What
You're Missing in our subscriber-only CounterPunch newsletter
WHO RULES: THE ISRAEL LOBBY
OR UNCLE SAM?
The answer
at last! Uri Avnery, former Knesset member, assesses the Lobby's
power. "If the Israeli government wanted a law tomorrow
annulling the 10 Commandments, 95 U.S. Senators (at least) would
sign the bill forthwith." But, yes, in the end the dog wags
the tail.Fifty
years ago Allen Ginsberg's "Howl" blew the cobwebs
out of millions of young minds and drove a stake through the
heart of Eisenhower's America. Lenni Brenner remembers Ginsberg
in the East Village.Dr Mengele died in exile, in disguise. Dr Ishii
died rich and recognized, in his own Tokyo home. Christopher
Reed on Japanese WW2 medical tortures and how the U.S. covered
them up.CounterPunch
Online is read by millions of viewers each month! But remember,
we are funded solely by the subscribers to the print edition
of CounterPunch. Please support this website by buying a subscription
to our newsletter, which contains fresh material you won't find
anywhere else, or by making a donation for the online edition.
Remember contributions are tax-deductible.Click
here to make a donation. If you find our site useful please:Subscribe
Now!
U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza
Rice couldn't possibly have been more accurate when she accused
Iran of "playing games" with the international community.
Rice was specifically referring
to an announcement made April 30, by the deputy head of the Iranian
Atomic Energy Agency Muhammad Saeedi, that his country is willing
to allow "snap inspections" by the U.N. nuclear watchdog,
the International Atomic Energy Agency on the condition that
the U.N. Security Council is excluded from any involvement in
inspecting Iran's nuclear-enrichment facilities.
Iran is playing games in the
sense that it is repeatedly testing U.S. resolve to see how far
the Bush administration is willing to go to escalate the conflict.
Naturally, the outcomes of Iran's political experimentations
help adjust -- escalate or downgrade -- the government's political
attitude toward the issue.
Ironically, the "games"
to which Rice was protesting are called "realpolitik,"
where practical matters are weighed, considered and taken into
account based exclusively on statistical, cost-effective analysis,
and where ethics and law carry little weight.
It's ironic because no Middle
Eastern government comes close to the United States and the so-called
EU-3 -- Germany, France and Britain -- in playing such games.
After all, realpolitik was coined by a German writer to describe
the attempt to balance the powers of European empires in the
19th century.
True, Iran is no empire and
is unlikely to metamorphose into one. Moreover, the chances are
that no balance of power -- in the real sense -- is possible
between Iran and its Western nemesis, considering U.S. military
might combined with that of "willing allies," no matter
how hard Iranian President Ahmadinejad labors to create a fearsome
aura around his nation's military force.
But thanks to other factors
-- precisely President George W. Bush's low ratings at home and
his embattled military in Iraq -- Iran is finding itself in a
much more comfortable state than that of former Iraqi President
Saddam Hussein and his government, prior to the U.S. invasion
in March 2003.
Some rightfully observe that
the U.S. government's rhetoric concerning Iranian nuclear enrichment
is almost an exact replica of that employed before the Iraq war.
First, there was the exaggeration of Iraq's military might, which
was seen as a "threat" to its neighbors -- most notably
Israel -- and U.S. regional interests. Then came the sanctions,
formidable and suffocating, meant to "contain" the
Iraqi regime and impede Hussein's alleged incessant drive for
chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.
Then there was the muscle flexing
and awesome military deployment. Finally came the showdown: war,
forced regime change and occupation.
The Bush administration and
the pro-war clique in Congress -- and they are many -- sound
equally enthused for another Middle East showdown, and Tehran
is the new destination. Once again, it's not respect for the
law -- since Iran's nuclear enrichment is not in violation of
its commitment under the Nonproliferation Treaty -- or respect
for democracy -- for Iran is much closer to an actual democracy
than many corrupt and authoritative U.S. allies -- or respect
for human rights -- since the U.S., as the effective ruler of
Iraq, is the region's top human-rights violator -- that stimulates
such enthusiasm.
Rather, it's realpolitik. Iran
alone provides 5 percent of the world's oil exports. At a time
when access to and control of energy sources translates into
political power and strategic affluence, and in an age of uncertain
oil supplies and fractious markets, the Iran prize is most enviable.
But that alone can hardly justify
the seemingly irrational readiness to expand the battlefield
for an already overstretched U.S. military. That's where the
infamous pro-Israel neoconservative warmongers are most effective.
In the same way they managed to concoct a pro-war discourse before
the disastrous war on Iraq -- using the military and ever willing
mainstream media -- they're working diligently to create another
false doomsday scenario required for a military encroachment
on Iran.
If all of this is true, then
why is Iran "playing games"?
The answer is multifaceted.
While Iran is no match for an empire, it also understands that
it holds great leverage through its significant influence over
Iraq's Shiite population and their representatives. While the
invasion of Iraq has disaffected most of the country's population
regardless of their sectarian affiliation, the Shiite leaderships
have yet to outwardly demand an American withdrawal and, for
strategic reasons, have yet to join the flaring insurgency. Using
its influence in Iraq, Iran could significantly alter the equation,
a decision that would unlikely suit the U.S. long-term interests
in occupied Iraq.
But Iran can do more, even
if indirectly. When the price of a barrel of oil recently reached
$ 75, the Group of Seven industrial nations sent terrible warnings
of an impending global economic crisis. Imagine if the prices
hit the $ 100 mark -- or even $ 120. How will already fractious
energy markets treat such a possibility, keeping in mind already
vulnerable Nigerian oil production and the less accommodating
-- read: more independent -- Venezuelan oil supplies? Needless
to say, "unexplained" acts of sabotage against Iraq's
oil production facilities and export pipelines will likely add
fuel to the fire.
All of these outcomes exclude
entirely the implausible likelihood that the U.S. military is
in fact capable of leading a ground war or maintaining a long-term
occupation of a country several times the size of Iraq, which
has not been weakened by years of debilitating sanctions.
As optimistic as it may sound,
one can, to an extent, speak of a "balance of power."
Wherever such balance can be struck, realpolitik and its associated
"games" can also be found in profusion.
While the U.S. wishes to maintain
the posture of the uncompromising, hardheaded party, ready to
mull its many "military options" at the strike of an
executive order, Iran is calling its bluff, confidently speaking
of its own options.
Iran 2006 is certainly not
Iraq of 1990-1991, or 2003. Some major changes to the political
map of the Middle East have taken place and serious challenges
are appearing day after day to the astonishment of the beleaguered
U.S. government and its president.
Whether it still genuinely
believes in military options as decisive retorts to its many
global challenges, the Bush administration must learn to deal
with new political realities, and it must also accept that playing
politics is no longer restricted to empires alone.
CounterPunch
Speakers Bureau Sick of sit-on-the-Fence speakers, tongue-tied and timid?
CounterPunch Editors Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St Clair
are available to speak forcefully on ALL the burning issues,
as are other CounterPunchers seasoned in stump oratory. Call
CounterPunch Speakers Bureau, 1-800-840-3683. Or email beckyg@counterpunch.org.