I’ve been debating  on whether or not we are in a crisis over Iran’s nuclear program. This weekend a number of articles, in the UK, US and Asia, confirmed my fears. Iran presents a true crisis of larger import than the Cuban Missile crisis. We’re beyond that hour.

Last night, I had a ‘what if opposite’ moment, more on that below. My ‘what If’ and today’s piece by Professor Juan Cole gave me chills and the confirmation that we’re facing the unthinkable.

So let’s begin with Professor Cole. His piece puts the Plame leak – the real intent – into perspective. I beg the professor’s leave, my quoting his piece at length. More below

Professor Cole
  “Plame Wilson Had worked on Iran Ant-Proliferation” (02/14/2006)

[..]

Plame Wilson was outed to the US press by Vice President Richard Bruce Cheney, his staffer Irving Lewis Libby, and George W. Bush adviser Karl Rove.

There has for some time been speculation among bloggers that Cheney et al. wanted to shoot down 🙂 Plame Wilson for reasons other than that she is the wife of Ambassador Joseph Wilson IV, who blew the whistle on intelligence failures concerning alleged Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.
If she was working specifically on Iran, this theory becomes more plausible. We know that Cheney, the Neocons and other factions in the Bush administration desperately wanted to get up a war against Iran so as to overthrow its government.

If the CIA was successful in a measurable way in preventing proliferation to Iran of technology required for making a nuclear weapon, and could certify as much to Congress, that very success would make it harder to justify a war on Iran.

We know that someone among the Neoconservatives also let Ahmad Chalabi know that the US had broken Iranian codes and could read that country’s secret diplomatic correspondence.

[..]

Prof. Cole speculates

So between disrupting the work of Plame Wilson’s unit at the CIA and letting the Iranians know about the broken codes, the pro-war party managed to make Iran’s actual progress on nuclear research opaque to the US government.  It was necessary that it be opaque if there was to be a war. Iran is actually a decade or two away from having a bomb even if everything went well.  But US intelligence agencies must be less confident they know what is going on in Iran now than before the Neocons destroyed so much of the effort against Iranian proliferation. It was the US withdrawal of inspectors from Iran in 1998 that created the uncertainties that allowed Bush to invade Iraq. For warmongers, good intelligence on the enemy’s capabilities is undesirable if that intelligence would get in the way of launching a war.

 If the speculation were true, the scale of treason emanating from Rove and Cheney and his staff is scarcely imaginable. emphasis mine

Link to full article here

On the road to war with Iran there are experts cautioning. They, like those who cautioned us on Iraq, are voices in the wilderness. One such voice is John Pilger who writes

[L]ike the invasion of Iraq, an attack on Iran has a secret agenda that has nothing to do with the Tehran regime’s imaginary weapons of mass destruction.

[..]Iran offers no “nuclear threat.” There is not the slightest evidence that it has the centrifuges necessary to enrich uranium to weapons-grade material.

[..]

Those who flout the rules of the NPT are America’s and Britain’s anointed friends. Both India and Pakistan have developed their nuclear weapons secretly and in defiance of the treaty. The Pakistani military dictatorship has openly exported its nuclear technology. In Iran’s case, the excuse that the Bush regime has seized upon is the suspension of purely voluntary “confidence-building” measures that Iran agreed with Britain, France and Germany in order to placate the US and show that it was “above suspicion.” Seals were placed on nuclear equipment following a concession given, some say foolishly, by Iranian negotiators and which had nothing to do with Iran’s obligations under the NPT.
Iran has since claimed back its “inalienable right” under the terms of the NPT to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes.
Recently, one of Israel’s leading military historians, Martin van Creveld, wrote: “Obviously, we don’t want Iran to have nuclear weapons and I don’t know if they’re developing them, but if they’re not developing them, they’re crazy.”

Pilger states that Blair knows ‘the real reasons for an attack and the part Britain is likely to play.’emphasis mine

Next month, Iran is scheduled to shift its petrodollars into a euro-based bourse. The effect on the value of the dollar will be significant, if not, in the long term, disastrous. At present the dollar is, on paper, a worthless currency bearing the burden of a national debt exceeding $8trn and a trade deficit of more than $600bn. The cost of the Iraq adventure alone, according to the Nobel Prizewinning economist Joseph Stiglitz, could be $2trn. America’s military empire, with its wars and 700-plus bases and limitless intrigues, is funded by creditors in Asia, principally China.

That oil is traded in dollars is critical in maintaining the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. What the Bush regime fears is not Iran’s nuclear ambitions but the effect of the world’s fourth-biggest oil producer and trader breaking the dollar monopoly. Will the world’s central banks then begin to shift their reserve holdings and, in effect, dump the dollar? Saddam Hussein was threatening to do the same when he was attacked.

Link to full article: “Iran: The next War” here

A conflict that could last for generations? That’s the assessment of the Oxford Group, a British Think Tank whose predictions on Iraq were dead on.

 

The Oxford Group report, “Iran:Consequences of a War” ‘coincides with reports that strategists at the Pentagon are drawing up plans for “a last resort” strike if diplomacy fails. Plans for an assault have taken on “greater urgency” in recent months,’ The Sunday Telegraph said.

[..]

[T]he attack would result in “a protracted military confrontation” involving Israel, Lebanon and some Gulf states.

[..]The report concludes: “A military response to the current crisis is a particularly dangerous option and should not be considered further. Alternative approaches must be sought, however difficult these may be.”

Link to full article, “10,000 would die in A-plant attack on Iran” here

Here’s my ‘What If’:

We were sold the Iraq war lies, lies..”Saddam had to be disarmed his weapons of mass destruction..but no decision has been made.”

We were, like they say, true believers. No WMDs were found.

Now we’re being told Iran cannot be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons. National pride will not deter Iran from being pressured – the lessons of North Korea.

What IF we go on a bombing campaign “to pre-empt”, there’s that word again, acquisition only to be on the receiving end; – after the first sortie, Iran’s  nuclear retaliation?

Experts say they can’t be sure.

Iran has been working at this for 15 years. They had access to Dr Khan’s nuclear technology. Didn’t they? It is known Khan shopped the nuclear technology. Iran has disclosed that much. And, it is established some of the Iran’s equipment was purchased from Pakistan. And we have not been allowed to question Dr. Khan-no pressure on our new ally, Pakistan.

In 1981, Iranians saw the destruction of Iraq’s nuclear reactor by Israel and they noted Israel’s arsenal of nukes.
Like Martin Van Creveld wrote, Iran would’ve been crazy not to have developed nukes.  I opine, just maybe they bought a stack of nuclear weapons – openly available after the fall of the USSR.

For the sake of oil and to save the dollar for ourselves are we willing to begin a resource based nuclear war with China, Russia and 1.5 billion muslims worldwide?  Do they not all hold a stake in this? Do we?

  I’m no expert but it does appear Iran will have its nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. Keeping up with the jones and its neighbors-Pakistan, India and Israel.

Just wonderin’ Should we risk the world?