'U.S. intelligence report on Iran's nuclear program.'

                                                                         [Dar Al Hayat, U.K.]

Frankfurter Rundschau, Germany

The Third World War - Cancelled

"It's been clear all along that Iran had put its nuclear weapons program on ice. Can we seriously imagine that lord rulers George W. Bush and Richard Cheney didn’t know the slightest thing about it? … the Bush Administration owes its European allies an explanation."

By Karl Grobe

Translated By Julian Jacob

December 4, 2007

Germany - Frankfurter Rundschau - Original Article (German)

With two sentences, the united spy agencies of the United States have annulled Washington's Iran policy. First: The Teheran regime stopped developing nuclear weapons in 2003; that is four years ago. Secondly: The Iranian leadership decided to do this on the basis of a cost-benefit analysis.

The report  has spent at least a year in one of Washington's secret drawer. And it's been clear all along that Iran had put its nuclear weapons program on ice. Can we seriously imagine that lord rulers George W. Bush and Richard Cheney didn’t know the slightest thing about it?

If they did know, then Bush’s October speech about the danger of a Third World War was at the very least, reckless. Then it also follows that the plan to install a missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic - which also carried an emergency stamp - was not only rationally unjustifiable, but ideologically motivated. And this ideological cocktail, in addition to the reasons given, had two additional ingredients: The intent to keep the Russians on the straight and narrow and a wish to dismantle bad old Europe and replace it with a good new one.

Perhaps the reference to Teheran was seen as a means to that end. But whether these policies were based on a lack of knowledge - which amounts in the end to recklessness - or whether they were taken against better judgment, is therefore hypothetical. But whatever the case, the Bush Administration owes its European allies an explanation - and not the kind of explanation Bush gave on Tuesday, claiming that his administration has been right all along.

And in reference to the rationality of Iran's decisions, there are even greater consequences. Not every paranoid declaration uttered by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or the other hardliners in Teheran involves concrete political action. Given the analysis of some specialists on Iran - that Ahmadinejad's diatribes are meant primarily if not purely for domestic consumption - makes the assessment of America's secret services more plausible. After all, even in Iran this is an election year.

Certainly, the unsavory nature of Ahmadinejad's Parliamentary faction creates certain objective facts for us - but not the threat of a global nuclear war. Iran undoubtedly operates as a regional superpower and it uses Washington's war rhetoric as a means of reviving memories of the CIA toppling of the duly-elected Mossadegh Government 54 years ago, Washington's military assistance to Saddam Hussein 25 years ago, not to mention the very current chaos in Iraq.

The United States based its Iraq policy on alleged evidence of Baghdad's weapons of mass destruction - an error that publicly shamed then-Secretary of State Colin Powell. At the very least, the U.S. intelligence services want to avoid making the mistakes of 2002/2003 which have cost the lives of hundreds of thousands - even though its most recent report on Iran lacks a confession that the previous report (2005) was erroneous.

The basic NIE's basic finding that Tehran's most powerful people took a rational decision after making a cost-benefit analysis finally offers us a clear indication of future policy on Iran: negotiations with those who guide Iranian politics are an appropriate means of conflict resolution and that this is preferable to the violence of war. This doesn’t mean that we should abstain from political or economic pressure - but it does mean that foreign politics is not the business of hypocrites. The “old” Europeans have very little to learn in this respect. What we can glean can be limited to quiet regret for relying too much on our master - or was that masters? - in Washington.

What is strongly recommended, however, is the acceptance of the facts. First and foremost, the fact that Iran exists, that it has influence in the region, and that it holds the key to the Iraq problem. Secondly, that the geopolitical concert is played with many instruments, not just the Bush-Cheney horn. Third, that the desirability of a change in the Iranian regime is a matter for the Iranians, not the Americans. And fourth, that as a member of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, Iran has a right to control civilian nuclear technology.

To be sure, the report by America's 16 "watching and listening" services doesn't rule out that Iran may yet attempt to build nuclear weapons. Avoiding this, however, should be a matter of negotiation.

Click for German Version