A Strike Is Looming
If Iran and the US continue on the present trajectory I am afraid another conflict will ensue, not conventional warfare but a strike on that countries uranium enrichment facilities’. The loss of life will be minimal, a truly unfortunate outcome of even a surgical attack but more satisfactory than soldiers and Marines against Iran’s military. A strike of this nature will set Iran’s nuclear program back a decade or so giving diplomacy another chance. You can bet the farm on world-wide outrage coming in the form of threats by some of our allies and accusations that America and our immoral ways is at the root of terrorism. Most of the threats and accusations will be rhetoric, words spoken to mislead less sophisticated governments and cultures that most everyone on the planet agrees that the US is at fault, as usual. The truth, of course, is most of those countries will be delighted that Iran’s nuclear buildup is temporarily in shambles. This situation is truly unfortunate, there are few winners, hardly any but given that as a fact the US must act soon. And how would this be done? As I write there are strategist hunkered around planning tables in the Pentagon working on many different scenarios.
Arnaud de Borchgrave is editor at large of The Washington Times and of UPI and the following is his most recent article:
Officially, all the Arab rulers of the Gulf and other Arab leaders are strenuously opposed to any Israeli and/or U.S. air strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities. But that opposition is eroding rapidly.
Speaking at the Aspen Institute in Colorado last week, the United Arab Emirates Ambassador to the U.S. Yousef al-Otaiba said publicly - before denying it - "I think despite the large amount of trade we do with Iran, which is close to $12 billion, there will be consequences, there will be a backlash, and there will be problems with people protesting and rioting and very unhappy that there is an outside force attacking a Muslim country; that is going to happen no matter what."
And he added, "If you are asking me, 'Am I willing to live with that, versus living with a nuclear Iran, my answer is still the same - 'We cannot live with a nuclear Iran.'" A former Arab leader, in close touch with current leaders, speaking privately and not for attribution, told this reporter July 6, "All the Middle Eastern and Gulf leaders now want Iran taken out of the nuclear arms business, and they all know sanctions won't work."
In a joint op-ed column, former Sen. Chuck Robb and Gen. Charles F. Wald, the air commander in the opening stages of Operation Enduring Freedom in Oct. 2001, say the time is now to prepare credibly for a U.S. military strike. "Sanctions can be effective only if coupled with open preparation for the military option as a last resort ... publicly playing down potential military options has weakened our leverage with Tehran, making a peaceful resolution less likely."
The temptation for President Obama to double down on Iran will grow rapidly as he concludes that Afghanistan will remain a festering sore as far as anyone can peer into a murky future, hardly a recipe for success at the polls in November. With a war in Afghanistan, which is bound to get worse, and a military theater in Iraq replete with sectarian violence, the bombing of Iran may give Mr. Obama a three-front war - and a chance to retain both houses of Congress. End of article.
The above article is reprinted with permission and it represents a fair share of the thinking within the the United Arab Emirates as well as most European and Southeast Asian countries. The point here is that Obama must toss his social work approach in favor of a much more aggressive stance.
http://marvinwiebener.tatepublishing.net
If Diplomacy Fails
Disorder and confusion seem accurate descriptive words when describing what is going on in and around Iran these days. But those terms don’t necessarily apply to that country alone. Half of the world—those countries with a vested interest in what’s going on there—are just as susceptible to the disarray.
According to a NYT report dated June 14, 2010 Senator McCain (who I am a fan of) called on the US to support regime change in Tehran, saying the UN sanctions are ‘inadequate’ and that it is unrealistic to expect the current government (Ahmadinejad/Khamenei and the IRGC) to stop pursuing nuclear weapons, supporting terrorism and cracking down on its own people.
Is there anyone in any of the pseudo or semi civilized countries around the globe that doesn’t know the UN sanctions are inadequate? And that it is unrealistic to expect… All this talk is wearing me down and personally I am so far removed from all that is going on regarding nukes and Iran that I can’t imagine what a burden it is to all who are immersed in the fray all day everyday. The problem lies in how we—the good guys, the naïve guys and the scared guys—respond to Iran’s slight-of-hand, shuck-and-jive, smoke-and-mirror approach to negotiations. All of us together—The US, China, Russia, GB, France—can not proffer a plan acceptable to the Islamic Republic that’s in turn acceptable to the participating countries. After a while everyone gets tired of the rhetoric and lack of success and just wants to go out for a drink or round of golf. In the meantime the citizens of Iran are between a rock and a hard place, suffering the consequences of their leader’s errant ways while the IRGC gets closer and closer to building a bomb.
I have a question, just curious; what would be the outcome, the price some country would pay in aftermath consequences if that country slapped Ahmadinejad with missiles through the front door of two or three nuclear enrichment facilities? We know the global uproar would be deafening but like everything else the hue and cry would be short lived. Of course there would be loss of life and, of course, there would be anti-US or GB or Israeli sentiment floating about and it would take time to recover diplomatically. However, the rhetoric used to chastise that government would most likely be in the form of an artificial rebuke to be documented within UN records. No government lashing out at the country responsible for the missiles would actually mean what they say. The ulterior message on the other hand would be tacit approval.
Now, all that country—the one willing to strike the enrichment facilities—has to do is make sure Iran is in fact enriching uranium to weapons grade and exactly where they are doing it. When it comes to aggression there is no room for error, there will be errors enough even if the strike is absolutely perfect.
Marvin Wiebener
WORLDWIDE GEOPOLITICAL CHAOS
I do not believe people that forecast the ‘end of the world as we know it’, whether the prediction comes from Biblical prophetic utterances (Armageddon), the Aztec’s or Nostradamus, it makes little difference, no one has the ability to predict the end –whatever your concept of that is. It is certain the world as we know it will change and dramatically so, it is also a certainty Homo sapiens will eventually become extinct here on earth either by our own hand or by the hand of nature but how and when will always remain a mystery.
Now, with that said, I am of the opinion the next generation will encounter a very humbling and even tragic period for the Earth, and all that populate it. One doesn’t need to use their imagination to see it coming; it’s simply a matter of opening our eyes to the mess we’ve made of things.
Who’s at Fault
We can begin by lining up the usual suspects ranging from individuals like Hitler and Hussein to religions, philosophies, sciences, governments, corporations and so on. In other words the question should be who isn’t to blame? Events occurring during the development of mankind have had an accumulation effect. Two hundred-thousand years of human progress (population growth and inventions designed specifically for the convenience of man) has brought us to the brink of disaster for man and a much needed recuperation period for Planet Earth.
I don’t blame early man or woman for inventing the wheel, they were just trying to make life a little easier and they had no idea what consequences (unintended) would arise from that discovery. I do not blame Henry Ford for the millions of deaths and millions of life-changing injuries caused by vehicle accidents resulting from the mechanization of auto manufacturing. I do not blame Bill Gates for the creation and manufacturing of computer software that makes possible the exchange of hideous photos and information around the world as in child pornography, vivid pictures of human executions and a whole lot more. These all fall under the ever present and menacing law of unintended consequences. Every thing we do, every thing we invent, discover or say has unintended consequences, absolutely every thing.
Today, all of us contribute to the Earth’s demise in some way. I don’t know when or how it happened but at some point—actually a series of points (events) that have accumulated over centuries—our leaders (and us too) caused the balance of culture and nature to gyrate out of control into a random spiral, a chaotic black hole right here on terra firma sucking every thing (the good and bad) in and spitting all of its energy out in the form of war, hatred, bigotry, not to mention crime and man-made health hazards.
I’ll illustrate by giving a snap-shot of just one recent day and you can tell me if you see chaos coming. The following is regarding Iran because that is what this blog features for the most part, however, the NEWS BRIEFS could as easily feature the US, or Thailand, Greece, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Central Africa, Iraq, Japan, China, Russia, etc.
NEWS BRIEFS
SUBJECT: Iran
Date: May 13, 2010 (a single day)
The following was collected from just one news site, United Against Nuclear Iran. I’ll paraphrase UANI’s paraphrasing, and if you are in doubt about accuracy check their archives where you can gain access to all of the reports.
Recently the US government prohibited US companies from doing business with Iran as part of the sanctions imposed on Ahmadinejad, the president and Khamenei, the supreme spiritual leader. Of course, when all the US companies pulled out of Iran that cut deep into the companies profits which ultimately added to our unemployment which added to a significant loss of spendable income for Americans not to mention tax revenue for the same government (ours) that imposed the sanctions in the first place. Well, friend, that ain’t all. The United States of America is more openly opposed to Iran having nuclear weapons than anyone else in the world, and why is that? One reason is because Iran’s economy is strong, they have money, oil, natural gas and most other influential nations don’t. Iran wants to sell its petroleum products and China, Russia, and a whole slew of other big and small countries want to buy so they are not nearly as invested in sanctions as is the US. They actually are but they want to keep it a secret, France doesn’t want to make Iran too angry by joining the US in a big way, and instead of ‘foot-stomping’ they only ‘toe-tap’ their ire.
Our government has prohibited US companies from doing (a lucrative) business with Iran, so, do ‘sanctions’ work and who is hurt the most? The US is hamstrung financially by imposing restrictions and that’s not all—our government (the government that prohibited US companies from doing business in Iran) has awarded in recent years $880 million to seven foreign companies involved in Iran’s energy sector. Where are those profits and taxes going? Yes, you are right; they are going to the foreign countries holding the contracts with the US. According to the Bloomberg Report Boeing and Exxon Mobil are lobbying to fend off tightened sanctions against Iran, why? Because it may cost $25 billion in US exports, that’s why. That’s $25 billion Americans need to ward off the severe effects of the global financial crisis. The report goes on to say that Legislation now before Congress would expand a 1996 law penalizing foreign companies that invest in Iran’s oil industry. To me that spells trouble for the United States from a financial perspective. And of course it spells more trouble for most all the other countries too.
CAN WE HANDLE THE TRUTH?
It may sound as though I am against sanctioning Iran and other countries doing business with that country but there is nothing further from the truth. The problem with pushing for everyone (China, Russia, France, Great Britain and others) to sanction Iran—the only way sanctions can be effective—is for the citizens of the US to be willing to embrace REAL austerity, and I mean R-E-A-L austerity. Can you see the turbulence brewing? I know we are NOT Thailand or Greece but, nevertheless, what is happening there can happen here.
RUSSIAN RHETORIC
You might recall that I am paraphrasing major news reports from just one day in May to illustrate my point that drastic changes are on the way. On that same day (May 13, 2010) Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov warned the United States and other Western nations against imposing unilateral sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program, Interfax reported. What next?!
Making a Point
I did not think it would be a mistake to take a few weeks away from posting to this blog and I was right. Scanning through news about Iran and her president Ahmadinejad I find the same or nearly the same banter taking place now as was making news six weeks ago. The word game continues and I suppose that is okay as long as President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton don’t blink. As I’ve mentioned in previous articles we’ve already taken a weaker stand by the mere fact the US continues to move its line-in-the-sand back not forward. The AP reported two weeks ago that Sec’y Clinton vowed the Obama administration will not accept a nuclear armed Iran and is working on sanctions “that will bite”. Just how many ways and how many times will the US make threats before actually doing something. Any child psychologist will tell parents not to threaten unless you are willing to back it up. It’s not just good child psychology it is also common sense. Some time in the near future the US will need to make a serious point and the longer we wait the more serious the point will have to be.
Obama's Social Work Approach
During the first year of Barak Obama’s presidency it has been the rant of conservatives (of which I am one) that Obama is weakening the US with his bowing to other world leaders and accepting blame for some of the world’s misguided moments and even apologizing on the world stage. Obama is trying a new tactic, an outstretched hand, apologies, community organizing, taking a meeker stand on issues of national importance. I call it a social work approach to exercising his influence and authority over domestic and foreign matters, in other words—a passive approach to governance. This approach emboldens our adversaries and contrary to popular belief extending a cooperative hand does not produce the desired social work outcome of mutual respect. Instead, our adversaries see it as an opportunity to strike. Iran, for the moment an adversary, will find some subtle way of striking. It won’t be a nuclear bomb, or frontal attack on our military or an assassination of a high ranking American. Most likely it will be in the form of financing a small band of Islamic fanatics (proxies, as in insurgents and suicide bombers) so they can plant a bomb in a train or a hotel in Madrid owned by free market capitalists. Another IED placed strategically near a US or ally foreign embassy. The list of ways Iran can ‘strike’ is long and as complicated to disrupt as is the government to understand.
Why Libya Abandoned its Nuke Program
While reading articles about Iran featured on my abbreviated news service this morning an opinion piece featured in The Guardian caught my eye. The author, Bennett Ramberg, penned that in December 2003 Libya abandoned its nuclear weapons program. Ramberg called this a dramatic shift and credited sanctions as the key motivator. He is hopeful that sanctions, plus other forms of pressure (like those used in Libya) will help turn Iran around. The key phrase, if you read his article closely, is “…plus other forms of pressure…” but he fails to mention what other forms of pressure he is referring to. Ramberg also fails to mention Libya is somewhat isolated from other supportive Arab states and that they don’t have much of a defense system. The other forms of pressure I believe he’s not crediting enough were those that could be exerted by coalition military forces. Sanctions within the realm of pressure-diplomacy are almost always effective when the country(s) enforcing the sanctions have a weaponized Blackhawk hovering over head. The element necessary for reasonable diplomacy to take hold is fear. Fear of loosing real-estate, possessions, supremacy, status, family and finally fear of loosing ones life. It is basic survival mentality, although during the last few hundred years we’ve dressed it up and called it different things: relationship building, negotiation, mediation, conciliation, compromise and so on. All these approaches work as long as the fear of loosing something is a part of the equation, and the only sure fire way to convey that is to flex muscle. This is not a psychological issue, subject to analyzing and treating in terms of civilizing the opponents, it is clearly genetic—a part of our DNA and neurologically hardwired into our brain. Don’t look to psychologist for answers to why we war, look instead to an anthropologist.
Marvin Wiebener
Visit Wiebener’s website at http://marvinwiebener.tatepublishing.net/ . He invites comments on any of his many articles about Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Agree or not, it doesn’t matter and he always responds.
Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, Haiti, The Budget???
I’m ready to pull my hair out, if I had any that is. In reality I’ve been in this state of mind for some time now—frustrated, angry, beside-myself—and growing more so every day. Oh yes, I hear you; you’re not interested in my issues after all you’ve got your own stuff to worry about, right? But listen, if I haven’t lost you yet please hang on a few lines more to see if you agree with my concerns that have me frustrated, angry and beside-myself.
Look at what is fresh off the press today February 8, 2010:
- Officials with the Council on Foreign Relations tell us that Iran is continuing to provide funding, weapons, training and sanctuary to numerous terrorist groups based in the Middle East.
- Reuters headlines read, “Iran has rejected Western overtures and the international community has no choice but to move toward imposing new sanctions over its (Iran) nuclear program…”
- The New York Times: “Iran’s president ordered his atomic scientists on Sunday to begin enriching their stockpile of uranium in order to power a medical reactor…”
- L. A. Times: “Iranian officials trumpeted new nuclear and military ambitions Monday in the face of domestic political discord and stepped up international talk of tightening economic sanctions against the Islamic Republic.”
These are but a few of the headlines specific to Iran, and with our own surplus of domestic troubles our government seems to be paying less and less attention to the looming crisis the Islamic Republic is presenting. Iran, whether they realize it or not, have the US over a barrel and here is why. The US is facing its worst financial crisis since the depression years resulting in deeper debt to countries that, just a few years ago, were considered adversarial—how comforting is that? Secondly we are engaged in two wars—one of which has been conducted by men with rusty weapons who reside in caves and ride horses. And thirdly a humanitarian effort of epic proportions that is costing us more than money. All this under the U.S. Commander in Chief most enemies and allies alike see as weak—whether he is or not it’s the perception that counts.
My frustration comes from what I perceive as our own government locked in a stalemate. A pissing contest that makes the 2010 Super Bowl appear minor league. The government impasse (including all office holders of the legislative branch and the executive branch, Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Independent, TEA Partier, left wing nut, and right wing moral majority fanatic) has created a gridlock forcing the central nervous system of those humans to shift gears without benefit of engaging the clutch. The gears are shredding and the transmission is about to fail. Instead of using our collective heads to resolve these serious matters our leaders from the president on down insist on playing childish games, accumulating tiny bits of egregious knowledge, blowing that information out of proportion and hammering the perceived opponent with it. Political leadership are assuredly in the midst of a drunken brawl, intoxicated with the need to be right as well as their need for power and authority. The nervous system has triggered the production of adrenaline in those men and women and in turn their bodies have redirected blood flow to muscles waiting for the signal to fight or run. The physical effect of conducting government business in this manner results in less cognitive interaction and with that—consequently—less cooperation and with that less bridge-building and with that more disorganization… It seems to this average American that we are getting no where and along the path to no where a workable solution too many of the worlds problems remains illusive.
The point of referring to the four—among many—headlines mentioned above is to say that nothing new is happening to resolve this crisis. Those “official reports” aren’t enlightening or informative, it’s just more of the same.
Marvin Wiebener
IS A COUP D’ETAT LOOMING IN IRAN’S FUTURE?
Trying to understand and simultaneously untangle the current political set of circumstances in Iran is fruitless. There is no head on this snake, so to speak, no one entity or person that stands out as a leader the citizens of that country can put their trust in. Another analogy might be that there are too many heads on this snake. There is the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader and his group. Then there is Ahmadinejad, the President and his followers. You can’t overlook Mojtaba Samareh Hashemi, Ahmadinejad’s right-hand man, who has implicit power within Iran’s secular government. On Iran’s spiritual leadership side there is Mohammad Taqi Mesbah Yazdi, spiritual advisor to Ahmadinejad and described as fanatical and extremely hostile to the West. Yazdi advocates suicide bombing attacks against Israel and is a vocal supporter of Iran’s quest for nuclear weapons. To add fuel to this fire I must mention General Mohammed Ali Jafari, Commander of the IRGC (read my last article titled: AND THE GUARDS GROW STRONGER).
Now, you may be asking why I’m listing Iran’s leadership hierarchy in this manner and thinking ‘what’s the significance.’ Some might see this list similar to that of the USA—President Bush and his spiritual advisors (Billy Graham until recently), the Vice President, influential friend of the military and advocate of force. General Patreaus the supreme commander of everything military in Middle East, and Karl Rove a powerful political figure wielding implicit power. [I’m using the immediate past administration as my example due in part to the fact I am uncertain about the current administrative hierarchy] The answer is simple and it is why I live in America and not somewhere else. The likelihood of a coup d’etat in the US is almost impossible given the fail-safe mechanisms built into the operation of our government. Thank the framers of the U.S. Constitution for that. Iran and its government, on the other hand, are at the mercy of fanaticism born from various interpretations of scripture passages from the Koran. That won’t happen in the US either and you can thank the framers for that one too. General Patreaus won’t and for that matter can not circle his very powerful wagons and overthrow the US government. Vice President Cheney, no matter how hawkish, couldn’t muster his followers and make a run on the West Wing. But, any of this and lots more can happen in Iran because they lack the constitution that could keep a lid on political, religious and cultural volcanic events. There is no rule for-the-people-by-the-people in Iran. Murder and torture are approved techniques for persuasion in Iran. Martyrdom is an approved recruitment method for jihadist. With this combination of constructs available to all the various potential divergent groups in Iran anything can happen and very little of it good.
Marvin Wiebener, author of The Margin and The Moriah Ruse
Visit Wiebener’s website at: http://marvinwiebener.tatepublishing.net/
AND THE GUARDS GROW STRONGER
In the previous article titled, “If Iran’s Present Regime is Overthrown, Consider This” I described the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as being a combination of powerful entities similar to the US’s own Delta Force, the CIA, FBI and Warren Buffett. The Warren Buffett analogy is in reference to the IRGC’s business interest. According to an article in The New York Times dated January 14 the Iranian Parliament is now investigating the rise of a pseudo-government within its own border. This investigation was prompted by the recent takeover of a majority share of Iran’s telecommunications monopoly by the Revolutionary Guard. This isn’t the only “business” venture the Guards have a working interest in, and that raises the question of why is this happening. The pseudo-government concept is of particular interest when you consider the IRGC’s other activities namely: providing weapons and money to the Taliban, training Islamic radicals in the art of martyrdom (suicide bombers) as well as the art of terrorism and guerilla warfare (Hamas and Hezbollah). The obvious answer is that this pseudo-government is acquiring businesses looking to profit monetarily but unlike businesses in the US where profits go to research and development, expansion and profit sharing these pseudo-government profits are for the purpose of financing the IRGC’s more scurrilous activities mentioned in the previous sentence. More to the point and the real concern, as far as I am concerned, is who's responsible for this. Is it Ahmadinejad, the president or is it Ayatollah Ali Khamenei Iran’s supreme leader? Could it be both or is one or the other accumulating power in hopes of securing their authority as Iran’s leader. The Parliament doesn’t know, they are the ones ordering the investigations. Do you see the hand-writing on the wall? I think I do but then I might just be delusional. Before I put my foot in my mouth I am going to think about this and I’ll offer those thoughts, delusions or simply a figment of my imagination, in a day or two.
IF IRAN’S PRESENT REGIME IS OVERTHROWN, CONSIDER THIS
Of course I am all for the overthrow of Ahmadinejad, Iran’s president and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme religious leader (a higher rank than president). But I am very concerned about what kind of leadership will evolve in the interim, that chaotic period between the downfall of one regime and the rise of a new and hopefully a better one.
My concern is based on the fact that while Ahmadinejad and the theocratic leadership are losing ground in favor of a growing democratic mentality there exists in Iran a shadowy element that covets power and authority at any cost. They are radical in the strictest Islamic tradition, and ruthless, they control the military and are business savvy—an ominous set of characteristics when considering possible outcomes of a government overthrow. The organization of which I speak is of course the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), think Delta Force, CIA, FBI and Warren Buffett all wrapped up in a bit of fascism. The IRGC was originally formed by the Ayatollah Ali Khomeini in 1979 during the fall of the Shah and the resurgence of theocracy in Iran.
This Khomeini (now deceased) should not be confused with the present supreme leader Khamenei—note the slight difference in spelling of the name.
The IRGC was given powers commensurate with the needs of a supreme religious leader. Since then those powers have grown substantially and today their influence is both feared and respected.
My concern is an obvious one, as they say—“It isn’t rocket science.” What if during the turmoil of a regime change the IRGC decides it doesn’t like what it sees for its future and decides to intervene. Lets not fool ourselves, they are powerful enough to do it and their propensity toward fanaticism is unmistakable. And the IRGC leadership makes no bones about their nuclear ambitions. What happens then?
Marvin Wiebener