If Washington Makes War on Iran, it will be America's Last
"Experience teaches that all embargos imposed by America
end in a destructive war. That was the case in Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan, and
we doubt that the stifling embargo on Iran, which is growing stricter by the month,
will be an exception. ... We hate war because it only results in destruction,
orphans and widows - and because its victims are often brothers of the same faith.
But if Washington launches a fourth war, it will be its last."
President Obama lays down the law with Iran's central bank: Does the United States actually want a war with Iran, to fuel its flagging economy? In the Arab world, this is not at all a far-fetched suggestion.
There
is an Arabic proverb: "A criminal always hovers near the scene of the
crime." It is a saying that applies, in one way or another, to America's current
moves - both political and military - in the Arab Gulf region.
There
are those who argue that the Obama Administration, at the door of a ferocious
electoral battle with rival Republicans and facing a debilitating economic
crisis, cannot risk a new conflagration after burning its fingers and pockets losing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. But wouldn’t it also be rational to conclude
that because of these - the economic crisis and the presidential election - the
administration might want a war?
To
further explain, backing Israel and meeting its demands to destroy Iran's nuclear
ambitions are a common denominator in every electoral campaign of both major U.S. political parties.
To gain the goodwill of Israel and the powerful Jewish lobby, one Republican
candidate has even threatened to send aircraft and missiles against Iran to protect
Israel.
President
Obama cut his New Year vacation short and took less than two days back on the
job to sign a law imposing a ban on any transaction with Iran's central
bank. He also issued a statement in which he strongly supported a preliminary European
agreement to impose severe sanctions on Iranian oil exports. It was as if he
wanted to rush the sanctions into force so badly that he couldn't tolerate
waiting until the end of the month for the agreement to be signed.
America
and its Western allies cannot survive without waging wars in the Middle East, so
they invent pretexts and prepare the way for such pretexts to explode. In the past
ten years they have waged three major wars, in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. Now
it seems like the countdown has begun to a fourth war against Iran in the
coming weeks or months.
There
are three key indicators common to each of these previous wars - and that
another is close to being waged:
First was
theimposition of Palestinian-Israeli negotiations by force, to give the
impression that America is committed to resolving this issue. That is what
George H.W. Bush did when he convened the 1991 Madrid Peace
Conference in order to justify his Desert Storm
against Iraq. That is what George W. Bush did when he launched negotiations and
spoke twice of establishing a Palestinian state; first when he launched his "war
on terror" in Afghanistan; and then before the occupation of Iraq.
And now
at America's behest and under a Jordanian initiative, without cause and without
executing even the least Palestinian demand of halting settlement activity, the
Palestinian Authority is again being forced into open-ended talks with the Israelis
amid unprecedented expansion of Israeli settlements. And why? These are preparations
for a war against Iran and perhaps Syria, Hamas and Hezbullah.
The second
has to do with deals to purchase modern weapons systems by the Gulf countries.
This amounts to upwards of $130 billion in the form of aircraft and missiles - far
more than the capacity of these countries to absorb them. The intention here is
to give a boost to the U.S. military industry, creating hundreds of thousands
of jobs for America's unemployed, i.e.: to indirectly recycle oil profits.
Third:
The continuous siege of sanctions here and embargoes there to economically choke
Iran and its allies and starve Iran's population. Experience teaches that
all embargos imposed by America end in destructive war. That was the case in
Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan, and we doubt that the stifling embargo on Iran,
which is growing stricter by the month, will be an exception.
We are
now witnessing a very heated war of words centered on the waters of the Arab
Gulf. Iran is conducting naval exercises and testing new weapons systems that
include medium- and long-range missiles. Washington has responded by warning
Iran of serious consequences if it follows through on its promise to close the Strait
of Hormuz, and considers Tehran's threat to close the Strait as a sign of
weakness - as if the U.S. is inciting Iran to do so.
The U.S.
administration, which is said to have drawn up plans to wage this war with the
cooperation of its ally Great Britain, is looking for the "trigger."
Whether it plans to wage an actual war or a psychological one, the U.S. is the
big winner. One way or another, it has succeeded in its effort to escalate fear
in the tiny Gulf states, whose pockets and vaults are filled with billions of
dollars for purchasing weapons to support the fast-collapsing American and
European economies, while neither the U.S. nor Britain have offered even crumbs
to Arab countries in crisis or those emerging from revolution like Egypt and
Tunisia.
Mrs.
Hillary Clinton, engineer of U.S. foreign policy and its latest wars in the
region, says she won't allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons so as to prevent a
nuclear weapons race in the region among countries like Egypt, Turkey and the
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. But one can reply to this justification by asking why a
nuclear arms race didn't occur when Israel, which is more dangerous to the Arab
nation than Iran and continues to occupy Arab lands and holy sites, acquired such
weapons?
We actually
want to see a nuclear arms race in the region, since that would cost a tenth of
the amount needed to buy American weapons. In addition, it would constitute a
shield and deterrent for the Arab people in the face of both Iranian and
Israeli threats.
If
there really were patriotic Arab leaders, they would encourage Iran to acquire
nuclear weapons in order to justify following the same path for themselves.
America
has lost every war it ever waged in this region. It lost its wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan and is now retreating from its past policy of putting the Taliban
on its terrorist watch list, denying that it ever put out a reward for the killing
or capture of Mullah
MohammadOmar. Furthermore,
it has blessed the Taliban for opening an embassy in Qatar to be a hub of
communication with Washington.
Looking
at all this, we can conclude that in terms of a future war, Iran will not be an
exception. Not because Iran would be the largest and most militarily equipped
target yet, but because America is short of breath and cannot in any other way maintain
the gains it has won thanks to a highly developed capacity to destroy - and
because the final results were detrimental to the ambitions and goals for which
it fought these wars.
We hate
war because it only results in destruction, orphans and widows - and because its
victims are often brothers of the same faith. But if Washington launches a
fourth war it will be its last. The same could be said of Israel, because good doesn't come from the bosom of evil - meaning American
and Israeli.
