|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Middle
East : Iran
Bush exploits Strait of Hormuz incident to threaten Iran
By Peter Symonds
11 January 2008
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
Five days after Sundays encounter between US warships
and Iranian boats in the Strait of Hormuz, details of what took
place remain in dispute. What is clear, however, is that the US
administration, at the very least, deliberately inflated the incident
on the eve of President Bushs visit to the Middle East to
menace Iran and raise the political temperature in the volatile
region.
Speaking on Tuesday, just hours before departing, Bush accused
Iran of a provocative act, saying: It is a dangerous
situation, and they should not have done it, pure and simple.
Speaking in Jerusalem the following day after meeting with Israeli
leaders, he went one step further, warning Tehran of dangerous
consequences if US ships were attacked. All options
are on the table to protect our assets, he said, My
advice to them is, dont do it.
Bushs aggressive language was obviously appreciated by
the Israeli government, which has been sharply critical of last
months National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) by 16 US agencies
that Iran had ended any nuclear weapons program in 2003. The assessment
undercut the escalating propaganda campaign by the Bush administration
and its Israeli allies for tough international action to force
Iran to shut down its nuclear facilities. The incident in the
Strait of Hormuz conveniently provided Bush with the opportunity
to renew his warnings of the alleged danger posed by Iran.
Iran was a threat, Iran is a threat and Iran will be
a threat to world peace if the international community does not
come together and prevent that nation from the development of
the knowledge to build a nuclear weapon, Bush declared.
A country that once had a secret program can easily restart
a secret program. A country which can enrich [uranium] for civilian
purposes can easily transfer that knowledge to a military program.
Just over a month ago, Bush and his officials were insisting
that Iran had a nuclear weapons program and posed an imminent
threat. Now, without missing a beat, the president insists that
Iran remains a threat and must be prevented from having the knowledge
to build a nuclear weapon. Moreover, the hypocrisy involved in
making such a statement in Israel, which has covertly manufactured
its own nuclear weapons, is breathtaking. While Bush speaks of
the Iranian threat, Israel and the US are both notorious for launching
unprovoked military strikes and wars of aggression in the Middle
East.
Over the past year Israel has issued its own menacing warnings
that it would not permit Iran to gain nuclear weapons. Reports
in the British press have pointed to advanced Israeli preparations
for air strikes on Irans nuclear facilities. Following talks
with Bush, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert indicated Iran had
been a major topic of discussion and that he had been reassured.
I certainly am encouraged and reinforced, having heard the
position of the United States under the leadership of George Bush,
particularly on this subject, he said.
Comments by Israels ambassador to the US, Sallai Meridor,
highlight the determination of Israel and the US to heighten the
confrontation with Iran, despite the NIE findings. After explaining
that the two governments were in sync and think similarly,
he responded to a question about a military strike on Iran, by
ominously declaring: Both the US and Israel havent
removed any option from the table. All options are on the table,
not only in the future.
Doubts about Pentagon account
The political manner in which the US has exploited the naval
encounter in Strait of Hormuz to inflame tensions is out of all
proportion to the incident itself. According to the original Pentagon
account, five small, lightly-armed Iranian speedboats allegedly
buzzed three US warships passing through the strait. One of the
Iranian vessels dropped several white, floating box-like objects,
causing one US ship to alter course. A radio message warned: I
am coming to you. You will explode after a few minutes.
Naval personnel warned the Iranian boats to keep their distance
and manned weapons.
No weapons were fired and the Iranian vessels backed off. Indeed,
while an unnamed US official acknowledged that the US warships
were minutes from opening fire, the Iranian boats, which came
no closer than 500 metres, displayed no obvious sign of hostile
intent. The three US vesselsthe guided missile cruiser USS
Port Royal, the guided missile destroyer USS Hopper and the guided
missile frigate USS Ingrahamwere all heavily armed with
machine guns, Phalanx close-in weapons systems, torpedoes and
large calibre guns.
Over the past five days, holes have begun to appear in the
initial Pentagon story. The US navy released a video of the Iranian
speedboats spliced together with audio from the bridge of one
of the ships. No mention was made of the white boxes and the key
word few in the radio threat was indecipherable. The
video, which has been widely broadcast, runs for only 4 minutes
and 20 seconds and was thus an edited version of the 20-minute
incident using audio from just one warship.
Commander Lydia Robertson, spokeswoman for the US Fifth Fleet
in Bahrain, acknowledged yesterday that the navy could not be
certain the radio message even came from one of the five Iranian
boats. It may have come from another ship in the area or from
shore, she said, adding: We dont have a direct connection,
but its not necessarily a disconnect. Another aspect
of the threat is also oddthere is no background
noise as one would expect in a broadcast from a small high-speed
boat.
Iranian officials dismissed the incident as an ordinary occurrence
and denied that any threat was made. An unnamed spokesman for
the Iranian Revolution Guards, which operated the boats, told
state-run TV: The footage released by the US Navy was compiled
using file pictures and the audio has been fabricated. Tehran
has now released its own edited video of the events showing an
Iranian officer in a small craft speaking via radio to coalition
warship 73 and carrying out routine identification procedures.
Irans low-key response tends to indicate that no one
in Tehran is seeking to make political mileage out of the incident.
In fact, the regime has more to lose than to gain by heightening
tensions with the US. The Iranian government has been seeking
to finalise arrangements for another round of talks in Baghdad
involving the US and Iranian ambassadors over security in Iraq.
Over the past month, Tehran has improved relations with neighbouring
Gulf states, making advances that would be upset by any new confrontation.
The Bush administration on the other hand has been seeking
at every turn to pressurise and provoke Iran. On Wednesday, the
US Treasury Department imposed new financial penalties on a top-ranking
Iranian Revolutionary Guard general, Ahmed Foruzandeh, a Syrian-based
television station and two Iraqis living in Iran for allegedly
fuelling the anti-US insurgency in Iraq.
When he heads to the Persian Gulf tomorrow, Bush will find
no enthusiasm among US allies for a conflict with Iran. Gerd Nonneman,
an academic at Exeter University, told Reuters: The royal
families in the Gulf are looking at the Bush visit with slightly
weary resignation... On the one hand they want a joint diplomatic
strategy to avoid a nuclear-armed Iran but they are saying we
think we can engage Iran more effectively. We think we can take
the sting out of this by engaging with Iran.
Irans longstanding regional rival, Saudi Arabia, has
explicitly declared that it will rebuff any US demand to break
off relations with Tehran. Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal
told a press conference on Wednesday: Well listen
to everything the [US] president says. He can raise any issue
he likes. [But] were a neighbour to Iran in the Gulf, which
is a small area, so were keen for harmony and peace among
countries in the area.
For the Bush administration, the incident in the Strait of
Hormuz could not have been better timed to stymie the development
of diplomatic relations with Iran, to heighten tensions in the
region and possibly to justify a further US military buildup against
Tehran. It cannot be ruled out that the US, which has a long history
of engineering provocations, concocted this latest naval encounter
to meet these political purposes.
See Also:
Naval encounter highlights tensions stoked
by Bush trip to Middle East
[8 January 2008]
Despite US intelligence
shift: European powers back continued sanctions against Teheran
[7 December 2007]
Following intelligence
report exposing administration's lies
Bush continues threats against Iran
[6 December 2007]
US intelligence report
shows war drive against Iran based on lies
[5 December 2007]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |