Scott Ritter and Seymour Hersh have made at least two appearances at The New York Society for Ethical Culture in the past year to discuss US foreign policy issues concerning Iraq and more recently Iran. The October 16, 2006 appearance covered the issues of Mr. Ritter's current book Target Iran. Transcripts and podcasts are available.
It is Mr. Ritter's contention that the Busch administration's primary tool of foreign policy is that of regime change. Any efforts by those nations that are so targeted to engage us in diplomacy have and will be rebuffed. This administration will not talk to those it considers it's enemies. This has been challenged in the media by the James Baker group, but it remains to be seen if they will effect any changes.
Target Iran, according to Mr. Ritter, in based on press coverage in the Middle East and private confirmation of those stories by members of our intelligence community. The story is that America is already working inside Iran with dissidents to identify targets. We are also said to be negotiating the details of staging areas for our base of attack for this widening of the Middle East war. Once that is completed, this administration intends to attack.
The public is and will be sold the same scenario in which (ala Downing Street memo), the facts will be fixed around the policy.
Why will this happen? One element is the influence of Israel. Iran is perceived, and not incorrectly, as a major threat to Israel. But Ritter makes the point that Israeli and American interests are not identical. After the recent events in Southern Lebanon, watching our congress and our administration give their complete support to whatever Israel was going to do, it's hard to see much separation.
Whatever the threat to us from Iran, Mr. Ritter says it's very much overblown at this point and should not lead to war. Iran, according to Ritter, approached this administration several years ago to normalize relations and limit it's nuclear research. They were rebuffed. Mr. Busch can only visualize regime change.
If this goes forward as Mr. Hersh and Ritter both seem to think is inevitable, what are the chances of success? According to these gentlemen, the results will be utter catastrophe. Iran will immediately shut off the oil spigot. Venezuela will create a hemispheric crisis by acting in sympathy and fail to honor their US contracts. US troops in Iraq will be under attack by the Shia and possibly because of a religious fatwa in response to our attack. Iranian missiles will be directed against the Saudi oil fields to further disrupt the world markets. The world economy will be plunged into a massive recession. This could lead to a ground invasion of US troops most likely from Uzbekistan that could easily turn into a trap. Our ground troops are seriously depleted and under equipped at this point already. Here is where Ritter says this administration could use field grade nuclear weapons to break the back of Iran. He thinks this is the ultimate deal breaker because it absolutely assures us that radical Arabs will find a way over time to deliver a nuclear bomb to an American city.
These scenarios seem outlandish, except there are so many radical Republican sources cheering on war with Iran, that one cannot expect this administration to not once again respond with a military solution as the first order of business. Of course, they visualize success not the failure predicted by Ritter.
The massive failure of our government during Katrina and the fiasco in Iraq are both symptoms of the same problems in the Busch administration. What if war with Iran leads to the doomsday scenario that Ritter and Hersh talk about. This book is a sober assessment of these issues and should be read widely by the public.
The potential of a Democratic House of Representatives in the near future will not change the scenario described by Ritter. American militarism is ascendant. As Ritter says, if the war in Iraq were going well, the public would be very satisfied. The fact that the war is against all tenets of international law and was an immoral act on our part is not something that most of us seem to worry about. Too many Democrats only talk about running a competent war.
