|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Middle
East : Iran
US threats against Iranthe specter of nuclear barbarism
Statement of the WSWS Editorial Board
13 April 2006
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
The revelation that the United States government has conducted
advanced planning and preparation for a bombing campaign against
Iran that includes the possible use of nuclear weapons represents
the most serious threat posed in an increasingly unstable international
situation.
US imperialism has embarked upon a trajectory that will, if
not stopped, lead to a world historic catastrophe that will make
World War II pale by comparison.
That such an act could even be contemplated by the Bush White
House should stun and horrify all those who are concerned with
the fate of the world and the future of humanity. Little more
than six decades after US imperialism carried out the first atomic
bombings against Hiroshima and Nagasakiinflicting horrors
that generations since have vowed must never be repeatedWashington
is actively considering the use of such terrible weapons once
again, this time without provocation or even credible proof of
a future threat. Such an act would have the effect of criminalizing
America as a country and a society.
These plans are not only real, but are already being acted
upon, as was confirmed by Seymour Hersh in an article published
in this weeks New Yorker magazine as well as by the
Washington Post. The preparations include the deployment
of special operations troops inside Iran to spot targets and the
staging of air exercises in the skies over the Arabian Sea, simulating
strikes with nuclear tipped missiles against Iranian nuclear facilities.
The threat of war has only intensified since the publication
of these articles, with the Iranian governments announcement
Tuesday that it has succeeded in enriching uranium for its nuclear
power program. Teheran once again insisted that this program is
meant solely for peaceful uses, and experts confirmed that the
development still left Iran far from being able to produce the
weapons-grade enriched uranium needed for a nuclear weapon.
There is undoubtedly a strong element of recklessness in the
actions taken by the government in Teheran, which is pursuing
shortsighted political aims of its own in the nuclear confrontation,
utilizing the nationalist resentment of a large section of the
Iranian people towards US bullying as a means of diverting social
and political tensions within Iran. The actions of the bourgeois
factions that control the Iranian government have done nothing
to defend the Iranian people from the threat of war. Indeed, they
have played into the hands of the right-wing militaristic clique
that controls the White House.
Domestic political calculations play a prominent role in the
new US buildup to war. The collapse of popular support for Bushs
policiesitself a manifestation of a deep-rooted social crisis
in the UShas encouraged the administration to embark on
another campaign of military aggression as a means of stampeding
public opinion and suppressing opposition.
Predictably, the Bush administration responded to the latest
announcement from Teheran by ratcheting up its bellicose threats.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Wednesday that the United
Nations Security Council must take strong steps against
Iran to maintain the credibility of the international community.
She added, We cant let this continue.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld described Iran as a
country... that supports terrorists. He continued: Its
a country that has indicated an interest in having weapons of
mass destruction.
The administration is following a virtually identical script
as that used in the run-up to the war on Iraq, with dark and unsubstantiated
warnings of a supposedly imminent threat from weapons of
mass destruction that can be stopped only through US-initiated
regime change. Once again, Washington is dismissing
United Nations monitoring of the Iranian nuclear program as useless,
and there can be little doubt that, given the almost certain refusal
of Russia, China and perhaps other members of the Security Council
to back military action, the Bush White House will again declare
the UN irrelevant and embark on its own unilateral action.
Speaking before an audience at the Johns Hopkins University
School of Advanced International Studies, Bush repeated his bellicose
2002 denunciation of Iran as constitutingalong with North
Korea and the now US-occupied Iraqpart of an axis
of evil.
Bush declared that his strategy in relation to Iran was based
upon a doctrine of prevention. In the language of
international statecraft, a preventive war is a war of aggression
launched with the aim of preventing a perceived rival from gaining
power or achieving a strategic advantage in the future. Under
the precedent established by the Nuremberg trials of the German
Nazi leadership, it constitutes a war crime.
The World Socialist Web Site has drawn attention to
the stark parallels that exist between the policies pursued by
the US administration and the methods employed by the leaders
of Germanys Third Reich in the 1930s and 1940s. The utter
contempt for international law, the launching of military aggression
on the basis of bogus pretexts, the use of overwhelming force
against relatively powerless victims are common to both regimes.
Some of our readers may have dismissed such comparisons as exaggerated.
With the latest revelations concerning US war plans against Iran,
such complacency is no longer tenable.
There is a powerful element of recklessness and even insanity
in the US threat to use nuclear weaponsfor the first time
anywhere on the planet since the end of the Second World Warfor
the supposed purpose of preventing Iran from gaining the technology
that could be used to produce nuclear weapons.
Drive for oil and strategic advantage
Underlying this apparent madness, however, is a definite policy
being pursued by US imperialism. As in Iraq, the primary motive
behind the war threats against Iran is not weapons of mass destruction,
but oil. The Iranian nuclear program is not, in reality, seen
by Washington as a huge threat. As in Iraq, WMD serves as a casus
belli for military action in pursuit of other objectives.
We do not support the Iranian governments efforts to
obtain nuclear weapons, on the principled grounds that they in
no way advance the struggle of workers in Iran or elsewhere in
the region. However, even if Iran were to acquire a nuclear weapon,
it would have no major military significance, given the overwhelming
force in the hands of the US.
Iran is, after all, surrounded by countries with such weaponsRussia,
Israel, Pakistan, Indiasome of them having obtained these
weapons with the open support of Washington. Had the US-backed
dictatorship of the Shah not been overthrown, the nuclear program
that it began, with the direct support of people like Cheney and
Rumsfeld, would have undoubtedly long since produced bombs.
The American administration is merely exploiting popular ignorance
of the situation and a compliant media to create a smokescreen
behind which it is pursuing definite interests. Iran possesses
the worlds second-largest natural gas reserves and the fourth
largest oil reserves, which are expected to produce for some decades
after Saudi Arabias oil runs dry. Moreover, Washington is
confronted with the political fact that Iran stands to emerge
as the principal beneficiary of the US intervention in Iraq, threatening
to thwart the US attempt to establish unchallenged hegemony over
the Persian Gulf and the regions strategic energy resources.
An even greater threat to US interests is seen in Irans
growing ties with Russia, China and Europe. Washington has no
intention of allowing its major economic rivals to reap a strategic
advantage from its decades-long policy of economic sanctions against
Iran. In particular, the ties between Iran and Russia are seen
as an impediment to the US drive to control the enormous untapped
oil and gas reserves in the former Soviet republics of Central
Asia.
In the final analysis, the threat of a war of aggression against
Iran and the use of nuclear weapons express the historic crisis
of American and world capitalism, and the accelerating disequilibrium
within the entire capitalist nation-state system. This disequilibriumand
its malevolent product, the danger of a new world warhas
been exacerbated both by the collapse of the Soviet Union and
the relative decline of US capitalisms position within the
world economy.
Within Americas ruling oligarchy, these parallel developments
have fostered a consensus strategy of exploiting US imperialisms
military superiority for the purpose of reorganizing the world
economy in the interests of US-based banks and transnational corporations.
This means the seizure of strategic positions and resourcesas
in the Persian Gulfand the use of militarism and war to
preclude the emergence of any rival, even of a regional character,
that would challenge Americas bid for global hegemony.
Bushs dismissal of reported plans for the use of nuclear
weapons notwithstanding, there is ample evidence that within the
US political establishment what was once unthinkable is now seen
as a viable option. Published in the current issue of Foreign
Affairs, which reflects the views of the US foreign policy
establishment, is an article entitled The Rise of US Nuclear
Primacy. This article makes the case for a winnable nuclear
war based on technological advances in US weapons systems and
the deterioration of the former Soviet Unions nuclear arsenal.
Today, for the first time in almost 50 years, the United
States stands on the verge of attaining nuclear primacy,
the article states. It will probably soon be possible for
the United States to destroy the long-range nuclear arsenals of
Russia or China with a first strike.
A nuclear strike against Iran, which borders Russia, would
represent a first step in testing out this strategy. It would
serve not merely to devastate Iran and inflict massive civilian
casualties on that country, but to threaten Russia, China and
any other power that might stand in the way of American imperialist
aims.
The US is moving in a direction that leads inexorably toward
a wider and catastrophic war that would claim the lives of hundreds
of millions. As for the next act of US military aggression, the
question is not if, but only when.
Iraq has already shown that within the existing US political
structure there is no means to stop this threat. On the threat
of a war against Iran, the Democratic Party has remained virtually
silent.
In his New Yorker article, Hersh quoted one member of
the House of Representatives as saying, Theres no
pressure from Congress against launching a new war.
There has been no call by any section of the Democratic Party
leadership for public hearings to consider the political, military,
legal and moral implications of reported plans for a war that
could involve the use of nuclear weapons. There is no reason to
believe that Congress and the Democrats will not be just as complicit
in this new criminal act as they were in the invasion and occupation
of Iraq.
Symptomatic of the reaction of the erstwhile liberals was the
editorial appearing in Tuesdays edition of the New York
Times under the complacent headline, Military fantasies
on Iran.
Congress and the public need to force the kind of serious
national debate that never really took place before the American
invasion of Iraq, the Times declares, noting that
the administration is making threats of future American
military action in language that sometimes recalls statements
made before the invasion of Iraq.
The editorials call for a serious national debate
on a new war of aggression echoes precisely the language used
by the Times in the months leading up to the invasion of
Iraq. At that time it urged the administration to continue pursuing
a pseudo-legal justification for the war, and advocated a debate
to prepare the public for it. When, however, the White House ordered
an invasion without UN sanction, the newspaper supported it anyway.
This latest editorial warns about the possible adverse implications
of air strikes against Iran for US troops in Iraq, questions whether
such strikes could really destroy all of Irans nuclear
facilities, and describes a war with Iran as reckless
folly. But the newspaper does not denounce the prospect
of unprovoked air attacks and the possible use of nuclear weapons
for what they arewar crimes. Clearly, the editors see such
things as real possibilities.
Police state measures at home
The implications for American society itself of such an act
of war are staggering. Such attacks would undoubtedly provoke
retaliation, which would be seized upon by the administration
in Washington to mount a dramatic intensification of the war
on terror, in the form of further military escalation abroad
and the elimination of basic democratic rights at home.
The use of nuclear weapons by the US would provoke outrage
and horror within the American population, sparking mass opposition.
The government would respond with out-and-out repression. The
prospect of the American people facing a fascist-military dictatorship
as the byproduct of such a military attack is very real.
Posed in the new war threats against Iran is the basic alternative
of the present historic epoch: socialism or barbarism. A fight
against both this new threat and the ongoing war in Iraq can be
waged only through the independent mobilization of American working
people, together with workers and oppressed people all over the
world. This must assume the form of a political struggle against
the American financial oligarchy and both of its political parties.
The danger is that the capitalist crisis and the resulting
recourse to militarism and war are developing very rapidly, but
the political means to oppose them lag far behind. This danger
has to be overcome through a conscious recognition of the contradiction
between the enormity of the issues posed and the lack of any political
alternative within the capitalist two-party system.
A new mass revolutionary movement must come forward which bases
itself on the international unity of the working class in the
struggle for socialism against the outmoded nation state system
upon which imperialism rests. The Socialist Equality Party and
the World Socialist Web Site are fighting to lay the political
foundations for the emergence of such a movement.
See Also:
Washington considering nuclear strikes
against Iran
[10 April 2006]
UN Security Council bows to
US pressure for a statement against Iran
[31 March 2006]
Washington seeks to bully
UN Security Council over Iran
[15 March 2006]
US drumbeat against Iran threatens
new war of aggression
[11 March 2006]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |