Traditions of the Kyrgyz people were being formed with the help of economic, trade, domestic and other relations with kindred and other tribes that were closely related to the geography of their ha...

After the coup of 19 March 1953 in the socio-political history of Iran there were fundamental changes: the powers of parliament were limited and the absolute power of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi was...

In the Middle East, Saudi Arabia and the Islamic Republic of Iran are two countries that claim to leadership in the region. With a powerful resources and political potential these countries are the...

Who pulled America into the abyss?

Thursday, June 27, 2013 - 16:14

Currently, a number of politicians in Washington urge America to unleash another war against Iran. This happens against the background of two wars, grueling for the USA and their economy, in Iraq and Afghanistan, which have been lasting for more than 10 years.
Active supporters of the "decisive action" against Iran are John McCain and Joseph Lieberman. We would remind you that McCain is a member of a non-governmental political organization "The Project for the New American Century" - PNAC. The main goal of this organization is the development and justification of war and geopolitical principles of the Wolfowitz Doctrine, also known as the "Defense Planning Guidance" - DPG. This document was developed in 1992 and is recognized as the unofficial internal document justifying massive increase in defense spending for strategic proliferation and expansion of military forces in order to establish the overwhelming superiority of the USA as the world's sole superpower. Supporting the pre-emptive strikes against the use of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, the paper declared: "The USA must show leadership necessary to establish and maintain a new world order, which should clearly demonstrate to potential competitors that they should not seek to play a greater role or try to defend their legitimate interests more aggressively". The paper also pointed quite clearly at the Middle East as a major goal of the USA, particularly at Iran and Iraq, "to save the USA as the dominant foreign power in the region, and to provide access to the USA and the West to the local oil". Later, due to the media leaks, the document was seriously altered.
In 1994, McCain became the president of "New Citizenship Project". It was the parent company PNAC, which served as the main organization to collect donations for the PNAC.
McCain also collaborated with PNAC and Wolfowitz in an attempt to oust Saddam Hussein in Iraq. In 1998 he participated in the sponsoring the Iraq Liberation Act that proclaimed the "regime change" in Iraq by the U.S. policy and assumed 97 million dollars of U.S. military aid to the Iraqi National Congress - INC. INC consisted of the anti-Saddam group, whose aim was to organize a national uprising against Hussein. It was headed by Ahmed Chalabi, the Iraqi informant, whose faulty intelligence data that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and ties to Al Qaeda, were later used to draw the USA into the war with Iraq.
McCain also was co-chair of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq (CLI) – in partnership with Senator Joseph Lieberman. Committee for the Liberation of Iraq was founded by the PNAC in late 2002 and continued to finance Chalabi's INC with millions of taxpayer dollars, completing it shortly after the U.S. invasion to Iraq in 2003. In 2004 McCain became a member of the PNAC, ironically having signed a letter to the organization, condemning the foreign policy of the Russian President Vladimir Putin for its return to the "rhetoric of militarism and empire".
Accordingly, McCain was among the PNAC from the start and, although the organization no longer exists, its ideology and the members (many of whom are now advisers of McCain for presidential campaign) are still very active.
In September 2000, before the presidential election the PNAC carefully formulated its principles in a document called "Rebuilding America's Defenses" - RAD. This document designed to serve as a guide for future administrations had a solid impact on the policies pursued by Bush administration.
Here are some recommendations from the RAD report: to fight and to win a few major military conflicts that happen at the same time.
One of the main goals is to restore America's defenses that would be sufficient to "decisively win multiple, simultaneous wars in major theaters". The document clearly testified in favor of sending troops to Iraq regardless of the fact whether Saddam is in power. According to RAD, «while the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the temporary grounding of an action, the need for a substantial American military presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of regime change of Saddam Hussein".
Then there was a warning that "Iran may be a greater threat to the U.S. interests in the Gulf than Iraq. And even if the US-Iranian relations improve, the maintaining the advanced forces in the region will still be an essential element of American security strategy for long-term U.S. interests in the region". Consequently, Iran and Iraq were seen as areas of several major wars in the name of promoting "long-term U.S. interests in the region", in fact, because of its oil. McCain also put forward the suggestion of a possible continuation of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan for a hundred years.
Returning to the situation with Iran, it should be noted that McCain and Lieberman, despite assurances from some of the leading experts in the USA that the threat of Iran's nuclear program is not great enough to start a large-scale war against the country, the politicians continue to lobby militarist initiative to solve Iranian issue.
Discussing the theme of the inevitability of war with Iran, another famous American politician of the Republican Mitt Romney, U.S. presidential candidate in the elections in 2012, said that now it is time for the adoption of the resolution and the formal declaration of war against Iran. Romney continued to call for war against Iran throughout his election campaign. Against the background of a exhausting war in Iraq and the disastrous military campaign in Afghanistan, the calls to invade Iran fully meet the previously mentioned principles of RAD « to fight and to win a few major military conflicts that happen at the same time" and if to trust McCain, then it is necessary to keep these wars for hundreds of years.
The U.S. military experts and politicians understand that trillions of dollars and thousands of lives given for Iraq and Afghanistan is not enough, if they unleash a war with Iran. Analysts note that before the invasion of American troops both Iraq and Afghanistan were badly depleted, social and humanitarian catastrophes created extremely favorable conditions for the U.S. invasion in these states. Having a high level of intelligence at its disposal, excellent military equipment, the active support of guerrilla groups - allies in the region, Iran can turn an open U.S. aggression against Iraq in the long war, which was mentioned by McCain. However, the thesis contained in the doctrine of the RAD about multiple simultaneous wars in different parts of the world is unlikely to be continued as detailed in the economic and social consequences for the USA.
According to the experts an attack on Iran will cause a number of serious negative consequences to the U.S. interests in the region. Some military analysts say that in terms of military equipment the USA is not ready to hold the land, large-scale war against Iran and probably the Americans with Israelis will resort to point air strikes, they say.
At the same time, Iran is unlikely to remain calm, if any strikes still take place. I want to remind that Iran is geographically close to transport corridors in the region and oil resources of its neighbors - US allies.
From the economic point of view, Iran can cause significant damage to the oil interests of the USA and its allies in the region, making it difficult or simply blocking the transport of oil. Iran has opportunities to cause air strikes or make a diversion in the largest shipment of oil in the Gulf - the Strait of Hormuz. I want to remind that it transports 20% of world oil supply. The attempt of the U.S. Navy in the Persian Gulf to confront Iran at sea may face great difficulty in maneuvering. Iran understands that for this country it would be difficult to challenge the USA, Israel and their allies in direct collision. According to experts, Iran has the tactics of asymmetrical war for this.
Japanese edition «The Diplomat» published an article of Raoul Heinrichs titled "Asymmetric threats of Iran" in January. Author of the article notes that, by regional standards, the Iranian navy is extremely powerful and well-organized force of coastal action, whose mission is not to win the maritime powers that exceed in the power, but to protect air and sea approaches to the south of Iran that the enemy had to pay a heavy price for any attempt to get close to them. These forces designed to not allow the enemy to operate in the Gulf are composed of submarines, mines and speed boats armed with cruise missiles. All of these tools are relatively cheap - compared to the ship, which they must resist – and it’s disproportionately hard to defend against them. Submarines are difficult to detect, it’s difficult to clear mines from the waters, it’s hard to prevent speedboats from approaching to the distance at which their missiles could pose a significant risk to even the most secure vehicles, especially when there are a lot of these speedboats and they are spread. Naval geography also plays into the hands of Iran. In contrast to the western Pacific Ocean with its water expanses and concentric island chains of the Persian Gulf - it is a narrow space that is extremely convenient for offensive operations to interdict enemy action. Funnel effect may allow Iran to concentrate punching power. Short distances reduce the effectiveness of monitoring and, therefore, the technological requirements for operations. In addition, they reduce the time available to enemy fro anti-missile strike, and noisy coastal waters may serve as an ideal acoustic cover for the Iranian submarines.
The author notes that, even in spite of the fact that in the end the USA would still be able to suppress the resistance of Iran at the sea, Iran will remain a difficult opponent for the USA in the Persian Gulf.
Experts also point out that from an economic point of view an attack on Iran will entail serious negative consequences, and will cause an incredible spurt in oil prices up to several hundred dollars per barrel. According to the analysts, it would strike a serious blow to the economies of many countries that have not yet recovered from the global crisis. Former adviser to the U.S. president on national security Zbigniew Brzezinski stated that the war with Iran may be delayed for many years and will have severe economic consequences for U.S. citizens and the representatives of the middle class.
The analysts in the USA note that a number of politicians in Washington, being focused on the necessity and inevitability of war with Iran, avoid to comment the disastrous effects of war on the economy and social life of the USA.
According to the military experts, in case of a large-scale military campaign against Iran the war theater will not only be limited to the territory of this country. The fighting hostilities will become catalysts for conflicts in neighboring Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan.
Despite the misconception of some orientalists that Iran, confessing Shia Islam would not use military active support of the representatives of the neighboring states, the majority of population practice traditional Sunni Islam. So, one can say with certainty that Iran has enough supporters and allies in the region and outside the Muslim world, to create such conditions for the USA when the war with Iran will be a war of attrition for Americans.
For the United States the situation will be worsen by an incredible surge of anti-American sentiments in the region and the Muslim world.
According to the experts, the threat to the life of each military man - a U.S. citizen or any member of the foreign companies or other structures in the Middle East and the Persian Gulf will be increased at times.
Political analysts note a high degree of misinformation in the U.S. media in the program of promotion the ideas of the necessity of war with Iran.
According to the analysts, the unprecedented level of risk in the alleged U.S. military campaign against Iran, which can lead to disastrous consequences for the U.S. economy, remains without sufficient attention in the media.
It should be noted that in the United States both in the expert community and in political and military circles, there are many opponents of the idea of war with Iran. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey said about the inadmissibility of American attack on Iran. "America must avoid any form of involvement in the military conflict against Iran," said Dempsey.
The situation with Iran clearly demonstrates the extreme obsession of some politicians in Washington to destroy Iran in such form as it is now. And there was no discussion or debate on serious political level in the USA about the negative effects for the USA of the deployed and future wars. Militaristic vector in the strategy of the "Greater Middle East" is set by the same group of politicians in the USA. However, the average Americans and Western Europeans do not see neither the economic dividends, no explicit geopolitical bonus from all the wars that have already been deployed. Also the image of the omnipotent al-Qaeda becomes more and more dim in world trends, as it started justifying wars and conflicts, in which the United States participates.
Against this backdrop, the bar of the value of the actual rights and freedoms go down. In the light of increasing double standards in international relations, the rights and freedoms of the individual are seen more as a standard mechanism of the pressure on the whole states from the USA, rather than a desire to ensure the person's most important value - life. If not to mention the rest of rights and freedoms, security has now become a dream of many nations in the Middle East, the Persian Gulf. Countries in these regions are engaged in a grueling and confusing wars and conflicts that have no end in sight.

URL of this article: