Seymour Hersch haas another of his sensational “exposes” about an imminent US military attack on Iran to destroy Iran’s fledgling nuclear capability (see “the Next Act,” 27 November 06) Hersh’s article also alleges that the Pentagon is attempting to overthrow Iran's government via covert support for Iran’s Kurdish, Azeri and Baluchi separatists. Finally, Hersh alleges that Robert Gates, who in his recent writings has favored a US-Iran détente and US concessions to gain Iran’s cooperation in Iraq, is in reality secretly anti-Iran and is being brought on board to fool Congress and the US public that the VP Cheney hard-liners have lost control of the Iran policy.
My goodness, if anti-Iran “Cheney hardliners” are still in control of the Bush administration, and are preparing to take imminent action, Iran should be trembling in its boots, correct?
Far from trembling in its boots, Iran is acting as though the US no longer exists. In Lebanon, Iran has unleashed Hezbollah to bring down the democratic, pro-US government, eliciting only pro-forma protests from the US. As far as Iran’s nuclear program is concerned, Teheran’s policy is full speed ahead with Iran making no pretense whatsoever of further cooperation with the UN.
Moreover, the US has encouraged Iran’s obduracy by liberalizing US sanctions in the strategic area of technological upgrades for Iran’s Airbus fleet. The US has readily granted Ahmadinejad and Khatami visas without political preconditions to visit the US. Rumsfeld, who genuinely disliked Ahmadinejad, is out, while the genuinely pro-Iran Gates is in. The anti-Iran Republican House of Representatives is out, while the relatively more pro-Iran Democrat-controlled House is in, with the pro-Iran “dialogue” (i.e. US concessions) Rep. Lantos in charge of the policy.
Best of all, it seems as though the pro-Iran James Baker gang, with full Democratic Party support, has commandeered President Bush’s stagecoach and is holding him prisoner. At this point a skeptic would say that the Bush administration seems eager to meet all of Iran’s terms to get its 147,000 hostages back.
It is no surprise that Iran’s fuhrer Ahmadinejad smiles all the time.
However, three hard-nosed countries will wipe that smile off Ahmadinejad’s face: Syria, Lebanon and Iraq (Israel has been co-opted into a pro-Iran stance). Unlike Czechoslovakia in 1938, which did what it was told and surrendered, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq are resisting. More than that, they will prevail over Iran.
This is because Iran has made three irretrievable mistakes. First, Iran will find it difficult to subdue Syria, Lebanon, or Iraq on separate terms, but to subdue all three, and in the same time frame, is well beyond Iran’s reach. In this regard, today’s press reports that Iraq's anti-Iran Shia leader Muqtada Al-Sadr, who is pro-Syrian, has made several recent visits to Damascas, including one lasting two weeks. Iran, watch out. Iraq’s resistance is getting organized.
Iran's second big mistake is underestimating the Arab states that will defend Syria, Lebanon and Iraq. In fact, Iran is crazy if it think the Sunni Arabs will give way, like the UK and France in 1938. They cannot give way when a coalition between them and Iran’s intended victims would dominate the Middle East. Iran, in contrast, will have no allies as it sets out to create a Persian empire.
Iran’s third big mistake is to choose the US as a partner. Not only is the US a political liability for Iran, the US cannot be seen as a reliable Iranian ally, especially in Iraq, where the US Congress, even under Democratic Party control, will shrink back from turning over Basra and southern Iraq to Iran.
This brings us back to the original question. Why is the Bush administration leaking anti-Iran war fantasies to Seymour Hersh? That’s easy. Such fantasies constitute “red meat for the red states,” and also constitute a US gift to Ahmadinejad, who can use them to shore up support for his Nazi regime.
