Iran's "Good Nuclear News" and the Real Rationale for US Strikes

Speculation abounds after the announcement by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran that he will release "good nuclear news" on Tuesday night. It is expected that he will say that his scientists have enriched uranium to foster nuclear power in the country which, if true, is certainly not good news for his people considering the current international tensions.

If the regime has been able to enrich uranium, it is still considered unlikely that Iran would have the capability to create a bomb for some years to come. However, the announcement of a successful enrichment program is expected to cause a huge backlash which the Iranian government is prepared for.

"After the good nuclear news, the psychological war against us will start," lawmaker Gholamreza Mesbahi-Moghaddam told an Iranian parliament session on Tuesday. "I can say there will be international media campaign against us in the next days because of the news the president will announce."
[...]
"Our enemies cannot do a damn thing given the Iranian nation's persistence, and they know that," Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying by state television.

This follows the Sy Hersh story this past weekend that Bush has not taken the nuclear option off the table when it comes to dealing with Iran's nuclear activities despite being urged to do so by his Joint Chiefs. Bush shrugged off Hersh's assertions as "wild speculation" and could obviously go no further than that by promising to investigate any leak of classified plans because to do so would be to admit that Hersh's sources were correct. So, by his staunch denial, he all but confirmed his thinking related to dealing with the Iranian threat.

It is believed that the US is pursuing strong action against Iran to protect Israel from possible missile strikes. Hersh's article stated that, "Bush and others in the White House view him as a potential Adolf Hitler, a former senior intelligence official said." This sentiment was pushed by AIPAC's executive director, Howard Kohr, in March, 2006 at their annual conference which had the ominous slogan, "Now is the time".

Kohr's sobering speech was an exercise in Holocaust analogy. It was preceded by a short video bluntly comparing Iran to Nazi Germany and the Islamic Republic's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, to Adolph Hitler. "The parallels of the geopolitical climate of March 5, 1933, and that of March 5, 2006, are stunning in their likeness, eerie in their implication," Kohr said, adding, "Unlike the ominous days of the 1930s, this time we must not ignore the approaching thunder."

AIPAC has been embroiled in a spying scandal for quite some time, resulting in the imprisonment of Larry Franklin and it's worth recalling some of the details which relate to Iran:

The two ex-Aipac staffers - foreign policy and research director Steve Rosen and former Iran specialist Keith Weissman - are charged with unauthorized possession of national defense information and with passing it on to foreign agents - believed to be Israeli diplomats - and to the media.

It's also interesting to note that Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, recently said of Iran: "We may face no greater challenge from a single country" while Bush, speaking to an AIPAC gathering in 2004 proclaimed: "AIPAC is doing important work. In Washington and beyond, AIPAC is calling attention to the great security challenges of our time." Proof that AIPAC, Washington's most powerful lobby group which is full of neocons, is driving Bush's Iran policy? Sound familiar? Revisit what Philip Zelikow had to say about the reason behind the Iraq war in 2004.

The fact remains that Iran's nuclear capabilities are not a direct threat to the United States at this time and while proliferation is a long-term concern, the possibility that Iran can develop a nuclear warhead on one of its missiles within the next year or so would be an imminent threat to Israel. In March, Bush admitted his reason for his push against Iran:

I made it clear, I'll make it clear again, that we will use military might to protect our ally, Israel."

While many pundits and bloggers are focused on a takeover of Iran's oil supplies by the US, the military planning released by Hersh suggests otherwise since the strikes would simply be directed at taking out Iran's nuclear facilities. Bushco has stated that it wants regime change in the country and is working behind the scenes to organize political opposition groups to that end. However, tactical strikes against specific targets cannot bring that about. Therefore, it's advisable to look at the broader situation in the Middle East - specifically to the vulnerability of Israel - in order to understand the true rationale behind Bush's mission.

UPDATE: Iran's former president, Rafsanjani, has announced that his country has successfully enriched uranium from 164 centrifuges.

"We operated the first unit which comprises of 164 centrifuges, gas was injected, and we got the industrial output," Rafsanjani said in an interview with KUNA.

"There needs to be an expansion of operations if we are to have a complete industrial unit; tens of units are required to set up a uranium enrichment plant," said Rafsanjani, who was Ahmadinejad's rival in last year's presidential race.
[...]
The U.N. Security Council has demanded Iran shelve enrichment activity and on March 29 asked the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to report on its compliance in 30 days.

White House reaction was swift:

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the statement showed Iran was "moving in the wrong direction" and if it persisted, the United States would discuss possible next steps with U.N. Security Council members.

"If the regime continues to move in the direction that it is currently, then we will be talking about the way forward with the other members of the Security Council and Germany about how to address this going forward," McClellan said on board Air Force One en route to Missouri.

CNN anchor, Jim Clancy, while reporting on today's speeches from Iran reminded the audience that prominent neocons Cheney, Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld, while serving in the Ford administration, had actually supported the idea of Iran developing nuclear power facilities.

Ford's team commended Iran's decision to build a massive nuclear energy industry, noting in a declassified 1975 strategy paper that Tehran needed to "prepare against the time -- about 15 years in the future -- when Iranian oil production is expected to decline sharply."

Rumsfeld, in response to questions during today's Pentagon briefing, said he will "wait and see what our experts say about it".