[lbo-talk] "Revealed: Israel Plans Nuclear Strike on Iran"

Yoshie Furuhashi critical.montages at gmail.com
Sun Jan 7 05:58:48 PST 2007


On 1/6/07, Michael J. Smith <mjs at smithbowen.net> wrote:
> On Saturday 06 January 2007 08:32 pm, Dwayne Monroe wrote:
>
> [quoting]
> >> Colonel Sam Gardiner, a Pentagon adviser, said Iran
> >> could try to close the Strait of Hormuz, the route for
> >> 20% of the world's oil.
>
> DM:
>
> > It's an open secret that Iran is armed with the
> > peerless Moskit, a Russian anti-ship ramjet cruise
> > missile.
> > If provoked, Tehran could make things in the Strait of
> > Hormuz...quite interesting.
>
> This may fall into the category of "are we paranoid enough
> yet," but I can think of people who would love this scenario.
> Israel provokes Iran. Iran blocks the Strait. Gas prices
> quadruple (or whatever). The Joe Escalades of the world
> are howling for Iranian blood. Hillary Clinton or George W. Bush
> or some such is President, and... well, you see where this is
> going.

Iran's in far better fighting shape than Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, and the like. If I were running the empire, I would not attack it till the effects of sanctions kick in, dividing the Iranian power elite more (the deepening division of the Iranian power elite has already become clear to Washington through the Assembly of Experts and municipal elections last year, whetting Washington's appetite).

But Iran's armed forces are comparatively ill equipped, according to Kaveh Ehsani ("Iran: The Populist Threat to Democracy," MER 241, Winter 2006, <http://www.merip.org/mer/mer241/ehsani.html>):

Iran Total Defense Spending (in dollars) 4.1 billion Per Capita Defense Spending (in dollars) 60 Percentage of GDP 2.7 Active-Duty Armed Forces (thousands) 420

Turkey Total Defense Spending (in dollars) 10.1 billion Per Capita Defense Spending (in dollars) 146 Percentage of GDP 3.3 Active-Duty Armed Forces (thousands) 514

Israel Total Defense Spending (in dollars) 9.7 billion Per Capita Defense Spending (in dollars) 1,561 Percentage of GDP 8.2 Active-Duty Armed Forces (thousands) 168

Saudi Arabia Total Defense Spending (in dollars) 21 billion Per Capita Defense Spending (in dollars) 810 Percentage of GDP 8.8 Active-Duty Armed Forces (thousands) 199

Kuwait Total Defense Spending (in dollars) 4 billion Per Capita Defense Spending (in dollars) 1,770 Percentage of GDP 7.8 Active-Duty Armed Forces (thousands) 15

UAE Total Defense Spending (in dollars) 2.6 billion Per Capita Defense Spending (in dollars) 1,025 Percentage of GDP 2.8 Active-Duty Armed Forces (thousands) 50

Pakistan Total Defense Spending (in dollars) 3.3 billion Per Capita Defense Spending (in dollars) 20 Percentage of GDP 3.5 Active-Duty Armed Forces (thousands) 619 Source: International Institute for Strategic Studies, The Military Balance 2005-2006 (London, 2005) </blockquote>

The main things going for Iran are its sheer size (territory and population), its location (proximity to the Hormuz Straits), global economy (fast growth in China, etc., the house of cards in America, the global liquidity bubble, etc. keeping oil prices high), and Russian and Chinese perceptions of their national interests (which favor stability in contrast to the American desire for remaking the entire Middle East).

Iran being an illiberal democracy, its government, relatively speaking, has more popular legitimacy and support among its own populace than almost any other state in the Middle East, which, too, is a big plus when it comes to war (morale and manpower were the reasons why Iran could repel the Iraqi invasion, despite all major powers backing Iraq, which made the Ba'athist regime technologically superior to the Islamic Republic, especially since the latter was then saddled with leftover American hardware from the Shah's regime that could not be easily repaired due to American sanctions). Having observed the Iraq War, even the most pro-American dissidents in Iran would have second thoughts about a US-backed regime change, too.

But Iran's democracy also makes its politcs far more openly fractious than in almost any other state in the Middle East except Lebanon (a sharp political and economic conflict that some fear may turn into a civil war), Palestine (in an incipient civil war under the Israeli occupation), and post-invasion Iraq (in a deep civil war under the US occupation). That is why sanctions, which will divide Iran's power elite further as I said and diminish popular support for the government, are the most important means at this stage.

Military threat like this leak of Israel's plan for a nuclear strike, as well as the US naval buildup in the Persian Gulf, etc., should be seen in this context: military threat is meant to strengthen the pro-American factions -- the Rafsanjani and reformist, and perhaps also technocratic conservative, factions -- in Iran and push Russia and China to think that they have to go along with America in gradually escalating sanctions (the next review of which is to come in sixty days) in order to curb Washington (which they think is just crazy enough to launch a unilateral military strike even now -- that's on top of the fact that no state already in the nuclear club would like proliferation). -- Yoshie <http://montages.blogspot.com/> <http://mrzine.org> <http://monthlyreview.org/>



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list