Slam Dunk: The Bush Administration is Trying to Provoke Iran

The Bush administration is once again escalating its confrontation with Iran. Clearly they have multiple motivations for doing so. They're trying to "change the channel" from the failure of the "surge," ahead of the September Congressional debate on Iraq. They would dearly love to split off from the Democratic opposition on Iraq Members of Congress who share the AIPAC goal of confronting Iran. And they want to undermine negotiations taking place between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency over Iran's nuclear program.

But details have emerged from the recent escalation that strongly indicate what many have long suspected: the Bush administration's fundamental conflict with Iran is not about its nuclear program or alleged weapons smuggling -- so far unproven -- into Iraq.

It's simply a great-power struggle for influence. And while there's nothing too shocking about that, people in the United States should ask themselves -- and be asked by others -- what sacrifices we are really willing to bear so that the Bush administration can try to keep Iran from having the influence in Iraq that they would normally have -- and almost certainly will have -- if there is a democratic government in Iraq, given that 60 percent of the Iraqi population is Shiite and has strong cultural and religious ties to their co-religionists in Iran. How many U.S. soldiers' lives is that goal worth? How many billions of U.S. tax dollars?

On Wednesday, The New York Times reported:

Members of an Iranian Energy Ministry delegation were arrested and held overnight by American troops in Baghdad for having unauthorized weapons, before being released this morning, American and Iraqi officials said in Baghdad. Iranian officials protested the detentions today. The group had been invited to Baghdad to help resolve Iraq's electricity crisis, Iraqi and Iranian officials said.

...

a media adviser to the Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki of Iraq told Reuters news agency that the group was in Baghdad at the invitation of Iraq's Ministry of Electricity to help build a power station in the Shiite city of Najaf.

Why were these Iranians arrested by U.S. troops if, according to Iraqi officials, they were part of an Energy Ministry delegation invited to Baghdad to "help resolve Iraq's electricity crisis"? That Iraq has a serious electricity crisis is well known. Surely such assistance should be welcomed. There must have been some mistake.

Not so, apparently, The Times reports. A manager at the hotel where the Iranians were staying said:

"I told [the U.S. soldiers] that the Iraqi Ministry of Electricity had invited them, that they were guests of the ministry and that we had a letter from the ministry confirming this."

So, prior to the Iranians' arrest, U.S. soldiers were aware that the hotel where the Iranians were staying had proof that the Iranians were in Iraq at the invitation of Iraq's Energy Ministry.

What was the point of arresting these officials? Surely the U.S. forces could have anticipated that they would be compelled politically to quickly release them, since, as they knew, these officials were in Iraq at the invitation of the Iraqi government. There is a strong whiff of harassment and provocation about this.

Here is something very simple Congress could do to indicate that they are serious about preventing the Bush Administration from provoking a war with Iran. They could mandate that U.S. forces in Iraq cannot arrest Iranian government officials who can prove that they are in Iraq at the invitation of the Iraqi government, unless they have explicit authorization from the "sovereign" Iraqi government to do so.

Get involved.

Comments

[nomorebombs]

why is this man allowed to make decisions??

[altohone]

It's nice to know our crack troops are being used to score political points in the ideological battle.

Note that the corporate media dutifully reported the arrests of the Iranians but didn't follow up when the truth became known.

Iraq Part Deux has seen the groundwork laid of lie, repeat, lie, repeat... Bush can claim Iran is the main source of terror without his statement being challenged. Weapons smuggling and training by Iran allegations have been made so often that actual proof won't be necessary for the average American to believe it.

Wagging the dog may well be the GOP strategy for the next election cycle. Beware Iran! The AIPAC Congress won't interfere.

[Dap]

Dear Mr. Naiman,

It has been a while since I last dropped in on you, glad to see you're hanging tough, thanks for all your efforts. Agape.

[kwright]

chemical warfare agents from long ago. or so the story goes.

[kwright]

on a different note. the ap reported finding vials of some form of wmds from iraq at a un building near un headquarters. there is no apparent danger. well now we know where those pesky wmd's are.

[radiclib]

Yes, exactly.

Bush is a lame duck and a fool. But that does not negate the fact that he is DANGEROUS.

He still has plenty of time and the power to kill lots of people and waste tons of money. A Congress acting in the public interest would impeach and remove both Bush and Cheney this fall.

That's not a radical or even partisan notion; it's common sense, what is best for both Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives, left-wing and right.

[rhetoric.assassin2012]

This is the same thing as we did to provoke Japan into attacking Pearl Harbor.

Let's just how the hypocrisy of non-interventionist we were in WWII

A. Make an arrangement with Britain for the use of British bases in the Pacific, particularly Singapore.

B. Make an arrangement with Holland for the use of base facilities and acquisition of supplies in the Dutch East Indies.

C. Give all possible aid to the Chinese government of Chiang-Kai-Shek.

D. Send a division of long range heavy cruisers to the Orient, Philippines, or Singapore.

E. Send two divisions of submarines to the Orient.

F. Keep the main strength of the U.S. fleet now in the Pacific in the vicinity of the Hawaiian Islands.

G. Insist that the Dutch refuse to grant Japanese demands for undue economic concessions, particularly oil.

H. Completely embargo all U.S. trade with Japan, in collaboration with a similar embargo imposed by the British Empire.

ANY of THESE ARE ACTS OF WAR against Japan and does not make a non-interventionist.

Furthermore FDR had advanced notice of Japan's expeditionary fleet heading to Hawaii, and he refused to act on it.

It seems we are to provoke Iran into attacking the US by sending recon planes into their airspace and parking damn near our whole carrier and destroyer fleets in international waters and in Iran's backyard. That would be the same if China was doing the same to the US, and that not illiciting a military response. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.

[nomorebombs]

amen

[Boyaca]

Why, Maxwell Smart makes them all look a little incompetant. As a matter of fact Maxwell would have done a much much better job than this administration and military over the past 4 years and counting. These guys are so gung ho and so, so sad.

[BeyondPopper]

The scariest part is the talking point that Iran is working with al Qaida.

These clowns didn't understand that Saddam and al Qaida were enemies, and they still don't understand that Iran and al Qaida are enemies. They all look upon each other as apostates from the True Faith.

But then, these clowns don't care. They know what buzz words scare the American people the most, and as a terrorist regime they are more than willing to continue their campaign of terror as long as it takes to tear down the Constitution.

[TitaniumAvatar]

The ultimate winner in our Pre-emptive War with/Occupation of Iraq will be...wait for it...IRAN,