Latest ArticlesArchivesForumsRSS FeedGuestbookContact UsSearch

Iran Press Service (logo)

As of January 2009, this site is definitely closed, but you can follow Safa Haeri on his new blog: DAMAVAND at

Will Bush Attack Iran?

Published Sunday, April 20, 2008

London, 19 April (IPS)    As George W. Bush’s final term in office will soon come to an end, many around the world are wondering what his next move will be with regard to Iran and its controversial nuclear program.  Though Bush himself is denying the possibility of military action against Iran’s nuclear and military facilities, the hitherto history of US relations with the Third World (as well as with Russia and China) indicates that such assertions cannot always be trusted, especially when major-power diplomacy no longer seems capable of resolving the escalating confrontation between the West and the Islamic Republic, and the Bush administration has yet to take the military option off the table, so to speak. 

          While the Bush administration has been proactive, and to a great extent successful, in getting the United Nations Security Council to impose economic sanctions on Iran, such punitive measures will not in themselves be capable of the kind of immediate outcome (regime change) the administration has been hoping for, thus increasing the probability of US military strikes against Iran before the end of Bush’s second term.

With John McCain, the Republican presidential nominee gaining popularity, the Bush administration is finding itself in a more comfortable position for waging war against Iran

          Another important issue that is increasing the chances of Bush administration military strikes on Iranian nuclear and military facilities has to do with the sort of infighting and thus cut-throat environment that is nowadays characteristic of Democratic rivalry in the United States.  With John McCain, the Republican presidential nominee, gaining popularity as a result of the ongoing conflict between Senators Barack Obama and Hillary R. Clinton, the Bush administration is finding itself in a more comfortable position for waging war against Iran, for it no longer has to worry about an electoral backlash in November or a future administration that would be unwilling to continue in its footsteps.

          Iran’s recent announcement of the addition of 6000 new centrifuges to its current capacity, and such stage-setting statements as those recently made by the US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and General David Petraeus, the supreme US commander in Iraq, in which Iran has been more seriously implicated in the ongoing violence in Iraq, must also be taken into consideration when assessing the probability of potential US strikes against Iran.  

          Having said that, it is worth taking into account that the mere thought of a Democratic presidential victory in November would perhaps provide the Bush administration with even more of an incentive to wage a “pre-emptive” war against Iran while the opportunity still exists, so as to deprive the Islamic Republic of the chance to strike a “grand bargain” with the next administration, which, according to Bush and the neoconservative circle around him, would compromise Israeli and US interests in the region.

          With the above analysis in mind, a question arises as to what the world should make of the possibility of yet another US-led war in the Middle East.  What will happen to the price of oil, for example, which could in time trigger yet another global recession of the type experienced in the late 1920s?  What about the human costs of such a war, which would indeed be much greater than that which has already been the case in Iraq and Afghanistan?  What about the massive environmental degradation that such a ferocious war would help bring about throughout the region if not the entire planet?  What about the future of democracy in Iran as well as the United States, as the collective impact of the abovementioned factors will surely have an adverse effect on both?

Nuclear facilities
The prospect of a possible Democratic victory could increase the chances of a military strike on Iran by the Bush Administration before the end of his office.

          Though the above analysis may seem a bit alarmist to some, seasoned critics would agree that such logically based probability assessments with respect to the possibility of war and conflict are not only routine in the field of international relations, but also would be necessary if we are to maintain a vigilant position in support of peace.  Accordingly, it would do us all well to condemn not only the horrific prospect of yet another US-led war in the Middle East, but also the many atrocities the Islamic Republic has so far committed against the Iranian citizenry. 

          In other words, progressive politics would require the simultaneous condemnation of Western imperialism as well as Third World despotism, so as to enable the emergence of a genuine democratic outcome in both the North as well as the South.  Anything other than the above would surely be of a realpolitik rather than democratic nature and thus not in tune with our longing for a more humane world. ENDS US IRAN 19408

Editor’s note: Mr. Jalal Alavi is a sociologist and political commentator residing in Britain.




4 comment(s) on this page. Add your own comment below.

Sunday, May 11, 2008 02:19 [ 1 ]

Horrific US led war. The only horror was suckering in the terrorist into the fight and showing the world that these holy warriors don't give a dam about their own people, these terrorist found out quickly the Americans were too much so they just started bombing and killing civilians. Wow, that really surprised the world. The media likes to blame the victors these days because they know that in the end rhetoric is what it is, just a bunch of talk, and there is jealousy when America walks the walk. So America will take the blame for everything wrong in the world and be criticized for all the good too. I'm sure there is a bunch of starving and oppressed people somewhere wondering when the US is coming to save them too...

daniel morris
Monday, August 4, 2008 04:36 [ 2 ]

Due to the threats and militaristic ambitions of the current regime in Iran, The US of A have, it appears, have no alternative to attacking nuclear and perhaps associated military plants.

The Iranian regime fears Allah, not the US of A and it's allies. It would appear, in order to avoid a catastophe of this nature, Iran must stop all uranium enrichmment now, or face the inevitable consequences.

daniel morris
Monday, August 4, 2008 04:44 [ 3 ]

Due to the militaristic ambitions and threats from the current Iranian regime, the US of A and it's allies, are left with no option but to attack nuclear and perhaps other military facilities in Iran.

The current Iranian regime fears Allah, not US of A and it's allies; to avoid such a catastrophe, Iran must immediately terminate all uranium enrichment.

Syed Muqeemuddin
Tuesday, August 5, 2008 09:30 [ 4 ]

Israel was hoping that Iraq would stabilise and hence be a base to control Iran. That did not happen. Now that India has signed the Nuclear deal, Israel hopes that US can use India Nuke deal to either negotiate with Pakistan to be used as a base for land attack, or fall back to India and in this case use the sea route/arabian sea/persian gulf to launch naval attacks on both pakistan and iran. I think the pre-launch symptoms will be a rapid decrease in oil prices, to fuel the economic growth of India and China so tht they get hooked to the Oil. There will also be frequent terror attacks all across the world to show the world that muslims are terrorsits. If you can see the recent attacks in India, China, Pakistan and Turkey. This may only be a beginning. Soon the frequency of attacks and the impact will increase, setting the stage to coerce or negotiate with Gulf and Pakistan to support the attack or at least stand back and watch similar to the time of Iraq and Afghanistan attacks. Israel simply cannot give any more time to Iran, it has to be now or it will have to fight a more stronger Iran later on. However it needs the world support for the war that will be waged by US, since it has seen what happens when they go about it alone as in the case of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Comments on this page are closed.

As of January 2009, this site is definitely closed, but you can follow Safa Haeri on his new blog: DAMAVAND at

George W. Bush-7
The mere thought of a Democratic presidential victory in November would perhaps provide the Bush administration with even more of an incentive to wage a “pre-emptive” war against Iran

Powered by the Big Medium content management system. sitemap xml