No Existential Threat to Israel

Israel, the U.S and others are over blowing the threat from a nuclear Iran.

By Liam BaileyI received an e-mail from Israeli newspaper, Haaretz daily with the subject line: Stand up to –Ahmadinejad. Inside was an advertising banner with the subject line above a picture of an exuberant Ahmadinejad speaking into a microphone. The banner linked to a two minute video by, [Aish HaTorah, a yeshiva in the Old City of Jerusalem].

The Video

It is actually a slideshow. It starts with a picture of Adolf Hitler. Followed by a gruesome picture of tens of undernourished adult males, one standing, the rest lying in what I can only describe as a wall of pigeon-hole bunks. I assume it was taken in a liberated concentration camp. The narrator says: “Imagine you could have stopped Hitler in 1938.” another wall of pigeon holes, this time much smaller filled with human skulls. “Imagine you could have stopped him, but didn’t.”

Showing Ahmadinejad above the quote, “Israel must be wiped off the map,” the narrator announces: “Today a new Hitler is on the world stage calling for the destruction of the state of Israel.” The narrator falls silent for the display of two more pictures of Ahmadinejad above the quotes: “The Zionist regime is a dried up and rotten tree which will be annihilated with one storm” and: “The Elimination of the Zionist regime will be smooth and simple.”

Ahmadinejad’s Intentions and Israeli Lies

The first quote about Israel being wiped off the map is a matter of international debate. Some analysts say Ahmadinejad has never made such a statement, that it is an intentional mistranslation by Israel or their supporters to overstate the danger from Iran. If they are right and only the latter two quotes can be accredited to Ahmadinejad, he is not alone in wanting Zionism to be eliminated, which doesn’t necessarily mean exterminating Jews or obliterating Israel. In my recent interview with Israeli author and academic Ilan Pape, he said: “Israel has to be de-Zionised to a point before any genuine reconciliation can be attempted.” He was talking about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

The Hitler/Ahmadinejad Comparison

Whether Ahmadinejad said “Israel must be wiped off the map” or not, the comparison to Hitler and the holocaust is a blatant misrepresentation of one of the world’s most horrific acts. In 1938 the world was a different place, not least in the perception of Jews. 1938 was in an era when stereotypes were treated as fact and taught to children. Discrimination was accepted, in some cases even expected of people. Jews were stereotypically evil, greedy and devious and persecuted because of it.

When Hitler’s views began emerging, for those who didn’t hate Jews, such entrenched stereotypes made them indifferent. In short the Jews had no friends in the world capable of or willing to stop Hitler. Today the situation is very different.

No Comparison

The holocaust was a horrific and tragic occurrence. The world not even attempting to stop it pre-emptively was a disgrace. However, the world’s guilt over not stopping the holocaust, even if only indirectly, led to the partitioning of Palestine for a Jewish homeland.

In its infancy Israel faced threats from the Arab countries surrounding it, who really did want to carry out a second holocaust, who really did want, and try to wipe Israel off the map. As Egypt’s President announced before the Sinai war: “Egypt has decided to dispatch her heroes, the disciples of pharaoh and the sons of Islam and they will cleanse the Land of Israel….There will be no peace on Israel’s border because we demand vengeance, and vengeance is Israel’s death.” The U.S began supporting Israel militarily in the sixties and rescued Israel from the brink of defeat by airlifting military supplies during the Yom Kippur war , the aggressors Egypt and other neighboring Arab states learned that the U.S wasn’t going to let Israel be defeated.

Since then and currently Israel faces a very small threat from neighboring countries, some have signed peace accords. The others are reduced to funding internal resistance groups against Israel’s occupation, none of which is anywhere near capable of wiping Israel off the map.

Let’s assume Ahmadinejad does want Israel wiped off the map.

Far from having no friends, Israel is now in the “in” crowd, with the most powerful friends in the world: the U.S., U.K. and any other states wanting to stay in America’s favor. With the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), perhaps the most powerful lobby in America, America’s world influence and massive nuclear arsenal, Israel is one of the world’s best protected countries. If this support wasn’t enough to deter anyone considering an attack, or “the destruction of Israel”, Israel has a sizeable nuclear arsenal of its own, widely thought to be 200-400 active nuclear warheads. This is a significant deterrent against attack.

If Israel has 400 nuclear warheads, then Tel Aviv has the third largest nuclear arsenal in the world, bigger than China or France. Iran is years from even having one workable nuclear warhead, and depending on the size and weight of the prototype building a missile to carry it could take just as long. Thus, Israel has sufficient capabilities to defend itself, along with protection from the U.S. as No. 1 nuclear proliferator.

What’s more Ahmadinejad’s patriotism is the driving force behind the dramatic showdown with the U.S. and the world over wanting the country’s right to nuclear power under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which Israel has not ratified. His patriotism will prevent him from risking the total obliteration of his country by attacking Israel. So, Iran poses no existential threat to Israel, at least until they have the capabilities to disable the U.S and Israel. I’m sure you’ll agree, that, without outside help this is many years away.

The Lies

Israeli officials know that there is no such “second holocaust” or existential threat from a nuclear Iran. As Gareth Porter reported in the Electronic Intifada:

An article in the online journal of a hard-line think-tank, the Ariel Centre for Policy Research, in August 2004 revealed that “one of the options that has been considered should Iran publicly declare itself to have nuclear weapons is for Israel to put an end to what is called its policy of ‘nuclear ambiguity’ or ‘opacity’. The author, Shalom Freedman, said that in light of Israel’s accumulation of “over 100 nuclear weapons” and its range of delivery systems for them, even if Iran were to acquire nuclear weapons within a few years, the “tremendous disproportion between the strength of Israel and an emergent nuclear Iran should serve as a deterrent.”Why the Lie

You may be wondering why Israelis would want to create mass hysteria on the basis of lies, the same reason it denies Palestinian right of return, and is building a great wall around the Jewish state… Zionism’s greatest fear, Israel becoming predominantly Arab.
You may be confused, Israel’s Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh explained in an interview with the Jerusalem Post, saying that under the threat from a nuclear Iran:

“most Israelis would prefer not to live here; most Jews would prefer not to come here with their families; and Israelis who can live abroad will. People are not enthusiastic about being scorched.” Thus the danger, Sneh elaborated, is that Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would “be able to kill the Zionist dream without pushing a button. That’s why we must prevent this regime from obtaining nuclear capability at all costs.”

The Real Threats

Therefore, the fear is not over the existence of Israel, but over how Israel exists. I suspect Washington’s war planners know the existential threat is non-existent, but have their own reasons for failing to dispel the myth. America does not want allied Israel’s Middle East hegemony to end, especially not in favor of an enemy as staunch as Iran.

Israel putting such weight on their lies taking hold in the world media, has guaranteed their fears will be a reality should Iran successfully enrich uranium to weapons grade. That is why you can rest assured, if diplomacy and sanctions fail to stop Iranian enrichment, Israel will attack with or without U.S help. There is a distinct possibility that the attack will involve the use of nuclear weapons, therefore Iran is more in danger of a nuclear holocaust from Israel.

This article has also been published on War Pages on Blogspot


Unstoppable Iran: Is Military Action the Answer?

Military action may be the only way to stop Iran from achieving weapons grade enrichment, but is it really worth it? Asks, Liam Bailey.

Nobody who knows anything about the current relationship between Iran and the west believes that the latest Resolution, imposing minor sanctions against the Islamic theocracy will have the desired effect of ending Iran’s nuclear aspirations. UN Resolution 1737 was passed unanimously by the 15 member Security Council and prohibits the sale of any materials to Iran that could be used in their “enrichment related, reprocessing or heavy water related activities”. It also imposes restrictions on the movements of twenty-two people or entities involved in the nuclear program, the Ballistic missile program or both as well as freezing their “funds, other financial assets and economic resources.”

The resolution was passed, in a nutshell because of “serious concern that the IAEA Director General’s report of 27 February 2006 (GOV/2006/15) lists a number of outstanding issues and concerns on Iran’s nuclear programme, including topics which could have a military nuclear dimension,” and that after three years of intense efforts “the IAEA is unable to conclude that there are no undeclared nuclear materials or activities in Iran,” which is guilty until proven innocent. Also because Iran has failed to stop its nuclear activities in line with Resolution 1696, which gave them till Aug 31 to stop all enrichment and other nuclear activities.

The sanctions may yet be increased in frequency, functionality and severity, but Iran will carry on regardless. Many analysts believe that the west’s actions to stop Iran’s enrichment, puts their theocratic back further up and in fact reduces the chances of them terminating the program.

This is supported by the reaction to the resolution from Iranian leadership, since the resolution was passed Rafsanjani has said it will backfire, Ahmadinejad called it invalid, and said that Iran will humiliate the west, and in the event of a military strike, deal them a “historic slap” on the face. He also vowed to accelerate the program. So, accepting that resolutions, sanctions and other externally applied pressure will not effect an Iranian enrichment freeze, what will?

According to the old analogy “everybody has a price”, perhaps Iran could be persuaded to reconsider their decision on the six-nation incentives package, which included assisting Iran’s efforts in civilian nuclear energy and removing resistance to their entry into the World Trade Organization. Iran rejected the package on the grounds that further negotiation was needed on some of the points. The rejection was followed by intense but futile efforts on the part of the EU to iron out any difficulties Iran had with the package.

The E.U’s efforts were futile because Iran’s problems required direct negotiations with the U.S, who refused, demanding Iran stop enriching Uranium first. This was an obstructive, bloody minded and pig-headed policy. Bush still refuses to accept that Iran holds all the cards in the negotiations. Iran is already enriching Uranium without the E.U’s help and Russia is building them a nuclear power plant at Busheur, despite the current stand-off.

A signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran is entitled to enrich Uranium for civilian purposes, there is as yet no evidence to suggest Iran’s enrichment is not for civilian purposes, only concerns. Nuclear powers Russia and China are Iran’s biggest defenders. So why would Iran stop what it claims is enrichment for civilian purposes, to gain talks with the U.S about western help with a civilian nuclear power program, when Russia is already assisting them? There is no incentive to accept the incentives package, other than the threat of Israeli, U.S or both using military force, including the threat of a nuclear attack, making it clear why Bush refuses to remove the latter option from the table.

It doesn’t however, make clear why Russia finally agreed with the U.S. and U.K. that sanctions should be imposed on Iran. Russia has recently called for a joint approach on the issue, but previous to their agreeing to sanctions Russia with China had actively impeded every effort to end Iran’s enrichment, accepting only when they had sufficiently watered down the wording and the impact. China is of course heavily depended on Iranian oil and gas to fuel its booming economy. The U.S has been calling for this resolution since shortly after the deadline of Resolution 1696 was ignored, the long delay was caused by the reluctance of Russia and China.

The actions of Russia in particular make me wonder whether they can really be trusted as a partner in ending Iranian enrichment. For a start Iran was invited as an observer to the last meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), a trade, military and strategic alliance set up by Russia and China. At the meeting a pledge was made to defend the sovereignty of member states, if you like a verbal military agreement.

Since then the SCO and Collective Security Treaty Organization have held unilateral and bilateral military exercises, both coinciding with massive Iranian war-games. Russia has sold twenty-nine TOR M1 advanced missile Defense systems to Iran. Half of the systems, which are capable of targeting and shooting down the west’s Tomahawk Cruise Missiles, have been delivered.

We can’t expect the threat of a military or even a nuclear strike to pressure Iran into accepting the incentives package, while China and Russia are giving Iran every reason to believe it would have their support in the event of such a strike. Nor can we continue to allow Russia and China to take key roles in both sides of the debate. In civilian life a judge would not be allowed to rule on a case involving a party he had dealings with –like the Russia/Iran arms deal– so Russia should be given the choice: stop selling arms to Iran or be removed from UNSC meetings on ending Iranian enrichment. The U.S has courted controversy and heavy criticism from Russia for imposing sanctions on Russia for its arms deals with Iran.

That isn’t going to happen, the U.S. isn’t going to lift its precondition for talks and Iran isn’t going to meet the precondition. So, the incentives package is dead in the water. With such firm support from two of the world’s super-powers and Iran’s desire to develop their own nuclear knowledge it is doubtful whether any offer would be sufficient incentive to freeze Iranian enrichment anyway. Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khameini confirmed this Monday, saying that Iran will never stop its nuclear work.

So, we’re running out of options fast, perhaps military action is the only way to stop Iran from enriching Uranium…

Such an attack, if mounted by the U.S would likely come under immense pressure from Israel mounted on the most heavily pro-Israel President for decades; Israel is likely pushing for the regime change option. The consequences of such an operation would be, at the least a catastrophic conflict liable to engulf the entire region. If any or all of the SCO members (China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan) were dragged into the conflict in allegiance to Iran, in turn bringing possible involvement from U.S. allies (Azerbaijan, Georgia, Bulgaria, Romania, Japan, Israel and the U.K., although the latter two would quite possibly be involved in some capacity from the beginning), a

catastrophic global conflict could become World War III.

Israel may not manage to pressure the U.S into regime change but a pre-emptive strike against the nuclear facilities only. If conventional weapons are used Iran is likely to retaliate against Israel with missiles and may block the Strait of Hormuz, a vital oil channel. They had threatened this as a consequence of sanctions, now sanctions have been imposed it seems Iran have realized that blocking the Strait would only tighten the noose. Iran could also re-evaluate the consequences of a failed state in Iraq against a bloody defeat for the U.S in its neighboring country if Israel goes it alone, which would undoubtedly need a green light from the U.S in any case. It would be a definite if the U.S were involved in the strike. Such a strike also carries the risk of drawing countries from the opposing strategic alliances.

The Sunday Times reported that Israel is planning an independent strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, many of which are underground, using nuclear bunker busting bombs. Israel has denied the report that brought retaliatory threats from Iran. If such a pre-emptive strike were mounted by Israel, the U.S. or both using tactical nuclear weapons, the world’s fate will be in the hands of Russian and Chinese leaders and whether or not they decide to honor the SCO verbal military agreement and unleash any of their nuclear arsenals to retaliate on Iran’s behalf.

Given such a possible chain reaction of unintended, but foreseeable consequences, I ask:

Wouldn’t it be better to allow Iran to continue enriching and instead apply the current amount of pressure on them to allow IAEA inspectors to roam freely around Iran in search of the covert weapons program the U.S is so sure exists?

The worst case scenario of that course of action would be the inspectors missing something and Iran enriching Uranium to weapons grade, possibly even diverting some and making a few warheads. Now, if you listen to Israeli military advisers, ex generals, think-tanks, lobbyists, and you get the idea, if Iran got nuclear weapons, in a fit of un-bridled, religion induced madness Ahmadinejad would make good on his calls for Israel to be wiped off the map. You have to ask the question, what would Iran gain from wiping Israel off the map?

Below I will briefly cover the possible consequences of several nuclear attack scenarios, the Physicians for Social Responsibility [PDF Chapter 5 p77] paint a more complete picture.

Some people may think Iran would attempt to wipe Israel off the map to give the Palestinians independence.

The only thing it would give the Palestinians is a slow and painful death from the radiation sickness spread by the toxic dust cloud engulfing everything. In the miracle that some of the Palestinians and/or Israelis survived the attack and by some miracle didn’t catch radiation sickness, the land would be infertile and anything that did grow would be full of radiation. They would also stand a much higher chance of catching Leukaemia and It wouldn’t be a gamble whether any children born would be deformed only on the degree of the deformity. That is assuming the Iranian weapons are close to the yield of the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki to end the Pacific leg of WWII, which is highly unlikely.

A more likely scenario is Iran attacks Israel with whatever they have thrown together as nuclear missiles; thousands of people die and the above consequences are inflicted, but only on a minute fraction of the scale of Israel’s retaliation. The Israeli reaction to such an attack would leave Iran in total devastation, hundreds of thousands maybe even millions killed by the original attack alone, the aftermath as I detailed above would leave hardly anyone in Iran alive and again, with radiation in the ground, all the crops and the water system, they couldn’t survive. Any miraculous survivors of the blasts and their immediate aftermath would have to be airlifted straight into quarantine to be monitored. Iran as we know it would cease to exist.

Even if the Iranian weapon is on a par with Hiroshima and Nagasaki or better and Israel was wiped off the map, Iran would still cease to exist after the U.S retaliated on Israel’s behalf. Either way Iran would be no more and the world would hang in the balance of a Russian and Chinese decision.

If anything comes through from Ahmadinejad’s supercharged speeches, apart from strong religious beliefs and utter commitment to continue enrichment, it is unrelenting patriotism. The very patriotism that gives such fervour to his continued defiance, in that he is determined that the state he is so proud to be a part of enjoys the right it is entitled to under International Law.

If it strikes me as slightly hypocritical that the biggest nuclear proliferators in the world should be telling Iran that their signature to the Non-Proliferation Treaty isn’t worth the paper it is written on and they are guilty until proven innocent of breaking it, you can’t blame Ahmadinejad and other patriotic Iranians for their reaction. Ahmadinejad’s patriotism would also surely prevent him from doing anything to risk the total obliteration of his country, which would mean he wouldn’t attack another country with nuclear weapons, especially not Israel.

Unfortunately it looks like Israel will attack Iran, either themselves or using the their U.S lobbying group the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) widely thought to be the most powerful lobby in America to convince Bush Iran needs to be stopped.

The forecasts I have made in this article could well mean the end of the world and yet I am not running out to build a fall out shelter. Though it may not seem like it from my writing I am ever the optimist. I have written this article in the hope that the U.S will vote for President, the candidate they feel is the least likely to be influenced by the Neocons, AIPAC and Israel. In other words, NOT BUSH, who could well wipe out the whole map trying to keep Israel on it.

Global Nuclear Arms Race

The consequences of Iran and North Korea’s nuclear programs are globally catastrophic.By Liam Bailey

Nov. 3 2006 will be remembered as the day the Middle East changed forever, six Arab states announced their intention to initiate programmes to master atomic technology. Morocco, Algeria, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, want to start civilian nuclear energy programs, Tunisia and the United Arab Emirates also showed interest. So many states, all predominantly Sunni Arab making simultaneous announcements of seeking nuclear power has prompted fears that their true intention could be to master the technology on the path to the first Arab atom bomb.

Despite these fears the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has consulted with all governments and will offer technical assistance in their development of nuclear power plants. The announcement was a complete reversal of Arab policy, which had previously been joint calls for nuclear disarmament throughout the Middle East, in other words the nuclear disarmament of Israel, the only Middle East state known to have a useable nuclear arsenal.

In my opinion the trigger for the Arab announcement was Iran firing “dozens” of long range missiles Nov. 2, including the Shahab 3, capable of carrying warheads of 1400 cluster bomblets anywhere within 1000 miles and the Shahab 2 with a shorter range but just as deadly. The Iranian missile tests came in response to the Oct 31 U.S led Naval exercises in the Persian gulf, in which 25 nations practised an operation to intercept and search a ship thought to be carrying weapons of mass destruction 20 miles from Iranian territorial waters. Despite what is becoming a significant U.S naval presence in the region, only one U.S coastguard vessel had an active role in the exercise; making the U.S Naval build-up seem somewhat suspicious.

One of the six Arab states announcing an intention to go nuclear: United Arab Emirates was involved in the exercise as an observer, all six are part of the Arab League, and all among the League’s ten richest states. Bahrain, Qatar and Kuwait the other three Arab states involved in the exercise are also members of the Arab League, which has a long running rivalry with Iran.

With the exception of Iraq and Bahrain, the Arab League is made up of predominantly Sunni countries, many Sunni Arab countries in the Middle East are thought to be suspicious of Iran’s nuclear program, so you could say such an announcement from the countries rich enough to go nuclear was to be expected. In my opinion Iran’s firing of long-range missiles in response to an exercise involving Arab League countries was the trigger for six of the richest Arab League states to take a step towards mastering nuclear technology. What they will use this technology for and the reactions to their intended use remain to be seen.

So while Iranian missile tests threaten to provoke a nuclear arms race across the Middle East Pyongyang’s nuclear test Oct. 9 caused and is still causing reverberations throughout Asia. The test, which could have killed thousands in North Korea and neighbouring countries if in going wrong radioactive material was spewed across the region at the mercy of wind speed and direction. The test didn’t go wrong but the consequences look to be just as dire.

In the days and weeks before Kim Jong Il’s irrational act some hard-line Japanese conservatives such as former Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone were quietly stating the need to develop nuclear weapons in the face of nuclear sabre-rattling by North Korea. Although his comments caused controversy among the Japanese political community, according to the Korea Times a large number of strongly nationalistic Japanese politicians supported his views. The successful test Oct. 9 added further validity to their cause and in the following weeks their case has been further strengthened by main-stream and prominent ministers like Foreign Minister Taro Aso showing his support for the controversial stance, saying Oct. 18 that it may be time for Japan to start discussions about nuclear armament.

Japan possesses enough Plutonium to make thousands of nuclear bombs and given its economic, academic and technological strength it is widely thought that they could develop nuclear weapons within months of starting such a program. Shinzo Abe’s assurances that Japan will neither have, make nor allow the import of nuclear weapons in Japan have done little to reassure their understandably anxious neighbours. Whether reflective of a genuine change in Japan’s stance on nuclear armament or not Foreign Minister Taro Aso adding credibility to former Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone’s comments prompted a similar debate in South Korea. The day after Taro Aso’s remarks, former leader and presidential candidate for South Korea’s opposition GNP party Lee Hoechang questioned whether South Korea should reconsider nuclear armament in the face of Japan’s changing attitude and the recent actions of Kim Jong Il, saying during a lecture: South Korea will need to develop its own nuclear weapon when Pyongyang’s possession of a nuclear weapon becomes an accomplished fact and Japan starts moving for nuclearization.

A nuclear domino effect in Asia, long feared by the west and a main reason for preventing a nuclear armed North Korea threatens to become a reality. If Japan does move towards nuclear armament, likely pushing South Korea to follow suit, not only will it lessen the chance of denuclearisation in Pyongyang, no doubt it will prompt Kim Jong Il to further augment his nuclear prowess, possibly with another test. These actions could then become a catalyst for China, Russia and other regional powers to do the same; triggering a catastrophic arms race, which given the current tensions between the west, China and Russia over Iran’s fledgling nuclear program, could quickly spread around the world.

Depending on the Arab League intentions and the restraint of the Japanese and South Korean governments; two already unstable regions could well enter into a nuclear arms race. A race that would make both regions much more unstable, possibly drawing in other regions and undoubtedly bringing the world one step closer to its second use of the world’s deadliest weapons; something I hoped I wouldn’t see in my lifetime.

Is Attacking Iran a Viable Option?

This article was also published by the Centre for Research on Globalisation, one of my best achievements so far…

Is Attacking Iran a Viable Option?

The definitive end of U.S military supremacy.

By Liam Bailey

I have written several articles on the Iran crisis pitting two expanding and important strategic alliances against each other and the similarities to the powder keg of Balkan and European alliances that erupted into World War I.

On one side is the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). Led by China and Russia, the SCO has four other permanent member states: Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan. Along with a senior official from India’s oil and gas industry, the prime ministers of Pakistan, Mongolia, Afghanistan and Iran attended the last meeting in Shanghai on June 15. It was the first meeting since Iran announced that it had successfully enriched Uranium: Iran was invited to become a full member.

The meeting was about strengthening trade and exports but also had a strong undertone of strengthening the alliance. A verbal oath was sworn for defending each other in the event of any attack. China and Russia have already signed military cooperation agreements with and are the main suppliers of advanced weaponry to Iran and Syria. This gave them verbal military cooperation agreements with all the SCO members, including Iran.

A senior spokesperson for U.S. ally Japan said: “The SCO is becoming a rival block to the U.S. alliance; it does not share our values. We are watching it very closely.” The U.S. too was watching it very closely, but from afar because their request for observer status at the meeting had been denied on the grounds that they shared neither land nor fluvial border with any of the SCO member states.

The meeting’s undertone of warning the U.S. against attacking Iran was evident in Chinese President Hu Jintao’s closing statement: “We hope the outside world will accept the social system and path to development independently chosen by our members and observers and respect the domestic and foreign policies adopted by the SCO participants in line with their national conditions.” Jintao’s statement was immediately followed by the verbal agreement — all members vowing to defend each other’s sovereignty and the alliance as a whole.The strengthening of this rival alliance and its challenge to U.S. supremacy was worrying amid speculation of advanced U.S. plans for war in Iran. The developments in the coming weeks and months increased the powder keg tensions of a well-backed Iranian nuclear standoff.The start of July, with joint military exercises by U.S., Romanian and Bulgarian armed forces, which continued until September, coincided with the North Korean missile tests of July 5 and began an intense period of war-games and weaponry testing from all the major players in both alliances.

Aug. 19 saw the beginning of Iranian military exercises and missile tests in all the border provinces likely to become the frontline in the event of a U.S. attack. The SCO and Collective Security Treaty Organisation) (CSTO) headed by China and Russia respectively, held joint exercises in coordination with the Iranian exercises, both launched Aug. 24 in Kazakhstan, which between them involved all 10 members of the SCO except Uzbekistan.

The Russian and Chinese exercises were thought to have come in response to mistrust of the U.S.’s intentions in the region, the threat of attack on Iran, the U.S. navy’s involvement in the rebuilding of Kazakhstan’s navy since 2003, and Iranian fears that the U.S. was attempting to build up their ally Azerbaijan to counter Iranian influence and dominance in the region. Hence, the Iranian exercises along the Azerbaijan border.

These provocative drills from all sides of the powder keg of alliances could easily have took us one step closer to war, because of the strong support from the Muslim world, Russia and China for Iran’s stance that it has a right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes under theNuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. As the exercises continued, they coincided with Iran’s response to the six-nations incentive package on Aug. 22, which was a practically flat refusal to suspend enrichment as a precursor for U.S.-involved talks. This made Iran’s failure to comply with U.N. Resolution 1696 and suspend enrichment by Aug. 31 inevitable.

This lead to a stalemate, the U.S maintaining its hard line toward the rogue regime and immediately pressuring for sanctions, the EU taking the middle ground, and Russia and China effectively vetoing any form of U.N. punishment against Tehran. China is of course heavily dependant on Iran’s oil reserves on its path to becoming a world superpower.

As October comes to an end, we are still no closer to a compromise on ending Iranian enrichment and possible proliferation. The U.N. is split and sanctions just do not look viable in the foreseeable future. Yet another draft resolution has been drawn up by the U.S. and its allies and diplomats say it could be presented to Russian and Chinese officials this week. The proposed resolution aims to impose restrictions on Iran’s nuclear progression similar to those imposed on North Korea last week with the passing of U.N. Resolution 1718.

However, the fact that North Korea angered China and Russia with its openly defiant and dangerous (for China) nuclear test, has put the bond between China and Russia, and the dependence of China on Iran, foremost in their decision making processes, not to mention strengthening the SCO alliance. All of which makes the passing of this draft resolution unlikely.

As the U.S. has always maintained that it will not let Iran get the bomb, decisive military action continues to become increasingly likely. Who knows, Bush may give us one last expensive war on his way out of office. All the signs seem to indicate that this is highly possible. North Korea, named alongside Iran and Iraq as part of Bush’s axis of evil, performed its first nuclear test on Oct. 9. Its defiance of the international community in its six-nations format could and in my view will harden Bush’s already hard-line stance toward Tehran’s enrichment program and make military action a real possibility should Iran seem close to obtaining the bomb.

The months between Iran ignoring U.N. Resolution 1696 and North Korea’s nuclear test brought many statements from senior Iranians. Many speaking on condition of anonymity threatened tough retaliation against any imposed sanctions. The latest announcement, on Oct. 23, that Iran had launched a second batch of 164 centrifuges, bringing the total to 328 interconnected centrifuges, which can enrich uranium for energy or weaponry purposes, further exasperated the Bush administration.

But according to a diplomat close to the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency, no UF6 uranium gas is being fed into the cascade, as has generally been the case with the first batch: “The second cascade was brought on line earlier this month but they appear to be just running it empty. That is, vacuum-testing to assess durability.”

These reported advances in Iran’s quest for nuclear power, either for civilian or military use, are increasing the pressure on the U.S., the EU and the fractured UN to end the standoff before it reaches a critical point like North Korea’s defiant test. As is Israel’s leadership, who have also constantly fueled the tensions over the past months by periodically threatening the use of its military might to end Iranian enrichment, a cycle of responding to Iran’s slow but propagandized advances tit-for-tat. Therefore, in such a heightened climate, if Bush puts another wrong foot forward in his handling of Kim Jong-il (that is, concentrates on Iraq and pressurizes Iran while allowing North Korea’s nuclear ambitions to become nuclear weapons and reach a catastrophic climax), it could strengthen the Iranians’ resolve, which is already strong because of China’s large dependence on Iranian oil.

Chinese dependence, which is empowering an Iranian regime bent on becoming a nuclear power, is a dangerous mix in itself. Add to this, reports from Chinese and Russian defectors that a catastrophic conflict with the U.S. has been in the planning for years and that the timetable is to be stepped up in the event of an attack on Iran, and it becomes very dangerous indeed.

Despite the consequences of a U.S. attack on Iran ranging from bad to catastrophic, depending on the strategy and success of the attack, the stalemate within the dysfunctional U.N. is threatening to leave Bush with no option. Speculation over the use of military force against Iran has been rife since Tehran’s April announcement of successful uranium enrichment.

The latest surge in tensions is over proposed U.S naval exercises with Britain, France, Bahrain and Kuwait in the Persian Gulf next week. Iran’s official Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) quoted an unnamed Foreign Ministry official as calling the maneuvers dangerous and suspicious. The official also said the exercises, reported to be practice runs for intercepting and searching ships carrying WMDs, were not in line with the security and stability of the region but instead aimed at fomenting crisis. The source blamed the neoconservatives’ warmongering, which is being used in an attempt to achieve success in the mid-term elections.

I believe the proposed exercises are another attempt by the U.S. to provoke Iran into a knee-jerk reaction, which would further alienate it from Russia and China and ultimately allow Bush to use military action to stop Iran’s nuclear program.

According to a war game organized by The Atlantic with the help of retired air force colonel and specialist in the field Sam Gardiner, which simulated preparations for an assault on Iran by the next American administration be it Republican or Democrat, such an assault could involve any or all of three separate strategies: (1) a punitive raid on key Revolutionary Guard units to retaliate for Iranian actions in Iraq and elsewhere, (2) a pre-emptive strike on all possible nuclear facilities or (3) the forceful removal of the Mullah regime from Tehran in a regime change operation.

The war games panel decided that the first two could be carried out independently but that the third would require the success of the first two as preparation. In reality, the second option — a pre-emptive strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities — is the one most often discussed. Also in reality, any one of these actions or the encouragement of similar actions from Israel’s military forces could well unleash a catastrophic global conflict.

The earliest retaliation would likely come in the form of missile attacks on Israel and other U.S. allies within the range of Iranian missiles (1,280 kilometers), followed by the blocking of the Strait of Hormuz, a vital oil channel, as threatened in the event of sanctions. Also, Iran may decide that a bloody defeat for the U.S., even if it means chaos in Iraq, is something they might actually prefer and begin exerting their significant influence over the majority Shia militias in Iraq to more heavily join the war against U.S. forces. Iran has so far discouraged the Shia communities from becoming involved in the insurgency. This would mean that the number of U.S. forces in Iraq would be greatly reduced for the first time as forces would be needed for the Iran invasion, which would coincide with the most dramatic rise of violence against U.S. forces since the Iraq invasion began.

If the Iran invasion did not go according to plan, the subsequently shrinking number of U.S. troops in Iraq could shortly find themselves unable to control the rising violence and forced into a hasty withdrawal from the Green Zone. Such an outcome would be seen as a defeat and empower the Jihadists for decades to come.

If any or all of the SCO members (China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan) were dragged into the conflict with allegiance to Iran, in turn bringing involvement from U.S. allies (Azerbaijan, Georgia, Bulgaria, Romania, Japan, Israel and the U.K., although the latter two would quite possibly be involved in some capacity from the beginning), a catastrophic global conflict would become World War III.

If none of these countries became involved but the badly overstretched U.S. military failed to achieve regime change in Tehran, whatever Iranian nuclear capabilities remained would undoubtedly be channeled toward the rapid advancement of any existing nuclear weapons program.

Military action in Iran, therefore, should be consigned to the realm of fiction. But Bush’s predisposition to falling for his own rhetoric, and the slim chances of achieving any form of sanctions against Tehran, leave a catastrophic global conflict that could easily become World War III looming over our heads. Whatever the strategy, if Bush or the next American president decides to use military force against Iran, it could easily result in the definitive end of U.S. military supremacy in the 21st century.

Will World Leaders Ever Learn?

The build up of opposing strategic alliances continues to present similarities with the build up to World War 1. War-games, arms sales, technological advances and advanced weaponry testing are creating the powder keg ready to erupt into World War 3.

By Liam Bailey

Well, everyone count your fingers and toes August 22 has come and gone and we’re all still here.   In the last few weeks since I posted my article on the similarities between the current Iran/west stand-off and the build up to World War 2, and how they could result in World War 3, the search engine terms people found my article with became strange. Things like “World War 3 August 22 (in my article the date of Iran’s reply) and military action August 22.  At first I was a little intrigued so I did a little searching myself, but after reading the first article I knew it was claptrap. 

The gist of it was… August 22 this year coincided with the Islamic date that Muhammad flew first to “the farthest mosque” – usually identified with Jerusalem – and then to heaven and back.  Ahmadinejad’s strong belief in the Shiite tradition of the 12 “hidden imam, Shiites believe the Imam Mahdi has been miraculously kept alive by Allah since his disappearance in 874 A.D and will return at a time of great global chaos. Ahmadinejad believes strongly in this, some analysts are stating that Ahmadinejad and the Iranian leadership believe the time for Mahdi’s return is now, others like go further to say “Ahmadinejad sees himself as Allah’s instrument to pave the way for Imam Mahdi.” This led to suspicions over Iran’s intentions for delaying their response to the six-nations incentives package until that significant religous day, some people believed they intended to attack Israel some even stated a nuclear attack could be in the offing.

All August 22  brought was the Iranian response to the six-nations incentives package, as stated, which continued the routine of this whole diplomatic effort, both sides in the tussle for the support of Russia and China being seen to favour diplomacy, but both sides unwilling to sacrifice sufficiently to achieve it.  Iran refused to halt its enrichment activities in return for the six-nations incentives package, a western pre-condition for talks, then said they want to re-open diplomatic talks, which could then possibly led to an enrichment suspension.  The reactions from world leaders were somewhat predictable. 

The EU and U.S were unsurprisingly disappointed with Iran’s response, saying that the response fell short of what was expected of Iran, a full and swift suspension to all enrichment activities, as stated in U.N resolution 1696, which threatens sanctions should Tehran refuse to comply by August 31.  Russia and China however were less disappointed with the Iranians response, saying it was enough to bring all parties back to the negotiating table.

On the face of it the Iranian response and the unsurprisingly different reactions from the five member states has led to fears that Iran are trying to split the UN.  I believe it is just another effort at buying time to achieve their goal, using the Indian, Pakistani and North Korean model that once you have the bomb no one dare do anything about it.  I suspect Iran will come unstuck in this strategy, Bush cannot be compared to other Presidents, he is crazy, and the areas that it comes most to the fore is areas of previous U.S foreign policy mistakes, Afghanistan, Iraq and North Korea.  It is when you look at the other related events in the past days and months that it all becomes clear… 

Bush is definitely planning the use of military action to stop Iran building nuclear weapons; the trouble is the amount of fringe nations likely to enter the conflict, not to mention China and Russia, whose defectors have said there are existing plans in both nations for a catastrophic conflict with the U.S.   The UN is already split and the world has never been closer to all out war.  This crisis is making friends and enemies for both sides and as I’ve said in previous articles, both have and are creating significant strategic alliances.

In recent days and months we have and are seeing massive military exercises carried out by all players in both alliances, including joint exercises involving U.S, Bulgarian and Romanian armed forces from the start of July, which coincided on July 5 with the N.Korean missile tests and the exercises are expected to continue until September.  Followed on August 19 by Iran launching their biggest military exercises since just after their announcement of successfully enriching uranium, the exercise, which is well underway in 14 of Iran’s provinces bordering with Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Persian Gulf, Iraq, Armenia and the Republic of Azerbajan, all would become front-lines in any U.S/Iran war, and the exercises are to continue between now and October, the timeframe many analysts predict for a U.S led attack on Iran.  

Perhaps most worrying of all the Iranian war-games coincided with two massive operations in Kazakhstan, by the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organisation) and the CSTO (Collective Security Treaty Organisation), both launched on August 24.  The CSTO, Rubezh-2006 exercise, organised by Russia and involving Tajikstan, Krygistan and Kazakhstan took place near Aktau in Kazakhstan.  Kazakhstan also took part in the SCO operation with China, police and special forces units from both countries took part in the exercise Tianshan one in the Almaty region near China, which is thought to have been closely co-ordinated with the Russian CSTO and the Iranian exercises. 

Russia and China have signed a military cooperation agreement and are the main suppliers of advanced weapons to Iran and Syria, as well as both having spoken military cooperation agreements with all other SCO members, which will include Iran when their invitation to become a full member is honoured.  Respectively the U.S and Israel have military cooperation agreements with Azerbajan and Georgia.  The joint drills in Kazakhstan are thought to have come in response to mis-trust of the U.S intentions in the region, the threat of attack on Iran, the U.S navy’s involvement in the re-building of Kazakhstan’s navy since 2003, and Iranian fears that the U.S is attempting to build up their ally Azerbajan to counter Iranian influence and dominance in the region, hence the Iranian exercise on the Azerbajan border. 

The Kazakhstan exercises were undoubtedly both preparation for a U.S attack on Iran and a warning that if Iran is attacked, Russia and China won’t remain neutral.  How many other countries are dragged into the conflict and when will depend on the U.S and/or Israeli strategy.   The Iranian exercise and missile tests are preparation, but could be used as cover for mass transporting of troops and equipment, possibly a pre-emptive strike of their own on Azerbajan say.  All this is on top of the latest reports from U.S Brigadier General Michael Barbero, he told reporters at the Pentagon that Iran is training Iraqi insurgents, who would have thought it. 

I suggest that all informed people have known for a long time that Iran is deeply involved in the U.S problem of Iraq, the Pentagon making the announcement amid the current nuclear stand-off could be a further suggestion that the U.S war machine is in the final stages of preparation, the first attempt at pacifying the public, at least this time it is true.  Another worrying development was Iran announcing that their new heavy water reactor was going on-line, just a few days after it replied to the six-nations incentives package on Aug 22 with a refusal to meet the western demands of suspending enrichment. 

Since the proposal was given Bush’s Neocon UN ambassador John Bolton finally managed to get Russia on board and resolution 1696 was passed demanding an immediate and verifiable halt to all enrichment activities by August 31 and threatening sanctions should Iran fail to comply.  Thursday August 31st then, is the big day, but if we didn’t know immediately after the resolution was passed that Iran wouldn’t comply, their calling it illegal was always a bad sign, then we certainly did when they responded to the six-nations proposal, and the heavy water reactor sealed the deal. 

Iran will not suspend uranium activity Aug 31, in fact I suggest it will continue to be scaled up.  Bush will begin to get his knickers in a twist with the UN failing to impose sanctions, which Russia and China will always oppose, and according to the Times would do Iran more good than harm.  Bush will eventually use the situation to continue his advance for domination of the Middle East and onwards… the Caspian…who’s next, come on then?  I just hope the world can survive till Bush is finally restrained and dragged from the White-House, or voted out democratically, which ever comes first.

A Deeper Occupation Will Only Increase The Problems!

Since Israeli ground troops began fighting in Lebanon I have been saying they would eventually push as far into Lebanon as the Litani river, contradicted consistently by Israeli statements regarding their official aim in the conflict.  Vindication came yesterday.

By Liam Bailey

The official Israeli line at the start of the ground invasion was, widespread air-strikes and a limited incursion to root out Hezbollah weapons and fighters, then creating a 1.2 mile buffer zone inside Lebanon, which was extended to 4 miles shortly after 1.2 was reached, when 4 was reached and the strategy clearly wasn’t diminishing Hezbollah’s capability to attack Israel, the new offensive creating a buffer zone between Israel’s border and the Litani river was authorised by the Israeli defence cabinet yesterday.  Hezbollah’s leader has warned that Israel will be faced with a “monumental battle” the occupied zone will become an Israeli “graveyard”.  Eli Yishai, one of the cabinet members who voted on the offensive said: “The assessment is it will last 30 days. I think it is wrong to make this assessment. I think it will take a lot longer,” also hinting that the Israeli cabinet expected a ceasefire to be imposed before the operation was completed. 

All reports coming from the UN contradict the Israeli expectations.  At the start of this conflict the U.S called for Lebanon to mobilise its army south to take control of the border region from Hezbollah, now the peace-process is on the brink of collapse because the U.S won’t agree to pressure for an immediate Israeli withdrawal based on the offer from Lebanon’s Prime Minister of the Lebanese army calling up 15,000 reservists and entering the South to police any ceasefire the UN can achieve, an offer Hezbollah would also favour according to the comments of their leader on Arab TV yesterday.  The U.S continuing to back the Israeli line, that the offensive will continue until a substantial international force enter the area means the conflict still no looks no closer to a ceasefire, or a “cessation of hostilities”.

After the initial announcement of the Israeli defence cabinets decision, statements by Prime Minister Olmert put the new offensive on hold till the weekend to allow more time for diplomatic efforts, but said the offensive would be brought forward if Hezbollah launched a massive attack on Israel, unrelenting U.S support for the Israel continually moving the goalposts on its conditions for withdrawal and ending the offensive, a ceasefire is still as far away as ever. Today Israeli troops took control of predominantly Christian Marjayoun, a strategic base for the new offensive, and looking over the Litani valley a known Hezbollah rocket site, proving the announcement of delaying the new offensive as another symbolic gesture by Olmert, like the 48 hour ceasefire that barely lasted an hour.

Israel authorised the new offensive, almost immediately expanding the 10,000 troop offensive, Hezbollah are already fighting the occupation, the battle has started.  Olmert can’t stop it with talk, unless what he says starts the Israeli withdrawal.  Withdrawal is Israel’s best option, but the duration of this offensive means even withdrawal won’t bring peace, nor will an international force, this battle will go on until Hezbollah is defeated.  The aim of the new expanded operation is to push Hezbollah back behind the Litani river, almost 20-miles from the Israeli border, but whatever security (occupied) zone Israel create, will, to Hezbollah become Israel by default and the Israeli military will continually have to fight  and go deeper into Lebanon until Hezbollah is defeated, which may take years and end with Lebanon totally occupied by Israeli forces, as growing numbers of Lebanese civilians are compelled by the mounting civilian death toll and deepening invasion, to fight alongside the militia. 

As well as their knowledge of the terrain and organisation, Hezbollah’s growing numbers are also responsible for Israel’s failure to diminish their capabilities to attack Israel and resist the occupation.  Israel lost 15 soldiers on Wednesday, Israel’s bloodiest day of the conflict after a month of suspected heavy bombardment of Hezbollah positions and a twenty day ground invasion specifically targeting the militia.  Hezbollah also fired 170 rockets into Israel Wednesday, as Hezbollah will continue to fight Israeli forces, even after they reach the Litani and having already fired rockets 45 miles into Israel, I am now predicting that the Israeli offensive won’t stop at the Litani river, where it stops nobody knows, I definitely don’t predict a ceasefire anytime soon.


I am still working on the analytical essay I promised, it’s a whopper but I had to get this in today.

Road-Map To War 2

This is my latest article, I posted it to the Baileymail this morning.  The U.S led road-map to war continues in its aim of Israeli shared Middle Eastern domination.

By Liam Bailey

Nothing has changed in the latest Israel/Lebanon crisis, despite a major development. The U.K and France finally agreed on the wording of a draft UN resolution on Saturday, the first of the current crisis comes after a long line of failed UN resolutions issued over the years. The U.K got its way with the resolution, which calls for a “cessation of hostilities” weaker as oppose to an immediate ceasefire, the resolution was weak on other main areas, such as only suggesting that the Israeli soldiers be returned and Israel withdraws its long-running occupation of the Chebaa farms area of Lebanon, and address the prisoner issue. All signs indicate that this is but another symbolic gesture by Tony Blair’s UK, who supports the U.S in allowing Israel to achieve its aims against Hezbollah; Israel has always said it won’t withdraw or stop its offensive until international troops arrive, yet the resolution stipulates that the UN peacekeeping force in Lebanon already, should initially monitor the ceasefire until the force can be put in place.

The day after the draft was drawn up Israel reiterated it would continue its military offensive against Hezbollah until the international force arrived or it achieved its military aim of creating a buffer zone, which it would then occupy until the international troops arrive. Hezbollah said it would continue its attacks on Israel until all Israeli soldiers were withdrawn. The resolution was never meant to work, France were the only party who really wanted it to; but even they eventually had to concede to giving Israel the right to defend itself, a term wrongly interpreted by the Olmert administration, which is a law to itself. This was clearly displayed again yesterday, by Israeli Justice Minister Haim Ramon’s who said that even if the UN passed a immediate ceasefire resolution Israel would continue to occupy a buffer zone in South Lebanon, and would continue its military offensive until it achieved its aims, overruling the watered down resolution, “no-one can act against Israel”.

All developments then continue to back up my well-versed theories on the matter, the Israeli action, clearly months in the planning, has aims far beyond Israel’s future security, and will continue under the unwavering U.S umbrella until Hezbollah is defeated or war breaks out with Iran providing fresh justification for its continuation. The latest developments in the Iran crisis, their chief nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani announced yesterday “we will expand our nuclear activities where required” he also called the resolution “Illegal” and said “we reject this resolution”, also proving my theory, that Iran will be attacked by the U.S or Israel when it fails to comply with UN resolution 1664 by August 31st, combining with the current crisis to spark a catastrophic global conflict. Iran has also threatened to cease oil exports if pressure continues over its nuclear activities, a threat aimed at Iran’s ally China, relying heavily on Iranian oil in its path to super-powerdom, possibly apparent Russian support for the resolution triggered Iran’s necessity to ensure China will support Iran in its enrichment after August 31st.

What I think we will see over the coming days is further expansion of the Israeli offensive, throughout Lebanon, I believe we will see an escalation in attacks behind theLitani River, especially eastern areas. An escalation of these actions close to the Syrian border, would undeniably be an attempt at provoking Syria’s entry into the conflict, in another wing of the plan to provoke Iran into actions justifying attack, what worries me even more is that this could also be used to kill two birds, by achieving “regime change” in Syria through the U.S proxy Israeli army.

Buy content through ScooptWords

Road-map to war

I wrote and posted this article to the Baileymail July 31st, the day after Watching The Beginning. 

U.S/U.K created hopes of an earlier than expected ceasefire in the Middle East won’t materialise. The resolution on Iran was passed today. The world continues on its “road-map to war”.

By Liam Bailey

Rice’s second visit to the Middle East achieved a small concession from Israel late on Sunday, after an Israeli strike which killed around 60 Lebanese, mostly women and children in the early on Sunday morning. Later Israel agreed With Condoleezza to suspend its aerial bombardment of Lebanon from midnight, to allow for an investigation to be carried out by their military, and co-ordinating with the UN for a 24 hour period to allow safe passage for any remaining civilians wanting to flee. The 48 hour period was in a statement issued by Adam Ereli, State Department spokesman in Jerusalem, Israeli statements said “Only targets that are about to attack Israeli targets will be hit, and this will be the case until the full IDF [Israel Defence Forces] inquiry is concluded.”

Israeli warplanes and artillery continued to hit targets in Southern Lebanon, including a Lebanese soldier in the Souther city of Tyre, in a jeep believed to be carrying a top Hezbollah official. Hezbollah strikes also continued Monday, altough much fewer than previous days of the conflict; Sunday ending with reports of 156 Hezbollah rockets attacks on Northern Israel resumed barely after the suspension began b ut only three attacks were confirmed on Monday. The announced suspension coincided with a change in tone from U.S and U.K statements by Bush, Blair and Rice today, indicating they hoped to see a ceasefire this week, Olmert’s hard-line statement: The fighting continues. There is no ceasefire and there will not be any ceasefire in the coming days.” coinciding with the continuing artillery and occasional air strikes and Defence secretary Amir Peretz saying today that Israel plans to “Expand and strengthen” its attack on Hezbollah indicated otherwise.

In my articles I have implied that the U.S wouldn’t stop Israel until it had prompted Iran into actions justifying attack, so today’s news reports of new optimism as Bush and Blair changed their stance contradict me somewhat. In other news today however, the UN passed the resolution on Iran I have discussed in previous posts, resolution 1696 gives Iran until August 31st to suspend Uranium enrichment and open its nuclear programme to international inspections, but not containing the strong definite threat of sanctions as suggested by John Bolton, Russia and China watered it down to taking “appropriate measures” if Iran fails to comply. As I said in yesterday’s post, Iran has already made it clear it will not comply with this resolution and will abandon the six-nation incentives package because of it.

The Israel conflict has therefore killed two birds with one conflict, in a pre-emptive strike on Hezbollah which discredits and undermines the UN in the process. Not to mention Iran being more likely to comply with this resolution was it not for the U.S and U.K’s continued support of Israel in their carnage of Lebanese and Palestinian civilians, they certainly won’t in the current conflict. The suspension of Israeli bombardment today was promising but Israeli statements and actions shortly after the announcement confirmed it was a symbolic gesture to alleviate tensions with the Lebanese government, which reached a new high when they refused to hold talks with Condoleezza Rice on her latest visit to the region after the raid on Qana, the Bush administration doesn’t mind if Israel destroys all of Lebanon, as long as the fledgling democracy remains. This is why every effort has been made to involve the Lebanese Army in the international force patrolling the border.

The suspension is a U.S effort to bring Fuad Saniora back to the table and away from the brink of all out support for Hezbollah, after his statements thanking Hezbollah for their sacrifices during the conflict, and similar statements from other Lebanese officials. I still don’t believe we are really any closer to a ceasefire, don’t forget Hezbollah will have to agree to a ceasefire before peacekeepers go in, and Israel has stated it will not cease defending itself until the international force is in Lebanon and willing to fire on Hezbollah if it breaks the ceasefire agreement. Even if U.S support dries up completely, Israel will go it alone until Hezbollah to is defeated once and for all, and the UN has been sufficiently undermined by august 31st, so Bush can overrule it in favour of a war to protect us from Iran, a state sponsoring terrorism obtaining nuclear weapons.

Buy content through ScooptWords

Watching the Beginning…

This is an article from yesterday’s Baileymail.

My fears over the U.S pushing for increased pressure on Iran to suspend nuclear activities taking us one step closer to world-war 3, were confirmed today when Iran warned the UN against approving the proposed resolution.

By Liam Bailey

The Iranian foreign ministry today threatened Iran would abandon the latest incentives package offered by the six-nation coalition if the UN Security Council approves a resolution against Iran tomorrow. Hamid Reza Asefi said “If any resolution is issued against Iran tomorrow, the package would be left off the agenda by Iran, we will definitely revise our nuclear policy.” The stage is set for my fears to be realised, as again today the UN again called for an immediate ceasefire, following at least 60 Lebanese civilians, including women and children being killed in an Israeli air-raid on Qana, and again both Bush and Blair came out calling for a rapid end to the hostilities, but still only as rapidly as Hezbollah can be removed from the border, either by giving Israel time to destroy Hezbollah and most of Lebanon into the bargain, or the deployment of an external force to police a ceasefire, mostly applying conditions on Hezbollah and Lebanon agreed by both sides. A ceasefire we all know Hezbollah will never agree to.

The Lebanon conflict is showing better than ever before the determined strategy of the U.S/Israeli/UK governments to discredit the UN and render it obsolete, they want to control the world between themselves, in-case you wonder why Blair his sacrificed his political career to supporting Bush. The stage is then set for the catastrophic conflict that would come from a U.S or Israeli attack on Iran, if this UN resolution is passed tomorrow, there is every possibility, judging by today’s remarks that Iran will do the opposite of comply, but I don’t think we will see UN sanctions. The U.S obviously plans that the UN will be sufficiently discredited by August 31st to allow them to overrule it and attack Iran, using the nuclear armed Iran rhetoric in a re-spun Iraq war campaign. It is laughable that John Bolton and the Bush administration should now be pushing for two UN resolutions when everyday they undermine the UN by rejecting pressure on Israel to end the conflict, John Bolton, the man behind the resolutions on Iran and Hezbollah, vetoed the first UN resolution, mainly on Israel, because of its strong criticism of their disproportionate actions.

Bush stated Iran and Iraq as part of an “axis of evil” shortly before invading Iraq, prompting Iran into announcing its developing nuclear capacity as a deterrent against U.S attack. The Iraq war was also evidence of the U.S determined efforts to undermine the UN’s authority, so, now U.S ambassador to the UN is putting the date of August 31st on the proposed resolution, I believe we will see attempts stepped up to further undermine the UN. What we are certain to see is mounting civilian death tolls in Lebanon, and further; more determined calls for ceasefire from the UN, and further rejection of their calls from the Blair, Olmert and Bush, each time undermining the UN a little more. We might also see further Israeli “accidents” on UN outposts, although I doubt it; the observers in the areas of heaviest Israeli bombardment have been withdrawn so the Israeli military and air force can get on with their government sanctioned slaughter of civilians unimpeded and unobserved. Whether the attack was deliberate or not, it was effective in undermining the UN, the coverage of the 4 peace-keepers deaths in the mass-media emphasised their helplessness one headline was: “unarmed and in the cross-fire”. Really, in a conflict such as this the UN’s helplessness to stop the conflict, or even Israeli bombardment on their outposts is construed as ineffectiveness.

As I said in my July 28th post, Hezbollah will never surrender or disarm until it is defeated on the battlefield. A UN resolution, undermined as the UN is won’t change that. The same goes for Iran, after August 31st Iran will still be enriching uranium, in open defiance of the world. The Bush administration won’t stand for that; The UN resolution is what I have said of the whole U.S diplomatic effort on Iran, being seen to be doing all they can to find a peaceful solution, so they are supported in any future war. Their efforts in Lebanon confirm this, to the Bush administration, as many before diplomacy is diversionary and democracy transmittable. Watch the UN’s demise be completed by the U.S/U.K/Israel alliance in the run up to the deadline date, and watch Iran get devastated from the skies; maybe even nuked by America and/or Israel. Also watch the Israeli campaign intensify throughout August as it attempts to achieve their shared aims of discrediting the UN and destroying Hezbollah in preparation for attacks on Iran. Watch the beginning of World War 3.

Buy content through ScooptWords

The World War Blame Game

The world seems to be getting closer and closer to the brink of a catastrophic global conflict.  Thank you George W Bush.

By Liam Bailey

As I lay out in my previous post the current stand-off over Iran’s increasing nuclear capabilities is extremely capable of plunging the world into a catastrophic global conflict.  The latest tit-for-tat of the U.S and others extending the deadline for Iran’s reply to the latest offer week-by-week, and Iran standing firm on replying when it suits them possibly as late as mid-august, backs-up my theory that neither side is willing to compromise sufficiently to reach a diplomatic solution.   It is my belief that Iran feared American attack after the “axis of evil” speech and made the announcement as a form of defence, as well as funding the terrorist militias in Iraq to bog down U.S forces, making an Iran invasion unlikely.  The testing of seven long-range missiles by North Korea on Wednesday 5th July, the promise of more from N. Korea’s Kim Jong II and the ensuing diplomatic tensions, I’m sure causing fear to many people in Asia.  Another taught standoff and with possibly catastrophic consequences.

Look at the worlds two main crisis points/possible conflict triggers, Iran and North Korea, what do they have in common?  They were both part of an imaginary “axis of evil” according to the U.S President before he invaded Iraq, now they really are becoming an “axis of evil.”  Iran is standing firm on its nuclear program being for peaceful purposes, and their right to enrich uranium for such purposes under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, a right backed up by Russia, China and many other nations making sanctions almost impossible and war increasingly likely. North Korea claims its missile tests were in preparation to defend their national sovereignty, a claim generally met with scorn by the west.  Don’t you agree that if North Korea’s Kim Jong II went on television worldwide and said Britain, the United States and Japan pose a serious threat to the safety of the world, took up mass bombardment of Japan and then launched a ground force invasion, we would all expect a reaction from Bush and Blair to sure up our national security?

Of course Kim Jong II has clearly got it wrong, in attempting to increase self-defence capabilities I believe he has failed, but succeeded in increasing the likelihood of increased capabilities becoming necessary, as well as proving Bush right about the “axis of evil” statement to a certain extent.  The Friday following the test-firing, Japan proposed a U.N security council resolution ordering North Korea cease its ballistic missile program, including sanctions and a call for all other nations to take steps to keep North Korea from acquiring equipment needed to further the missile program.  Like the Iran stand-off most of the six-nations favour sanctions, it is China and Russia that still need to be convinced, but Japan maintain the need for sanctions their foreign minister Taro Aso according to the Kyodo News Agency said: “ Japan will not give in.  It definitely must be a resolution containing sanctions.”  Their senior vice minister Yasuhisa Shiozaki said security council members were privately “having positive discussions” and were chipping away at Russian and Chinese doubts.  If the Iran standoff is anything to go by that will not be an easy task.

Bush has seemed dedicated to achieving a diplomatic solution on North Korea, whereas in Iran’s case he doesn’t appear to be trying quite as hard.  Iran wrote a 27 page letter to President Bush at the beginning of the crisis, which was ignored by the U.S President at the time negotiating with Iran through the five-nations.  Even when he did offer to directly join the talks it was on the precondition of Iran ceasing enrichment, trying to secure the hopeful outcome of the talks before even coming to the table was either arrogant or optimistic to the point of stupidity, nothing strange for Bush though.  In North Korea’s case a U.S envoy is already in Seoul touring the region to coordinate a response to the missile tests.  Assistant secretary of State Christopher Hill is backing the Chinese proposal for informal six-nation talks, in the hope of bringing North Korea, currently boycotting formal talks because of U.S financial restrictions, back to the table.

The encouraging thing about both of these tense diplomatic standoffs is just that, they are diplomatic and not yet military standoffs, proving that Bush, despite his rhetoric is learning lessons from Iraq and Afghanistan that American oil imperialism no longer has free-reign.  The rate of his learning is slow in comparison to the rate the world is heading towards catastrophic conflict, so things will surely get worse before they get better.

Buy content through ScooptWords


« Older entries