The Dogs of War Howl at Iran

All around us now, the howls grow ever louder. We are told that if the Israelis don’t do it America will have to act in Iran. The Amen chorus on the right uses Iran as one if its principle Armegddon scenarios in trying to raise fear about the “dangerous” foreign policy of the Obama administration. The right is a bit isolated, but not completely alone in their amped up war hysteria. While editorial boards continue to urge caution, the paper themselves are full of doomsday scenarios, warnings that the “bunkers are impenetrable”, and the deadlines for action will soon pass. The inevitability of Iranian nuclear development is such that CNN reports that 71% believe that Iran already has the bomb, and 50% already believe military action is warranted if sanctions fail. As we know from our experience with Bush in Iraq shows, the trick is to make the case that all “reasonable efforts”have failed. After that America can be talked into almost anything. That is the case that the dogs of war are trying to make.

The Israeli’s appear ready to move by the summer, no later, and warnings appear everywhere that they are impatient with the American posture and American pressure to be patient. The Israeli PM, Netanyahu, met with a gaggle of Republican Senators last week, and is coming to Washington. Netanyahu has his own issues. The Jerusalem post reports that only 19% of Israelis want their government to act, if that means doing it without US support. Both the Senators’ visit and what will no doubt be a waterfall of opinion pieces by Israel’s so called friends in the US press coinciding with the Netanyahu visit are intended to put election year pressure on Obama to act.

There’s only one problem. While there is ample evidence that Iran is continuing to develop nuclear technology, the intelligence community both herein the US and elsewhere does not believe Iran has even decided whether or not to build a bomb. Last Friday the NY Times reported the consensus view of 16 separate intelligence agencies of the US government: “Recent assessments by American spy agencies are broadly consistent with a 2007 intelligence finding that concluded that Iran had abandoned its nuclear weapons program years earlier, according to current and former American officials. The officials said that assessment was largely reaffirmed in a 2010 National Intelligence Estimate, and that it remains the consensus view of America’s 16 intelligence agencies.”

Sound familiar? It ought to. The American public, half mad with grief and anger over 9-11, easily purchased the glossy lies and phantasmagorical fables Bush and the Intelligence communities were selling about WMD in Iraq. All of it turned out to be wrong, every last bit of it. David Kaye noted in last Friday’s Times article that the bar has been raised as a result of the Iraqi fiasco (my word, not his). Mr. Kay explained, “The amount of evidence that you were willing to go with in 2002 is not the same evidence you are willing to accept today.”

For weeks after the invasion right-wing radio abounded with stories of potential WMD finds, so hopeful were they that the fables would prove to be righteous. In absence of truths on the ground in Iraq, the American people were fed a steady diet of propaganda suggesting Iraqi involvement in 9-11. Even after the 9-11 Commission Report on the attacks was released in Nov-2004, Cheney in particular continued to hump the-- by then—obvious lie that Iraq was involved in the bombings at the WTC and the Pentagon.   

As we circle back to our current dilemma increasingly one begins to wonder if the real aim of the Iranians is to suggest that they are crazy enough to do it—to build a nuclear weapon within 500 miles of the Israeli capital--all the while taking in the world attention. Simultaneously they avoid what could be a catastrophically bad decision for them. Saddam Hussein tried this ruse with a half clever President. Hussein got to hide in a hole and eventually to be hung by his own people for his foolish bravado and that of his paranoid followers. The Supreme leader in Iran has ample reason to believe that his citizens would do the same to him given the opportunity. These are bad, bad guys with brutal records on human rights. The world may be better off without Saddam, but whether the world is better off as a result of the war that led to his ouster is another matter. One of the major consequences of the weakening of Iraq has been the strengthening of Iran.

North Korea has also been playing the “Look-At-Me” card. But in far more desperate circumstances that Iran, today the North Koreans folded to international pressure (even their sponsor China was antsy). In return for massive food aid North Korea claimed they would abandon both nuclear weapons and ballistic missile development. Time will tell if that new agreement stands. Others have not.

Meanwhile the world gets more complicated. The Arab spring has changed many facts on the ground. Hamas, Israel’s bitter and militant enemy in Gaza has moved from Syria and its orbit of Iranian influence there, to Doha. They have come out in favor of the civilian resistance to the Syrian government which aligns them at least in this instance with American policy. Hamas would destroy Israel without thought or reservation, but as with so many other foreign policy scenarios the complexity does not lend itself well to hysterical ramblings of ambitious politicians. Hamas is moving closer to reconciliation of the now far more moderate PLO. It remains to be seen if this is because the PLO is moving back towards radicalism and Infitada, or Hamas is moving towards some way out of the terrible hole it dug for itself. The pain of isolation and hunger and want in Gaza is matched only by the anger over lack of progress in the peace talks and the continued unilateral actions of the Israelis. Walls now enclose Palestinian communities and settlement activity goes on unabated and the Peace process is in cold storage. Whatever direction this takes, the Palestinians are now  a far more moderated force dependent on international recognition for their survival.

In Israel Defense Minister Ehud Barack has said the Iranians are "radicals but not total meshuginah (crazy)." The Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs has called the Iranians “rational actors”. These notes screw up the Amen chorus for military action and the Israeli PM and his media friends on the right are apoplectic with the diplo-speak. The Obama administration responding to Iranian signals they are ready to restart negotiations as recently enacted sanctions begin to take hold is urging Israeli restraint. Netanyahu is coming to push back and to gin up the first tool in machinery of war-- propaganda.  

The Israelis, in far more danger than America, of course see the Iranian situation playing out through glasses tinted with the colors of isolation and fear. Ahmadinejad, a Holocaust denier, has called for Israel’s complete destruction and made every effort to look slightly unhinged whenever he enters the world’s stage. But Israel’s friends do her no favors when they defend Israel no matter the course of action she chooses.

In the summer of 1982, prodded by an attempted assassination of an ambassador in the UK and rocket launches into their northern communities, Israel entered Lebanon to go after the PLO. Sharon, the then General of Israeli Defense forces and later Israeli PM, marched all the way to Beirut before getting bogged down with world opinion and close-quarters combat in the streets. Also looking for a victory over the PLO and its sponsor, the USSR, Reagan increased substantially the supply of weapons to our ally Israel. Soon enough the press was reporting questionable use of American made phosphorus charges and cluster bombs, both designed to inflict maximum civilian casualties and suffering.  Other than the pressure of the ensuing terror on its civilian population, none of the munitions had much effect on actual PLO fighters.

After much international pressure, Reagan sent 1,200 Marines to assist in an intentionally brokered evacuation effort designed to remove PLO leadership, save Israeli face, and stop the bombardment of Israeli and Lebanese civilian populations. What followed in short order was the murder of the Lebanese President, a Christian, the massacre of more than 800, and perhaps as many as 3,000 Palestinians in the Sabra and Shatilla refugee camps at the hand of Israel’s Christian allies in Lebanon, and the bombing of the Marine barracks in in Lebanon in in which 241 Marines were killed. Time and time again we make the same mistake. That part of the world always looks simpler from the perch from which American politicians devise their simple solutions.

In 2004, in the face of continuing sectarian violence and a deteriorating political environment, Reagan ordered the evacuation of all American military personnel from Lebanon. The Israelis left in 2000 with inconclusive results and under pressure from a war-weary electorate. They invaded Lebanon again in 2006 and again left with inconclusive results and world-wide criticism.  

The criticism of course only reinforces the strain of the Israeli conscience which wallows in isolation and xenophobic fear. This is not as easy as “Give-Peace-A-Chance”. This is a fearful and anxious time and the Iranian actors are as batsh** as they come. Coolers heads need to prevail and the American public needs to question the obvious answers that are presented. President Obama needs to stay strong in the face of right wing attacks that encourage further militarism and further loss.  

Americans, long sympathetic to the point of having a near blind spot as it pertains to Israel, need to remember the lessons of Iraq. We need to demand proof and see the facts for what they are. For all of the heat in regards the Iranian Nuclear situation there is precious little light. The level of ignorance and misinformation as the US once again edges to the precipice of war is stunning. This time, we need to know. Nothing less will do.