IRAN AND WHAT MAY LIE AHEAD!

 

 

Soon after he took over President Bush described Iran in evangelical terms as one of the three members of Axis of Evil.  One other member of this trinity was North Korea.  Confrontation with North Korea was persistently continued until after it became nuclear- a stark reminder of Bush's policy failure to stem the tide of nuclear proliferation. Finally, the Americans had to enter into serious negotiations to try to turn the clock back.  In the case of Iran, the American rhetoric has increased both in frequency as well as intensity. This may be intended to create uncertainty and increase pressure on Iran, but not knowing Bush's mind which regards military use as his first option to resolve national as well as international problems, the possibility of an attack appears more than real. An imminent possibility of armed attack by the Americans in the coming weeks cannot be dismissed out of hand as an act of lunacy.

 

American Presidents, particularly those that have done nothing to deserve a respectable mention in history worry about their legacy, when they are about to leave. The incumbent has left nothing but mayhem, death and destruction wherever he has focused his attention, whether it is Afghanistan, Iraq or Lebanon. So he wants something to gloat over in retirement. Iran to him offers an opportunity of redeeming himself. At least that is what he thinks. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice is reported to have advised the President to devote his final two years in office to seeking diplomatic solution with Iran.  Whether Bush listens to her or the neo cons has as yet to be seen.

 

. In pursuit of the gung ho policy, aircraft carriers-the Eisenhower and the Stennis- have been sent to the area in preparation for the onslaught. Secret operations have been launched in Iran, Lebanon and Syria to gather intelligence. Even Israeli agents are operating in Iran.  Acts of sabotage have been witnessed of late all over including on Pakistanis borders in Zahedan. The clandestine operations orchestrated by the Americans with funding left to the Saudis have obviously been kept secret from American people and the Congress.  A special planning group has been established in pentagon for a possible bombing attack within 24 hours of the orders of the President. The key players in the conspiracy of silence are Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the Saudi National Security Advisor and neo conservatives including Elliot Abrams. This is the same Bandar who had egged Bush on for an aggression against Iraq, according to Bob Woodward.

 

Pakistan would be a key player in the chess game because of its geographical location. Pakistan's Chief of Army Staff was commissioned by the Americans to host an all Arab Foreign Ministers conference in Islamabad as well as visit neighbors to drum up support in the region as part of Saudi-American strategy. Pakistan has proved its usefulness even in the past when it supported the US in its war against the Soviets and then in 2001 when out of fear for being pushed into the stone age it hastily allowed Afghanistan to be attacked and occupied by the Americans under the fig leaf of NATO.

 

According to Seymour M. Hersh writing on Saudi Arabia And Israel Cooperation To Defeat Iran, the Americans are pursuing a policy of reconfiguring the Middle East along Shia-Sunni divide and in the process have started helping and funding Sunni extremist groups including Salafis who are sick and hateful, because they hate the Shias with a passion.  This project has brought Saudi Arabia and Israel into a new strategic relationship.

 

According to the Hezbollah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, the Americans are bent on dividing the Muslim world and draw a new map for the region.  , They according to him want the partition of Iraq, Iran and Lebanon, so that, "partition would leave Israel surrounded by small tranquil states.'

 

The United States appears to be pursuing a policy of starting a civil war in the Muslim world by creating a Shia-Sunni divide.  Having succeeded in Iraq in fomenting a vicious civil war where there was none before its invasion in 2003, it has gone for a regional civil war where every group fighting the other would need American help to survive.  Americans do not seem to care how many lives are lost.  In Iraq close to a million people have died after the second invasion of 2003 and about 60,000 people are migrating everyday.

 

Pressure on Iran has been increased and Americans have started blaming it for their monumental failure to control Iraq.  Americans have shown no respect for diplomatic norms and have arrested Iranian diplomats in Iraq. Iranian aid workers have not been spared either. Not only that, they have kidnapped a former Iranian Minister of Defense from Turkey to gather intelligence on Iran. Unlike Iraq crushed under ten years' biting sanctions that degraded the country to the status of third world, its economic infrastructure all but destroyed in the so called First Gulf War and all weapons destroyed bit by bit, Iran might present some nasty surprises, although in the last analysis it is no match for the superior weaponry of the US.

 

This would not be the first time that Iran would be subjected to aggression in recent history.  It had to endure eight-years proxy war where Americans and Saudis helped Iraq. Iranian revolution received a serious setback because of the war. The Americans destroyed oil platforms, eliminated its navy and targeted missiles at passenger planes, according to Fisk. Saudi Arabia and Kuwait spent close to $404 billion on funding Iraq aggression against Iran, at the behest of the Americans. Both Iran and Iraq spent $1.5 billion a month on war. Iraq used 60 major chemical attacks.  More than a million and a half people perished.  About half a million Iraqis died.  In an effort to hurt Iran's economy, Saudis went so far as to threaten oil price cuts. Saudis helped the Americans launch the First Gulf War and will do so again. The role of the Saudi regime in helping one Muslim country after another being destroyed will forever be a blot on the family of Sauds. Isn't it time for the Muslims to review their sad plight and stop doing the bidding of an imperialist power. According to Robert Fisk in his book "The Great War For Civilization" Sunni power has come to be founded on Shia poverty, and by geographic coincidence, "almost all the oil of the Middle East lies beneath lands where Shia Muslims live.' 

 

Is there a way out for Iran to escape the cataclysmic effects of war? Perhaps not. With regional Muslim dictators providing funds, intelligence and territory and armed with the latest most lethal weaponry including depleted uranium shells, daisy cutters, bunker busters, phosphorus and other heavy bombs the US is unstoppable. So long as the victims of these wars are Muslims there is no problem as far as the Americans are concerned. Even the Russians have shown alarm at the possibility of Iran going nuclear. Its security chief said so in a recent statement. Dr. Dan Plesch, a Research Associate at the School Of Oriental and Africans Studies, during a debate before the Foreign Press Association in UK has reportedly warned not to be surprised, if one fine morning you wake up to find that the US has destroyed 10,000 plus targets inside Iran by using its strategic air power and sea-based missiles? Americans wont take yes for an answer in case they have decided to teach Iran a lesson for disobedience. Even if Iran agrees to suspend uranium enrichment, something it is allowed under the NPT, Americans would attack her if their imperialist interests were served thereby. America's strategy appears to be based on world domination and control of oil.  It would be drawn in conflict with other powers like Russia, China and India. 

 

Unipolar world is a dangerous place to live.  Russia has joined Britain, China, France and Germany in supporting the United States in second resolution imposing more stringent sanctions on Iran.  Russia, which did not lose any of its military might as a result of demise of the Soviet Union, however, finds it diplomatically difficult to resist American pressure; and for a variety of reasons, it has refused to stand by its commitment to Iran in refusing the delivery of nuclear materials for Bushehr nuclear plant in exchange for few concessions from the Americans like Russia's entry to the World Trade Organization.

 

Despite Iran's defiant posturing, there is some hope in the United States that the united support of major powers for UN sanctions is forcing a re-think in Iran.  Iran has repeatedly vowed that it has no intention of acquiring nuclear weapons and its nuclear program is entirely intended for civilian purposes. Only. Under Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Iran is entitled to nuclear energy with international safeguards.  Iran is prepared to discuss all options, if the threat of United Nations sanctions is withdrawn and the matter referred to International Atomic Energy Agency, where it belongs.  But the US wants no part of that. It wants to halt uranium enrichment at all cost.  The new sanctions in addition to trade sanctions imposed earlier involves an embargo on Iranian arms exports, a freeze on assets of individuals and companies involved in Tehran's nuclear program and ban on new loans or grants except for humanitarian purpose. The US in 1979 illegally froze all foreign held accounts in the wake of Islamic revolution.

 

Another Muslim state will have been destroyed, Lebanon pushed back to stone age, Afghanistan reduced to the brink of failure and the rest of the Muslim world left guessing where would the vampire hit next, Iran would be yet another victim of unprovoked aggression.  . 

 

Even if the Iranians agreed to the demands of the international community-read the US of A- it will find some excuse to destroy from the safety of the skies another Muslim country. The US is an international bully in breach of all international conventions and agreements. In its overweening desire to dominate the world and secure all the world oil to itself, it will use all its military might to create Karzais and Musharrafs the world over. Any defiant ruler would meet the fate of Saddam Hussein or Panama's former President who is serving life sentence for close to two decades in some unknown prison in the United States.

 

One former Pakistani Ambassador to the US who visited that country recently the signs are ominous. Iran is all over in New York Times, Washington Post and the electronic media. She thought that about 2m Pakistanis might get killed from the nuclear fallout if the installations are hit. That is a horrendous prospect. Isnt it time that Muslims stopped hating each other and recognized their real enemy. But the trouble is that no Muslim ruler except ironically the Iranian represents the people he rules. Lack of democracy is at the heart of the problem.

sshusain@hotmail.com)

 

WHAT CHOICES DOES PAKISTAN HAVE?

 

Pakistan has limited choices while dealing with the United States. Sole surviving super power will resort to every conceivable device to browbeat Pakistan or any other neighbour of Iran into providing the bases and other logistical support for premeditated attack on Iran. We are a third world country with one of the largest armies in the world but yet we are no match to the might of the United States. The large army serves the only purpose of keeping the people in bondage, hungry and deprived. What distinguishes a nation from another is the collective will of the people behind their Government, which alone provides strength, credibility and the courage to it to stand up to a bully.

 

The ham handed manner in which Chief Justice was made 'dysfunctional' on the basis of a reference filed about a week later has exposed the fragility of the regime. Chief Justice's virtual incarceration in his official residence with access denied even to his own counsel and total ban on outside contacts have provided a cause to the disaffected population in general and the legal community in particular to spearhead a movement which doesn't show any signs of dying down. Fires were stoked by physical manhandling of the Chief Justice by the minions of 'law' in full public view including damage to his glasses, tearing of his coat and pulling of his hair. The government 'wisely' tried to control the damage by destroying the Geo office in Islamabad. We touched very low depths of un precedented depravity. One seriously doubts if the present set up will survive this crisis.

 

It is inconceivable for a beleaguered regime to stand up to the super bully. In 2003 when United States was about to occupy Iraq through an armed aggression by employing the latest weaponry, it urged Turkey to provide bases for the attack on Iraq. Turkish Government refused in spite of all the pressure brought about by the US government. Not only that they used military to military contacts and had some senior US army general publicly egg on the generals of Turkey to do some thing about it, a euphemism for coup against a democratically elected Government. The generals refused because the government had taken a position, which was popular with the electorate. Generals do not dare contemplating a coup when the level of acceptability of the government is high. Even in Pakistan they did not dare interfere when Nawaz Sharif was battling a maverick judge. Turkish parliament voted, although by a narrow margin against allowing the bases. They spurned the American offer of $ 16 b as a political bribe. Heavens didn't fall and Turkey was not attacked nor was it destroyed. It still lives on and on more friendly terms than Pakistan with the super bully.

 

Iran is another example of defiance of the super bully. For 30 years after the revolution it has survived all machinations and conspiracies of the Americans. Iran has a democratic Government although one can question the extent of freedom allowed to the voters to choose their representatives because the candidates are vetted before being allowed to contest. A candidate has to be religious enough to gain acceptability with the Council of Guardians. Similarly the Council of Guardians exercises a veto on all important government decisions. This they are allowed under the constitution. How so ever imperfect, they have far more democracy than a large majority of Muslim states. North Korea and Syria are two examples of total dictatorships that defy the Americans.

 

After all how many countries can America destroy? It is not unlikely that if Pakistan keeping with the regime's past record of seven years starting with 9/11 buckles in, sooner or later it may yet become a victim of American aggression. After all it is suspected of harboring Al-Queda and Taliban and has nuclear weapons to boot. Succumbing to American pressure for fear of retaliation does not guarantee safety. Right here in Pakistan Nawaz Sharif was repeatedly urged by the American President not to go for nuclear tests. Nawaz Sharif stood his ground. Nawaz Sharif showed extraordinary grit.

 

Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was another brave man. He believed in limiting external pressures by stating his fallback position in clear terms and then sticking by it. This he called insulation. He pioneered unshakeable bilateral relations with China in spite of American displeasure. That relationship has stood the test of all times and has not suffered any domestic changes. Civil or military, Chinese have maintained most cordial relations with Pakistan. Military rulers have inherited the twin gifts given them by the civilian rulers in the form of nuclear weapons and solid Chinese support. It is the moral fiber that defines the course of action that a nation adopts.

 

One would think that Pakistan should try to withstand the pressure and refuse to provide bases demanded by the Americans. Having allowed Afghanistan to be occupied Pakistan should not become complicit in the destruction of another Muslim country in the neighbourhood. That would be a tragedy of Himalayan heights. Iran has always stood by us whether it was 1965 war or any other national crises of our own making.

 

Support by Saudis or Kuwaitis for such adventures emanates from absence of accountability of these regimes before their people. They owe their continued hold over power to the help material, military and diplomatic of the United States. The US got the taste of democracy in Palestine and Algeria and partly in Egypt and it has quietly shelved the democracy project.

 

Ironically Musharraf and Benazir have one thing in common. Both rely exclusively on the Americans for coming to power or staying there. One must hasten to add however that Benazir has a large vote bank (which she has decided to ignore and betray by staying away from the country) whereas Musharraf has none. He needs his uniform to keep his constituents in check. Recent reminder by the Americans to him to shed off the uniform before the year is out may perhaps be a change of emphasis rather than a real change of heart.

Syed Shahid Husain

Plz See my Published articles at  

http://sshusain.blogspot.com/

or from Pakistan / India / China users

http://www.pkblogs/sshusain

 

 

---

Interest Rates NEAR 39yr LOWS! $430,000 Mortgage for $1,299/mo - Calculate new payment