FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The Iran Nuke “Threat”

by BEN SCHREINER

They say you can’t kill that which has never lived.  It’s useful advice when analyzing the persistence of the so-called “Iranian nuclear threat.”

According to a report in McClatchy, “Israeli intelligence officials now estimate that Iran won’t be able to build a nuclear weapon before 2015 or 2016.”

Recall that just this past September Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was theatrically warning that Iran would achieve nuclear weapons capability by “next spring, at most by next summer.”

Of course, Netanyahu has made a career out of warning that Iran is about to go nuclear – claiming as early as 1992 that Iran was 3 to 5 years away from being able to produce a bomb

As one Israeli official justifiably lamented to McClatchy, “Did we cry wolf too early?”  Yes – early and often, to be precise.

“There has not been the run towards a nuclear bomb that some people feared,” the Israeli official went on to note.  “There is a deliberate slowing on their [Iran’s] end.”

The fact that Iran has made no run towards a bomb should come as no surprise.  After all, both U.S. and Israeli intelligence estimates have repeatedly found that Iran is not pursuing a bomb.

Moreover, it’s been nearly a year now since Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei first issued a fatwa against nuclear weapons.

“The Islamic Republic,” Khamenei declared back in early 2012, “logically, religiously and theoretically, considers the possession of nuclear weapons a grave sin and believes the proliferation of such weapons is senseless, destructive and dangerous.”

Speaking earlier this month, Iran’s Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast reiterated that Khamenei’s fatwa is binding.

“There is nothing more important in defining the framework for our nuclear activities than the Leader’s fatwa,” Mehmanparast stated. “This fatwa is our operational instruction.”

Contrast, then, the Iranian nuclear posture with that of the U.S. and Israel – the two supposedly threatened parties.

Israel has perhaps as many as 200 nuclear weapons.  It is unknown precisely just how many bombs Israel possesses because it refuses to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty (which Iran has done), or allow in international inspectors (which Iran continues to do).

Meanwhile, the U.S. – the only nation to actually deploy nuclear weapons in combat – is currently in the midst of upgrading its arsenal of 5,113 nuclear warheads.  With conservative estimates approaching $400 billion, the Washington Post reports, it will be the “costliest overhaul in its history.”

And yet, it is Iran that poses the nuclear threat.

In fact, Netanyahu, in defiance of his country’s own intelligence, continues to this day to warn of “Iran’s race to achieve nuclear capability.”

The Iranian nuclear threat simply cannot be killed.  And as it is permitted to linger, the U.S. military planning against Iran continues its acceleration.

As former Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barack revealed in a recent interview with the Daily Beast, the Pentagon has drawn up detailed plans for a “surgical operation” against Iran – what Barack deemed “scalpels.”

It’s worth noting, however, that much of the speculation on a possible U.S. strike against Iran has centered on the use of the Pentagon’s Massive Ordnance Air Blast weapon.  At 30,000 pounds, the “mother of all bombs,” as it is known, is the “largest non-nuclear weapon in the U.S. military arsenal.”

Clearly, the definition of what constitutes a “surgical operation” is becoming ever more flexed.

The Israeli daily Haaretz, meanwhile, reports that the Pentagon has just deployed six F-22 Raptor fighters to the Al-Dhafra Airbase in the United Arab Emirates.

The F-22, as Haaretz notes, is the “most advanced fighter currently in operational use by the United States Air Force and the only operational ‘stealth’ fighter in use around the world with the capability to evade enemy radar systems.”

The Pentagon originally deployed the F-22s to its UAE airbase last April, but claimed at the time that their deployment was to be temporary.  But after nine months, and a reinforcement of the warplanes, the deployment appears to be quite permanent.

It is again useful to compare Washington’s military posture in the Gulf to that of Tehran.

As an April Pentagon report found, Iran’s defense doctrine remains one of self-defense.  Iran’s military capacity, the report notes, is designed specifically to “slow an invasion” and “force a diplomatic solution to hostilities.”

The stationing of the stealth fighters in the UAE, along with a naval armada in the waters of the Persian Gulf, makes it abundantly clear what the U.S. defense doctrine is designed for.

It’s clear, then, the Iranian nuclear threat is but a phantom menace.  And that in part explains its enduring presence.  You can’t kill that which has never lived.

Ben Schreiner is a freelance writer based in Wisconsin.  He may be reached at bnschreiner@gmail.com or via his website.

More articles by:

Ben Schreiner is the author of A People’s Dictionary to the ‘Exceptional Nation’.  He may be reached at bnschreiner@gmail.com or via his blog.

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

Weekend Edition
June 23, 2017
Friday - Sunday
Jeffrey St. Clair
Democrats in the Dead Zone
Gary Leupp
Trump, Qatar and the Danger of Total Confusion
Andrew Levine
The “Democracies” We Deserve
Jeffrey St. Clair - Joshua Frank
The FBI’s “Operation Backfire” and the Case of Briana Waters
Joseph G. Ramsey
Savage Calculations: On the Exoneration of Philando Castille’s killer
John Wight
Trump’s Attack on Cuba
Brian Cloughley
Moving Closer to Doom
David Rosen
The Sex Offender: the 21st Century Witch
John Feffer
All Signs Point to Trump’s Coming War With Iran
Jennifer L. Lieberman
What’s Really New About the Gig Economy?
Pete Dolack
Analyzing the Failures of Syriza
Mike Whitney
Putin Tries to Avoid a Wider War With the US
Gregory Barrett
“Realpolitik” in Berlin: Merkel Fawns Over Kissinger
Louis Yako
The Road to Understanding Syria Goes Through Iraq
Graham Peebles
Grenfell Tower: A Disaster Waiting to Happen
Ezra Rosser
The Poverty State of Mind and the State’s Obligations to the Poor
Ron Jacobs
Andrew Jackson and the American Psyche
Pepe Escobar
Fear and Loathing on the Afghan Silk Road
Andre Vltchek
Why I Reject Western Courts and Justice
Lawrence Davidson
On Hidden Cultural Corruptors
REZA FIYOUZAT
Useless Idiots or Useful Collaborators?
Missy Comley Beattie
The Poor Need Not Apply
Joseph Natoli
What to Wonder Now
Thomas Knapp
The Castile Doctrine: Cops Without Consequences
Nyla Ali Khan
Borders Versus Memory
Binoy Kampmark
Death on the Road: Memory in Tim Winton’s Shrine
Sam Pizzigati
Companies Can Either Make Things or Make CEOs Rich
Tony McKenna
The Oily Politics of Unity: Owen Smith as Shadow Northern Ireland Secretary
Nizar Visram
If North Korea Didn’t Exist US Would Create It
Jill Richardson
Trump on Cuba: If Obama Did It, It’s Bad
Olivia Alperstein
Our President’s Word Wars
Clark T. Scott
Parallel in Significance
Richard Klin
Prog Rock: Pomp and Circumstance
Charles R. Larson
Review: Malin Persson Giolito’s “Quicksand”
June 22, 2017
Jason Hirthler
Invisible Empire Beneath the Radar, Above Suspicion
Ken Levy
Sorry, But It’s Entirely the Right’s Fault
John Laforge
Fukushima’s Radiation Will Poison Food “for Decades,” Study Finds
Ann Garrison
Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour Party, and the UK’s Socialist Surge
Phillip Doe
Big Oil in the Rocky Mountain State: the Overwhelming Tawdriness of Government in Colorado
Howard Lisnoff
The Spiritual Death of Ongoing War
Stephen Cooper
Civilized, Constitution-Loving Californians Will Continue Capital Punishment Fight
Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla
Cuba Will Not Bow to Trump’s Threats
Ramzy Baroud
Israel vs. the United Nations: The Nikki Haley Doctrine
Tyler Wilch
The Political Theology of US Drone Warfare
Colin Todhunter
A Grain of Truth: RCEP and the Corporate Hijack of Indian Agriculture
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail