Rumblings of War With Iran: National Call-In to Congress Tomorrow

Bill Sloat noted this morning that a surge in the price of gold last week is being interpreted by a prominent market analyst as confirmation that "the world smells war in the Middle East, specifically an attack on Iran."

Such good timing. Tomorrow is the National Call-In for Diplomacy sponsored the Campaign for a New American Policy on Iran (CNAPI), and Sloat's chilling item is a excellent reminder why it is so important to participate. CNAPI will be holding an innovative “Time to Talk with Iran” event and press conference on Capitol Hill at 10:00 a.m. tomorrow, at which members of Congress, celebrities, former officials, and other citizens will use a row of 60’s-era red “hotline” telephones to talk directly to ordinary Iranian citizens. Concurrently, CNAPI asks concerned Americans all over the country to call your U.S. Representative tomorrow at 1-800-788-9372 and urge them to work for direct, unconditional, and comprehensive talks between the U.S. and Iran, keeping in mind that the U.S. and Iran share common interests in a stable Iraq, the Middle East and Afghanistan, and there is no real reason to avoid talking to Iran since the U.S. pursued negotiations with brutal dictatorships in North Korea and Libya.

A reader wrote to me late last week to report that a group called Cleveland Peace Action has been lobbying northeast Ohio members of Congress and writing letters to the editor warning against a military attack on Iran. As part of this effort, Case Western Reserve University emeritus faculty member Norman Robbins put together a short memorandum that documents the saber-rattling activities of the Bush administration, the feeble case for concern about Iran, and why Congress should do something about it (including passing a resolution that would require formal Congressional authorization before attacking Iran). Prof. Robbins' disturbing report is reproduced in it's entirety after the break.

June 5, 2008

CONGRESS NEEDS TO ACT QUICKLY TO PREVENT WAR WITH IRAN
Cleveland Peace Action; contact N. Robbins, nxr@cwru.edu

Indications that the U.S. may attack military bases in Iran:

Beginning with General Petraeus’ testimony before Congress, an ever-increasing chorus of administration officials have echoed the same theme: Iranian weapons and Iranian trained militia are killing Americans in Iraq.

The clearly coordinated and scripted team includes Chair of the Joint Chiefs Mullen¹, Sec. of Defense Gates², CIA Director Hayden³, and current and former Ambassadors to the U.N. Khalilzad⁴ and Bolton⁵. These accusations have been accompanied by the introduction of a second U.S. aircraft carrier in the Gulf², a report that the National Security Council has approved plans for an attack on Iranian bases⁶, a statement from Admiral Mullen about “potential military courses of action”¹, a CBS report that the State Department is preparing an ultimatum for Iran², and recent joint discussions on Iran between the Israeli Defense Forces, Admiral Mullen, and NATO⁷. Reports of upcoming U.S. attacks alternating with denials⁸, calls for a blockade of Iran’s oil⁹, and Israeli threats¹⁰, all create a “hair trigger” atmosphere in which a minor skirmish could quickly spiral into war.

How strong is the evidence for Iranian military intervention in Iraq?

The Pentagon has alleged that Iran has supplied Iraqi insurgents with weapons, but has yet to display any captured Iranian weapons, has already withdrawn one such claim¹¹, and has deferred to the Iraqi government to investigate its claims, which the Iraqis said were “not conclusive”¹², and which Iraqi President Talabani flatly denied¹³.

Others have pointed out that it is difficult to distinguish between smuggled and officially supplied weapons. Iran may assist or train Iraqi Shiites, but the extent of the assistance, if any, is unknown, and is certainly not a strong basis for attacking Iran. Ambassador Bolton criticized British Intelligence, which said that America had exaggerated Iran’s military role in Iraq, as “dead wrong”¹⁴, but the British intelligence he mentions has yet to be released. Hypocritically, the Bush Administration has reportedly obtained Congressional approval for clandestine actions within Iran – the very type of intervention the US would condemn if it were carried out by Iran within Iraq¹⁵. Several guerilla groups, one even labeled as terrorist by the U.S. and another outlawed by the Kurdish government, apparently conduct forays into Iran with American support¹⁶.

Revival of charges that Iran is developing a nuclear bomb:

Despite the December 2007 NIE report¹⁷ that Iran ceased work on a nuclear weapon in 2003, and IAEA statements that have never claimed that Iran had a nuclear weapons program (despite recent allegations still to be clarified¹⁸), Secretary of State Rice, Israeli Prime Minister Olmert, and Senators McCain and Obama have all recently asserted that Iran has a nuclear weapons program¹⁹. In response to this alleged threat, Olmert⁹ and the Wall St. Journal²⁰ have proposed a blockade of Iranian imports of refined petroleum, even though this would be an outright act of war and would impose real hardship on innocent Iranian citizens.

Lack of public awareness of the “blowback” from an attack on Iran:

Unfortunately, when the mainstream American media covers threats of an attack on Iran, there is rarely any discussion of what the Iranians might do in response. It is folly to plan an attack without considering the “worst case” Iranian response. For instance, if Iran responded by attacking an American base or boat, this would likely precipitate a major American military response, which would likely provoke all-out war, quite possibly involving Israel as well.

War games (e.g. Atlantic Monthly²¹) have shown that an attack on Iran would have disastrous consequences. The New York Times reported that “a large number of senior military leaders share Admiral Fallon’s broad assessment that a war with Iran would bring unexpected and, perhaps, unmanageable, risks elsewhere in the Muslim world and around the globe”²². Gasoline prices at $7 a gallon and more American casualties are possibilities that would severely affect Americans. Even an Iranian human rights Nobel prize winner warns that an attack would strengthen Iranian hardliners²³.

It falls to Congress to question what the catastrophic consequences of an attack on Iran by the U.S. or Israel might be. Meanwhile, the drumbeats of war are getting louder, and preventive action is ever more urgent. Once an attack is launched, there will be no way to prevent escalation.

1. Congress should immediately pass one of the many pending resolutions (e.g. S. Res. 356, S. 759, H. J. Res. 14, H. Con. Res. 33) requiring formal Congressional authorization before attacking Iran.

3. Congress should insist that the Administration open broad unconditional negotiations with Iran, in which Iranian as well as American concerns receive a respectful response.

Endnotes:

1. “U.S. Weighing Readiness for Military Action Against Iran,” by Ann Scott Tyson, Washington Post, April 26, 2008. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/04/25/ST20080425...

23. “Shirin Ebadi: Don’t Attack Iran,” by Robert Dreyfuss, The Nation, April 29, 2008. http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080512/dreyfuss/print