and acrimony between US and Iran is edging towards
head-on confrontation. It is not rocket science to understand the
goings-on. There are enough straws in the wind to indicate on which side
the wind is going to blow. On a deeper analysis, five major factors come
to the fore as underlying causes for the possible US attack on Iran .
One is Iran ’s defiant posture and its outright declaration to acquire
nuclear capability. And it has made significant headway in this
direction. It has already built up a stockpile of uranium hexafluoride,
the raw material for enrichment into reactor fuel or bomb-grade
material.
The second is the invective bluster and intemperate rhetoric of Iran ’s
firebrand president who denies the Holocaust and intimidates Israel of
wiping off the world map. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
challenges the accepted facts of the Holocaust and accuses Jews of
skewing the facts to help justify the establishment of the Jewish State.
It is for the first time since its independence that Israel is facing an
existential threat. Israeli politicians often paint their country’s
history as a long series of existential threats but the prospect of an
Iranian nuclear bomb and the intimidating bluster of Iran ’s fiery
president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has never haunted them before.
The third is that the Bush administration indicts Iran of stoking
sectarian violence in Iraq by supplying the arms and explosive devices
to Shia militias that have caused so many casualities in iraq including
US military casualities. US claims to have sound proof that Iranian
agents have smuggled weapons to Iraq , including “explosively formed
penetrators”, a form of roadside bomb. In response to Iran ’s suspected
involvement in accentuating the crisis in Iraq , Bush has also
authorized the killing or capture of Iranian agents threatening US
soldiers in their activities in Iraq . Iranians are of the viewpoint
that the conflict in Iraq is not under Iran ’s control. It is controlled
by the Americans. Iran contends that Americans should change their
behaviour to end the conflict in Iraq .
The Fourth is that there lurks the danger that by going nuclear, Iran
will try to enhance its influence in the Middle East and ultimately
threaten American interests in the region. US undersecretary of State
for political affairs Nicholas Burns said on one occasion “ The US will
not let Iran to dominate the region. The Gulf isn’t a body of water to
be controlled by Iran . When challenged, the US will do everything to
defend its interests. We will respond – economically, financially,
politically and not necessarily just through military means”. The Sunni
ruled countries in the region also want Iran to be cut down to size and
they may team up with Washington in containing Iran . Because, what
these states dread is that Iran , by supporting Shia minorities in Sunni
majority countries, may foment the sectarian violence within their
realms and resultantly pose a security threat to them. On top of this,
if Iran ’s endeavours to develop nuclear bomb are not pre-empted, it
raises the possibility of a dangerous proliferation of nuclear
technology, even weapons, in the volatile region. And in this way, Iran
could destroy what is left of the international non-proliferation
regime.
Finally, there is the predicament of Mr.Bush. After being well-nigh
roundly routed in Afghanistan and US army bogged down entirely in Iraq,
Mr.Bush may think of a pre-emptive strike on Iran’s nuclear programme in
order to deter it from acquiring nuclear weapons, as a fitting way to
save his legacy from being pilloried by the people at large. He may
think that if US succeeds in snuffing out Iran ’s nuclear programme, its
failure on Iraqi count may get shrouded in the victory on Irani count.
Iranian supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has vowed to hit back at
US interests worldwide if attacked. Iranians claim that Americans are
within their firing range in the east, west and elsewhere. This is with
reference to the US military presence in neighbouring Iraq & Afghanistan
as well as in the Gulf Waters off southern Iran . It could lobb missiles
at American bases or Israel .. It could target western business
interests in retaliation which are strewn within reach from Dubai to
Doha . A less overt response would be to stir-up its allies to attack
coalition forces in Iraq & Afghanistan . Veterans contend that
diplomatic pressure toughened by sanctions should be given most time to
work because they think that even if US decides to launch military
strikes on Iran , it will not be possible to destroy Iran ’s nuclear
programme completely. Because Iran has buried many of its nuclear
facilities deep underground and has carefully dispersed them, so there
is no single target. Some of Iran ’s enrichment facilities are said to
be buried some 15 – 18 metres under soil and concrete. In order to
destroy these facilities, it would require no less than a nuclear weapon
– the use of which has got a remote or distant probability at least
politically or morally. And still some sites are unknown ones.
According to a study concluded by the center for strategic &
International studies (CSIS), even a large-scale attack could leave much
of Iran ’s technological base intact and allow the country eventually to
reconstitute an underground nuclear programme. Tailpiece: It would be
very difficult to debar a determined Iranian regime from going nuclear
either by military means or by sanctions. And the world would have to
learn to live with a nuclear Iran .
—The writer is an analyst of international politics. |
