Washington and European Union on collision course over how to neutralise Tehran's nuclear capabilities
US starts planning the war on Iran
Pentagon hawks have begun discussing military action against Iran to neutralise its nuclear weapons threat, including possible strikes on leadership, political and security targets.
With a deadline of tomorrow for Iran to begin an agreed freeze on enriching uranium, which can be used to produce nuclear weapons, sources have disclosed that the latest Pentagon gaming model for 'neutralising' Iran's nuclear threat involves strikes in support of regime change.
Although the United States has made clear that it would seek sanctions against Iran through the United Nations should it not meet its obligations, rather than undertake military action, the new modelling at the Pentagon, with its shift in emphasis from suspected nuclear to political target lists, is causing deep anxiety among officials in the UK, France and Germany.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is due to meet on Thursday to decide whether to refer Iran to the UN Security Council for being in breach of non-proliferation measures.
Sources close to the Bush administration have warned that Tony Blair will have to choose between the EU's pursuit of the diplomatic track and a more hardline approach from the White House.
While George Bush clearly favours more stick and less carrot, it is not yet clear what the stick might be: US administration sources say targeted air strikes - either by the US or Israel - aimed at wiping out Iran's fledgling nuclear programme would be difficult because of a lack of clear intelligence about where key components are located.
Despite America's attempt to turn up the heat on Iran, analysts remain deeply uncertain whether the increasingly bellicose noises which are coming from Bush administration figures represent a crude form of 'megaphone' diplomacy designed to scare Iran into sticking to its side of the bargain, or evidence that Washington is leaning towards a new military adventure.
Details of the emerging Pentagon thinking have come as US officials have spent the past week turning up the pressure on Iran before the deal comes into force.
US officials are expected to meet European diplomats and IAEA officials to complain about Iran's continuing production of substantial quantities of uranium hexafluoride, which can be used in a weapons programme.
Although not explicitly barred in the accord, US officials believe it amounts to a serious show of bad faith by Iran.
Speaking on the fringes of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum meeting in Santiago yesterday, Bush ratcheted up the pressure on Iran.
'It is very important for the Iran government to hear that we are concerned about their desires and we're concerned about reports that show that, before a certain international meeting, they're willing to speed up the processing of materials that could lead to a nuclear weapon,' Bush said.
Referring to the European countries that negotiated the deal with Iran, Bush added: 'They do believe that Iran has got nuclear ambitions, as do we, as do many around the world.
'This is a very serious matter. The world knows it's a serious matter and we're working together to solve this matter.'
Under a pact reached by the European countries and Iran last week, Iran is due to suspend all uranium enrichment, while it negotiates a deal in which it would receive trade incentives and peaceful nuclear technology.
Yesterday, the Foreign Office tried to play down fears that Iran is already breaching the deal which was negotiated with the EU, insisting that the IAEA be allowed to issue its own verdict on Tehran's compliance this week.
'We will wait and see what the report is: the Iranians have got until 25 November,' said a spokesman.
But Whitehall sources said the UK accepted that Iran had a complex and extensive nuclear programme that could not be shut down overnight.
'There is a lot of speculation that is unfounded. Obviously there have been a lot of concerns in the past, but there's a deal on the table and we hope that they will stick with it,' said one.
Last week, US Secretary of State Colin Powell, who has just announced his resignation, told reporters that US intelligence had seen hard evidence that Iran was close to putting a nuclear weapon on a long-range weapons system.
The allegation was immediately challenged by officials in the State Department, who said the information, which had come from a single 'walk-in' source, had yet to be verified.
SOURCE: The Observer (UK), "Pentagon turns heat up on Iran", 21 November 2004.
[ http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1356160,00.html ]
The Debate - Who's next?
[ http://www.thedebate.org/thedebate/who_next.asp ]
New York Times (US), "Groundhog Day", 20 November 2004.
[ http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/20/opinion/20sat1.html?oref=login ]
Stop us if you've heard this one before. The Bush administration creates a false sense of urgency about a nuclear menace from a Middle Eastern country. Hard-liners talk about that country's connections to terrorists. They portray European diplomatic efforts to defuse tensions as a feckless attempt to appease a rogue nation whose word can never be trusted anyway. Secretary of State Colin Powell makes ominous-sounding warnings about new intelligence, which turns out to be dubious.
That is how President Bush rushed the country into an unnecessary conflict with Iraq in his first term, and we have been seeing alarming signs of that approach all week on Iran.
Let's be cleareyed about this: Iran has an active nuclear program, has not tried terribly hard to hide it and has been dishonest in its dealings with the West. But nothing we have seen suggests some new, urgent development in Iran that would impel American officials to start talking about "the military option." ...
Washington Post (US), "Officers See Need For Bigger Iraq Force", front page, 22 November 2004.
[ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2565-2004Nov21.html ]
U.S. Assessments Cite Tenacious Resistance
BAGHDAD, Nov. 21 -- Senior U.S. military commanders in Iraq say it is increasingly likely they will need a further increase in combat forces to put down remaining areas of resistance in the country.
The possibility that additional troops would be required to battle the insurgency in this critical period preceding the Iraqi elections, scheduled for Jan. 30, has been signaled for weeks. The Pentagon took an initial step in this direction last month, ordering about 6,500 soldiers in Iraq to extend their tours by up to two months.
"The Insider" mailing list article, 22 November 2004.
Tags: Iran, attacks, air, strikes, nuclear, missile, facilities, weapons, sites, military, action, Pentagon, Hawks, war, invasion, regime, change, WMD, , conspiracy theories.