| 2005-2006 Us-israeli Threats To Attack Iran |
Article Index for 2005-2006 |
Website Links For Attack |
Information About2005-2006 Us-israeli Threats To Attack Iran |
|
''This article attempts to summarise, in an encyclopedic way, perceived or actual threats to Iran, perceived or actual violations '''by''' Iran of the NPT , documented claims of motivations for any or all of these, and perceived or actual violations of territorial sovereignty (attacks) by US and/or Israel against Iran, or Iran against US and/or Israel.'' ''The individual sections are internally chronological, and in several cases refer to other articles for in-depth documentation. The order of the sections should not be interpreted as a causal, chronological relationship in the escalating tensions. Since the January 2002 "; control of crude oil distribution and other strategic reasons including the Petroeuro , electoral reasons in the USA, electoral reasons in Iran, and increasing democracy in the Middle East. The nuclear civilian and/or alleged military programs are the reasons most widely discussed and have been controversial, Tehran pointing out that the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) allowed it to develop Nuclear Technology for pacific use and that it was a breach of International Legality to prevent it from doing so. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has made numerous inspections of Iran's installations, thus confirming that Tehran engaged itself in Uranium Enrichment , which is a critical component for both civil Nuclear Power generation and military nuclear weapons. Tehran claims this is for pacific use and that any threats toward it are a breach of Sovereignty . Control of oil, the Petroeuro , electoral reasons in the USA and Iran, and increasing democracy in the Middle East have been less widely discussed as factors behind the threats, but their roles as factors are also controversial. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND During the early 20th Century , many Iranians saw the US as a useful third force that could reduce the control of Russia and Great Britain over Iran. The US missionary Howard Baskerville was killed in Iran in 1909 shortly after he decided to support Iranians in the Constitutional Revolution . This relationship changed in the mid-twentieth century, when the US and Great Britain supported Operation Ajax , which in 1953 overthrew the democratically elected nationalist prime minister of Iran, Mohammed Mossadegh , due to his nationalisation of Crude Oil . The Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi , became an Absolute Monarch and created the secret police force SAVAK . In 1979 the Iranian Revolution brought to power a government that was hostile to the west, and relations deteriorated further with the Iran Hostage Crisis and the shooting down in 1988 of Iran Air Flight 655 , which killed 290 civilians. During the early Twenty-first Century , US-Israeli threats to militarily attack Iran commenced. Several different motivations, some uncontroversial, some controversial, for the possible attacks have been reported. Some US violations of Iranian sovereignty have allegedly already occurred starting from early-mid 2005 . THREATS TO ATTACK IRAN US threats to attack Iran The United States ' official position on Iran is that "a nuclear-armed Iran is not acceptable" and that all options - including the unilateral use of force and first-strike nuclear weapons are on the table. However, they have denied that the United States is preparing for an imminent strike. This came while three European countries, the United Kingdom (UK), France and Germany (the " EU-3 ") attempted to negotiate a cessation of nuclear enrichment activities by Iran, and American claims that these activities are aimed at producing nuclear weapons. {Link without Title} As of 2006, the United States has either a large or significant military presence or a history of several decades of tight military cooperation in four other countries bordering Iran: Iraq , Turkey , Afghanistan and Pakistan . An American journalist, Seymour Hersh , claimed in January 2005 that U.S. Central Command had been asked to revise the military’s war plan, providing for a maximum ground and air invasion of Iran and that the "hawks" in the U.S. government believed the EU3 negotiations would not succeed, and the Administration will act after this became clear. A former high-level intelligence official told him "''It’s not if we’re going to do anything against Iran. They’re doing it.''" Scott Ritter , former UN Weapons Of Mass Destruction Inspector In Iraq , 1991 - 1998 , claimed in April 2005 that the Pentagon was told in June 2005 to be prepared to launch a massive aerial attack against Iran in order to destroy the Iranian nuclear program. He claimed in June 2005 that the US military was preparing a "''massive military presence''" in Azerbaijan that would foretell a major land-based campaign designed to capture Tehran. He also claimed that the US attack on Iran had "''already begun''" (see below). In a , director for non-proliferation at the Carnegie Endowment For International Peace , claimed that "some senior officials have already made up their minds: They want to hit Iran." and that there "may be a coordinated campaign to prepare for a military strike on Iran." Joseph Cirincione also warned "that a military strike would be disastrous for the United States. It would rally the Iranian public around an otherwise unpopular regime, inflame anti-American anger around the Muslim world, and jeopardize the already fragile U.S. position in Iraq. And it would accelerate, not delay, the Iranian nuclear program. Hard-liners in Tehran would be proven right in their claim that the only thing that can deter the United States is a nuclear bomb. Iranian leaders could respond with a crash nuclear program that could produce a bomb in a few years." Plans for use of nuclear weapons against Iran In March 2005 US revised its Doctrine on when to use nuclear weapons to include Preemptive or possibly Preventive use on non-nuclear states. In August 2005 , Philip Giraldi , a former CIA officer, claimed that US Vice President Dick Cheney had instructed STRATCOM to prepare ''a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States... Claims that the US plans to use Nuclear Weapons in an attack on Iran have also been made in 2005 and 2006 by Jorge Hirsch , in January 2006 by Michel Chossudovsky , and in April 2006 by Seymour M. Hersh . Israeli threats to attack Iran A Scottish newspaper claimed in November 2003 that Israel ''warned that it is prepared to take unilateral military action against Iran if the international community fails to stop any development of nuclear weapons at the country’s atomic energy facilities''. In December 2005 , a British newspaper claimed that the Israel i military had been ordered to plan for possible strikes on uranium enrichments sites in Iran in March 2006 , based on Israeli intelligence estimates that Iran would be able to build nuclear weapons in two to four years. It was claimed that the special forces command was in the highest stage of readiness for an attack (state ''G'') in December. Seymour Hersh has also claimed that US Department Of Defense civilians led by Douglas Feith ''have been working with Israeli planners and consultants to develop and refine potential nuclear, chemical-weapons, and missile targets inside Iran''. Israel is estimated to have Between 200-400 Nuclear Weapons and well-developed missile delivery systems, but there are neither confirmations nor denials nor other information regarding the intent to use them in the operations allegedly being planned. European position on an attack on Iran During early 2006, different official and/or leaked statements by politicians and diplomats from the UK , France and Germany , dubbed ''the EU-3'', have indicated either support for an attack on Iran or opposition to an attack on Iran. United Kingdom A by UK diplomat John Sawers to French, German and US diplomats, dated March 16 , 2006 , twice referred to the intention to have the United Nations Security Council refer to Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter in order to put pressure on Iran. Chapter VII describes the Security Council's power to authorize economic, diplomatic, and military sanctions, as well as the use of military force, to resolve disputes. The Sunday Telegraph reported that a secret, high-level meeting would take place on April 3 , 2006 between the UK government and military chiefs regarding plans to attack Iran. The Telegraph cited "a senior Foreign Office source" saying that "The belief in some areas of Whitehall is that an attack is now all but inevitable. There will be no invasion of Iran but the nuclear sites will be destroyed." The BBC reported a denial that the meeting would take place, but no denial of the alleged themes of the meeting, by the UK Ministry of Defence, and that "there is well sourced and persistent speculation that American covert activities aimed at Iran are already underway". CLAIMS OF LIKELY TARGETS See Also: Iran and weapons of mass destruction#Facilities Cities likely to be targets according to the Centre For Nonproliferation Studies and the Oxford Research Group include towns with a total estimated population ( 1999 - 2006 ) of about 23 million (including metropolitan areas). These include:
MOTIVES FOR AN ATTACK Iran's nuclear program Since 2003 , the United States has alleged that Iran has a program to develop nuclear weapons. Iran has maintained that its nuclear program is aimed only at generating electricity. In June 2005 , the US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice said IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei should either ''toughen his stance on Iran'' or fail to be chosen for a third term as IAEA head. Both the United States and Iran are parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The United States (and other official nuclear weapons states) were alleged during the May 2005 month-long meeting on the NPT to be in violation of the NPT through Article VI, which requires them to disarm, which As Of 2006 they have not done, while the IAEA has stated that Iran is in violation of a Safeguards Agreement related to the NPT, due to insufficient reporting of nuclear material, its processing and its use.. Under Article IV, the treaty gives non-nuclear states the right to develop Civilian Nuclear Energy Programs . From 2003 to early 2006, tensions between the US and Iran have successively mounted even while International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspections of sensitive nuclear industry sites in Iran have continued, in line with an Additional Protocol to the NPT which Iran voluntarily adhered to. On March 8, 2006, US and EU-3 representatives noted that Iran has enough unenriched Uranium hexaflouride gas to make up to 10 atomic bombs if it were to be highly enriched, and adding it was "time for the Security Council to act". The unenriched uranium cannot be used either in the Bushehr reactor, which is a Pressurized Water Reactor , nor in atomic bombs, unless it becomes Enriched . . Crude oil and other strategic reasons Stephen Zunes , Middle East editor for the Foreign Policy In Focus Project , stated that the Republican and Democratic Parties Of The USA have an urge to punish, isolate, and militarily threaten an oil-rich country International Oil Bourse and the euro There are numerous indications that Iran plans to create a new International Oil Futures Exchange , whose formal name is uncertain, but may be called the Iranian Oil Bourse , trading oil priced in Euro s and possibly other currencies, rather than Dollar s, which all other other oil Market s currently use for trade. Some fear that this would have significant negative impact on the strength of the US Dollar on international currency markets. The opening of the exchange had been planned for March 20 , 2006 , but has been delayed. Electoral reasons in the USA In November 2005 , Michael Klare , professor of Peace and World Security Studies at Hampshire College , alleged that a major factor motivating the George W. Bush administration to attack Iran would be its desire to distract attention from domestic political difficulties and to increase popularity for the President. US Popular Support For Bush increased by about 10% when the US Invaded Iraq In 2003 and only dropped back to its previous level several months later. Electoral reasons in Iran Religious-conservative Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected president of Iran in 2005 . In October 2005 , he made remarks to domestic audiences agreeing with Ayatollah Khomeini 's statement that ''the occupying regime On December 8 2005 , he made remarks Doubting The Holocaust though a week later, on December 14 , he made a similar statement no longer literally denying the Holocaust. These remarks are generally considered to be in line with his populist voting base - 19% of voters chose him in the First Round Of The 2005 Presidential Election . Mahmoud Ahmadinejad claims that the remarks have been mistranslated and misinterpreted in the Western media, and that his aim is only to support democracy in Palestine . Independently of whether or not his remarks were misinterpreted, the international reaction to his perceived statements was extremely negative. Seema Mustafa in the Asian Age claimed that Ahmadinejad's remarks relating to Israel and the Holocaust are now used a major reason for an attack against Iran, stating that: A campaign to demonise and that this argument was presented to journalists in Delhi by German-French-UK representative Dr Michael Schaefer and US undersecretary Nicholas Burns when they were requesting Indian representative to accept IAEA referral of Iran to the UN Security Council . Increasing democracy in the Middle East In political speeches following the 2003 Invasion Of Iraq , George W. Bush has claimed (after weapons of mass destruction could not be found) that his administration's goal in the invasion was to bring democracy to countries in the Middle East and to oppose " Islamofascism ". The World Tribunal On Iraq and others have doubted the sincerity of this motive, pointing to a Systematic Campaign Against Academia In Iraq during the US occupation of Iraq. Robert Dreyfuss , author of ''Devil's Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam'', claims that the US actions in the region have in fact supported, and are continuing to support, "islamofascism" rather than oppose it. On February 5 , 2006 , Iranian Blogger Persian Majeed listed a number of alleged Human Rights violations by the US in Iran and alleged attacks by the US against Iranian democracy of the preceding half-century, requesting judicial enquiries and appropriate compensation payments to Iranians. His judgment of the severity of the US actions against Democracy In Iran concludes with the request that the US should be referred to the United Nations for sanctions. POSSIBLE MOTIVATIONS FOR IRAN TO VIOLATE THE NPT Paul Pillar, former CIA official who led the preparation of all National Intelligence Estimates (NIEs) on Iran from 2000 to 2005 in his role as national intelligence officer for the Near East and South Asia, told the InterPress Service that all of the NIEs on Iran during that period ''addressed the Iranian fears of U.S. attack explicitly and related their desire for nuclear weapons to those fears'' and stated ''"Iranian perceptions of threat, especially from the United States and Israel, were not the only factor, but were in our judgment part of what drove whatever effort they were making to build nuclear weapons."'' Another former CIA official, Ellen Laipson , said that ''the Iranian fear of an attack by the United States has long been "a standard element" in NIEs on Iran.'' 2003-2006 US VIOLATIONS AND ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF IRANIAN SOVEREIGNTY Since 2003 the U.S. has been flying Unmanned Aerial Vehicle s, launched from Iraq , over Iran to obtain Intelligence on Iran's Alleged Nuclear Weapons Program , reportedly providing little new information. The Iranian government has formally protested the incursions as illegal. A U.S. RQ-7 Shadow and a Hermes UAV have crashed in Iran. In June 2005, Scott Ritter claimed that US attacks on Iran had already begun, including US overflights of Iran ''using pilotless drones''. Seymour Hersh has claimed that the US has also been ''penetrating eastern Iran from Afghanistan in a hunt for underground Claims of US using Proxies See Also: People's Mujahedin of Iran#Alleged MEK Activity In Iran Scott Ritter also claimed that CIA-backed bombings had been undertaken in Iran by the Mujahideen E-Khalq (MEK or MKO), an opposition group listed by the United States Department Of State as a Foreign Terrorist Organization . In April 2006 , '' The Raw Story '' cited an unnamed UN source "close to" the United Nations Security Council stating that former MEK members had been used as a Proxy by the US for "roughly a year" inside of Iranian territory. An intelligence source quoted by ''The Raw Story'' said that the former MEK members were made to "swear an oath to Democracy and resign from the MEK" before being incorporated into US military units and retrained for their operations in Iran. See Also: Party for a Free Life in Kurdistan Following the killing of 24 Iranian security forces in Iran in March 2006 by the Party For A Free Life In Kurdistan (PEJAK), an opposition group closely linked to the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), which is listed by the U.S. State Department as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, Dennis Kucinich claimed in a letter to George W. Bush on April 18 , 2006 , that PEJAK is being supported and coordinated by the US, since it is based in Iraq, which is under the De Facto control of US military forces. SEE ALSO
REFERENCES |
|
|