No Evidence of Iranian Nuclear Threat: Bush Administration to Proceed Regardless

The Bush administration has once again ratcheted up the drum beating of a “Preemptive War” against Iran, based on the presumption of the now familiar sabre-rattling pretext of the country developing ‘weapons of mass destruction.’ Many see the administration’s motive as a dire desire of
passing on the White House baton to another neo-conservative warmonger, John McCain, as Bush’s successor in the November elections. While the court of public opinion worldwide, including many in the US, is unanimously against the waging another bloody war of aggression, which would be
costly to all sides concerned, President Bush – at least on the surface – seems to have been orchestrating another false image of ‘an international coalition’: relying on the support of his political allies in Europe, Israel and the Middle East.

To date there has been repeated number of unannounced inspections (more than 3,000) and copious live camera surveillance by the International Atomic Energy Agency of so-called nuclear sites in Iran; Iran, unlike other intransigent regimes in the region, has signed onto the Non-Proliferation Treaty and the United Nations conventions for nuclear non-proliferations. There is no proven evidence to substantiate claims by the Bush administration that the Iranian nuclear development – which Iran
states is for peaceful energy and medical applications – has, or is, leading toward the development of nuclear weapons.

The struggle for democracy, modernisation and socio-cultural and political reform in Iran has laboured on for more than 100 years, hindered by external intervention largely by the hand of the Americans since World War II, and their cronies within Iran, with theexpress aim of exploiting the natural resources and strategic position of the country. The first democratically elected Iranian prime minister, Dr Mohammad Mosadegh, an acclaimed lawyer who nationalised Iranian oil and defended Iran’s sovereignty against the Anglo-American Oil consortium was overthrown by a Central Intelligence Agency-sponsored coup in 1953. That coup was followed by the reluctant return of the Shah to, in-effect, reinstall the absolute monarch on the Persian Peacock throne, a throne that had been abolished 50 years earlier. The modest degree of domestic reform and international engagement achieved in Iran during the 1990’s, has now been replaced by some of the harshest repressive measures seen since the midst of the revolutionary fervor of the late 1970s. The credit for most of the socio-political regression belongs to Bush and his consistent and denigrating labelling of Iran as a member of the ‘Axis of Evil’. Add to that his ideologically inflaming rhetoric of the ‘Battle of Armageddon’ and that the result has been, in essence, resurrecttion of ultra-, and neo-conservatives everywhere. The current annual US financing of up to $100m (£50.45m) of covert ethnic unrest has also resulted in the further disenfranchisement of the political hierarchies of the Middle East region.

The press and media as well as the populace in both the US and Iran, therefore, remain vigilant by expressing their conscientious objections to war and terrorism, and repression and bloodshed, and have staunchly advocated demands for negotiations, justice and peace. If these talks do
not happen we may be facing a calamitous outcome that could engulf the entire Middle East, thereby pushing the price of oil astronomically high(higher than July 3 2008’s crude oil high of $146 a barrel), and an economic contraction would follow brining further hardship to the wider
populace. As treacherous as the long-term intertwined national interests of the Americans, the Iranians, and the Israelis may be the can harmoniously achieve credibility and economic competitiveness for the US. The could mark legitimate security and progress for Israel, and homegrown democracy, justice and development for Iran – on the basis mutually respectful
multilateral negotiations. The time, to resort to the human basics of logic and reason, rationale and justice, over belligerence and confrontation, and hegemony and adventurism, is far overdue. This paradigm, as counterintuitive as it may seem to the sold-out political powerhouses and lobbying think-tanks, is nonetheless, congruent with the longing aspirations of the peoples of the US, Israel and Iran who have reaffirmed their desires for change.

Categorised in: Article

This post was written by David Rahni