There is no evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, any more than there was any evidence that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.

As Israel itches to bomb Iran, Obama says all options are open

Obama meets Netanyahu. Cartoon by Steve Bell.

"Nuclear weapons in Iran's hands could undermine the stability of the entire Middle East," says Israel. You would at least hope that Barrack Obama would dismiss out of hand such an inversion of reality. You have to be blind, ignorant or have a vested interest in denying the facts not to see that the country which already has over 200 nuclear weapons and which has been destabilising the Middle East for 60 years -- with repercussions which have extended across the world -- is Israel, supported unreservedly by the United States.

There is no evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, any more than there was any evidence that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.

An "extraordinary threat"

The US government’s own National Intelligence Estimate of December 2007 reported that Iran suspended its nuclear weapons program in 2003 and there are no signs that it has been restarted. In May of this year a team of Russian and American scientists working for the EastWest Institute, concluded that Iran could build a simple nuclear device in one to three years, but only if it kicked out UN inspectors and dedicated itself to a weapons program. It would take five more years to be able to make a weapon small enough to fit onto a ballistic missile.

What Iran is doing, and has every right to do, is develop the peaceful use of nuclear energy. It is this that Obama’s Secretary of State Hilary Clinton called an "extraordinary threat", without of course explaining why Iran developing nuclear power, which, like any other nation, it is entitled to do, is an “extraordinary threat”, while Israel’s arsenal of nuclear weapons is not.

The other threat Iran is supposed to pose is through the alleged supply of weapons to the resistance fighting foreign occupation in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran, say the neocon warmongers in the US Congress, is supplying armaments which are “killing American soldiers”. This accusation has been repeated incessantly over the past five years, without a single piece of concrete evidence to show there is any substance in the claim.

Irrational and potentially suicidal

The Iranian government is portrayed by Israel, the US and the mainstream media as irrational and potentially suicidal, which it would have to be to threaten the United States with its weaponry, army, or foreign policy.

According to Israel and its neoconservative supporters, nuclear weapons -- which Iran doesn’t have and isn’t developing -- could be supplied to terrorists. No rational explanation is given for why Iran would do so and all the evidence is to the contrary, that Iran wants nothing more than stability in the region and a thaw in diplomatic relations with the United States.

And Obama’s response? Already deeply disappointing in escalating the war in Afghanistan and not ending the occupation of Iraq as expected from his election campaign, he is again showing that his foreign policy has little to distinguish it from that of George Bush.

Obama, who promised Israel’s Prime minister Netanyahu that “all options are on the table”, has asked his Secretary of Defence Robert Gates to update the war plan to attack Iran. He says Iran has till the end of the year to “cry uncle” and submit to any demands the US (through its proxy the United Nations or not) makes with regard to Iran’s perfectly legal programme for developing nuclear energy resources, the implication being that sanctions against Iran will be escalated accompanied by the threat of military action.

An act of war

A resolution calling for more sanctions against Iran is moving through the US Congress at present and could include blocking the import of refined petroleum products. As Iran – whose main export is petroleum --has only limited refining capacity, the country’s economy would grind to a halt, resulting in catastrophic hardship for most of the Iranian people. Many would consider the sanctioning of Iranian energy imports to be an act of war.

Obama was elected on the slogan “change that you can believe in”. That so soon into his presidency he is travelling down the well-worn path of American imperialist foreign policy, which has the potential to further ignite the tinder box of Middle East politics with an attack on Iran, is an alarm call for the antiwar movement. The “war on terror” is still here in all but name.