The Doomsday Scenario
August 24, 2004
Raymond Close, a longtime CIA operations officer in the Middle East, has penned a provocative analysis of the Bush administration’s options in Iraq—one that might end with what he calls a “doomsday scenario,” namely, an Israeli strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities.
In a letter circulated to clients and friends, Close writes:
Bush (if he remains president for another four years) will become more and more desperate to find a plausible explanation (an excuse) for the disastrous mess that his policy has created. I think Bush and the neocons will, therefore, soon begin to employ the argument that we would have succeeded in establishing a stable pro-western secular democracy in Iraq if it had not been for the fact that the evil Iranian mullahs inspired and instigated the radical Shia Islamist insurgency, thereby spoiling the whole enterprise and preventing America from delivering the torch of freedom to the people of Iraq. This propaganda campaign has already started, in fact, and is beginning to take on a life of its own that is quite distinct from, and clearly in addition to, whatever other (much more legitimate) reasons the United States may have today for genuine concern about the role being played by Iran in the region and in the world—mainly involving nuclear proliferation. The problem is that these kinds of confrontations have a way of escalating over time, inviting tit-for-tat charges and countercharges, until there is no way that national pride and "face" will allow either side to cool down.
What I am predicting is not a deliberate effort by the Bush administration to start a war with Iran (quite the contrary), but rather an ill-considered course of action that starts with a desperate search for an excuse for failure in Iraq, but ends up in a confrontation with Iran that will eventually get beyond Bush's ability to control with the resources—political, military and psychological—that he has at his disposal.
There is no question that Iran is meddling in Iraq, of course. Based on what’s happened thus far, however, it is clear that Iran is exercising enormous restraint. Part of that is simply self-interest: Bush has bungled Iraq so badly that Iraq’s Shiite fundamentalists are likely to gain the upper hand there by 2005, so Iran’s mullahs can simply sit back and wait for that to happen. Yet what Close suggests—and I agree—is that the White House can make things far worse by creating a confrontational showdown with Iran as a way of diverting attention from the Iraqi mess. Iran’s leaders already suspect that they may be “next” if Bush is re-elected, so there’s no telling how they might react. But in a way, it’s a paradox for Iran: if Iran tries to hurt Bush by causing more trouble in Iraq, they could end up helping him get re-elected instead, by fueling a crisis that be can capitalize on, War President that he is.
I not sure I agree with Close that the Bush administration, or its neocon contingent at least, is not deliberately seeking a crisis with Iran. Michael Ledeen, AEI, the Hudson Institute, and other intemperate voices are continuing the drumbeat for a confrontation. In a recent article, Ledeen wrote (as per his usual):
In Iran we have upwards of 70 percent of the people on our side. If we supported them, I think it quite likely that we could liberate Iran in a matter of a few months. And if Iran falls, Syria will most likely come right alongside.
If we do not quickly expose the vulnerability of mullahs and empower the Iranian people, I believe the next few months in Iraq will, if Tehran has its way, be bloodier than anything we have seen to date.
Last week John Bolton, the State Department’s house neocon, gave a speech to the Hudson Institute in which he reprised the “Axis of Evil” phrase and demanded “serious, concerted, immediate intervention by the international community” to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Given that the international community is not going to sponsor Ledeen-style regime change, is Bolton giving the green light for an Israeli attack? Or does he want U.S.-sponsored, Iraq-style regime change? What, exactly, does he want?
Close, in his letter, warns that if the U.S.-Iran showdown does escalate, it could easily lead to an Israeli attack:
Will this stimulate Israel to seek American approval for Israeli preemptive military actions—such as bombing the Iranian nuclear facilities? In that case, what I have described could be transformed from a "worst-case scenario" into a "doomsday scenario.”
tompaine.com |
