"The
world's chancelleries are observing carefully, since an escalation could lead
to a major conflict. Implicated are not only Israel, the U.S. and Iran, but the
other powers in the Middle East: Turkey, the regional ambitions of which have
become substantial; Saudi Arabia, which for decades has dreamed of seeing Shiite
Islam destroyed; and Iraq, which could break in two: one part Shiite and
pro-Iranian and the other Sunni and pro-Western."
The enigmatic Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei: With the perception that his regime is nearing the caoacity to build a nuclear weapon, pressure is growing for a decisive strike against his country. Much depend on his temperment and his determination to retain power.
Will 2012 be the end of the
world? That is what a Mayan legend predicts - actually fixing the date of the
apocalypse precisely at December 12 (12/12/12). In any case, in the context of
an economic recession and severe financial and social crisis in many parts of
the world (especially Europe), there will be plenty of risks this year - in
which we will see, among other things, decisive elections in the United States,
Russia, France, Mexico and Venezuela.
But the main danger
geopolitically will remain situated in the Persian Gulf. Will Israel and the
United States launch the publicly-discussed attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities?
The Tehran government claims its right to have civil nuclear energy. And
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has reiterated that the goal of their program is
not military and that its purpose is simply to generate energy from nuclear
sources. He also reminds everyone that Iran has signed and ratified the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty, whereas Israel has not.
Israeli officials don't
believe they can wait any longer. According to them, we are perilously close to
a time when the ayatollah regime will have an atomic weapon; and from
that moment on, it will no longer be possible to do anything about it. The
balance of power in the Middle East will have been tipped and Israel would no
longer enjoy incontestable military supremacy. Binyamin Netanyahu’s government
estimates that under these circumstances, the very existence of the Jewish
State would be threatened.
According to Israeli
strategists, now is the most favorable to strike. Iran is debilitated, both geopolitically
in the region, and economically in general - since in 2007, based on alarming IAEA reports, the U.N. Security Council
imposed sanctions. Iran's principal
ally, Syria, is dealing with an internal insurrection and is incapable of providing
assistance. And Syria's incapacity impacts another Iranian partner, Lebanese
Hezbullah. Its military supply lines from Iran are no longer reliable.
For these reasons, Israel
wants the attack to be carried out as soon as possible. To prepare for the
bombing, Special Forces troops have already infiltrated Iran. And it is more than
likely that it was Israeli agents who conceived of attacks over the past two
years which resulted in the deaths of five senior Iranian nuclear scientists.
Although Washington also
accuses Tehran of conducting a clandestine nuclear program to equip itself with
an atomic weapon, its analysis on whether to attack differs. The United States
is emerging from two decades of war in the region, and the result is not encouraging.
Iraq was a disaster and ended up in the hands of the Shiite majority - who
sympathize with Tehran. In the Afghan quagmire, U.S. forces have shown
themselves to be incapable of defeating the Taliban, with whom White House
diplomacy has resigned itself to negotiating before abandoning the country to
its fate.
These costly conflicts weakened
the United States and have exposed to the world the limits of its power - as well
as the start of its historic decline. This is no time for new adventures, much
less so during an election year, in which President Obama's reelection is uncertain.
And all when every possible resource is being mobilized to battle the crisis
and reduce unemployment.
Moreover, Washington is attempting
to change its image in the Arab-Muslim world, particularly after last year's “Arab
Spring” insurrections. Whereas before it was an accomplice to dictators, in
particular Tunisian Zine Ben Ali and Egyptian Hosni Mubarak, it now wants to be
seen as a patron of the new Arab democracies. Military aggression against Iran,
especially in collaboration with Israel, would undermine these efforts and
arouse the latent anti-Americanism that exists in many countries. This is especially
where new governments that have emerged out of the rebellions are led by
moderate Islamists.
An added vital consideration:
an attack on Iran would have consequences that are not only military (one can't
ignore the likelihood that some Iranian missiles will reach Israeli territory,
or could reach U.S. bases in Kuwait, Bahrain or Oman), but mainly economic. The
very smallest response from Iran that can be expected to the bombing of its
nuclear installations - a point their military leaders never tire of repeating
- would be to block the Strait of Hormuz. It is the funnel of the Persian Gulf
through which a third of the world’s oil passes - 17 million barrels a day.
Without this supply, fuel prices would reach intolerable levels, which would
hinder the global economic recovery and leave behind another recession.
The Iranian General Staff says
that, “there is nothing easier than closing this Strait.” It has expanded its
naval maneuvers in the region to demonstrate that it is capable of carrying out
its threats. Washington responded by saying that blocking the strategic passage
would be considered an “act of war,” and it reinforced its Fifth Fleet, which
sailed through the Gulf.
It is highly unlikely that
Iran would take the initiative and block the strait (though it might try as a
reprisal to attack). First, because by doing so it would be shooting itself in
the foot since it also exports oil via this route, and the resources it derives
from doing so are vital to them.
Second, because this would affect
some of its key partners which support it in its conflict with the United
States. This is especially true in the case of China. Fifteen percent of its oil
imports come from Iran. An interruption would sooner-or-later paralyze part of
its manufacturing base.
Tensions are clear to be seen.
The world's chancelleries are observing the situation minute by minute, since
an escalation could lead to a major regional conflict. Implicated are not only
Israel, the United States and Iran, but the other powers in the Middle East:
Turkey, the regional ambitions of which have become substantial; Saudi Arabia, which
for decades has dreamed of seeing its main rival - Shiite Islam - destroyed;
and Iraq, which could break in two: one part Shiite and pro-Iranian and the other
Sunni and pro-Western.
In addition, the bombing of
Iranian nuclear installations could cause a radioactive cloud that would be disastrous
to the health entire populations in the area (including thousands of U.S.
soldiers and the inhabitants of Israel). All of this leads one to conclude that
although the warmongers are vigorously raising their voices, the time for
diplomacy has yet to expire.
*Ignacio Ramonet is editor
of the Spanish version of Le Monde Diplomatique and writes editorials on
International Relations for several publications. Original text from IPS.
Portuguese version from the blog Outras Palavras [Other Words], with [Portuguese]
translation by Antonio Martins.
