ETERAZ

While political scientist, Norman G. Finkelstein discounts the possibility of an Israeli attack on Iran as posturing (see his interview with Press TV here), it seems that the hawkish brute John Bolton begs to differ in a recent interview with The Daily Telegraph and regards it as a near certainty, before Bush leaves office in the fall. Unwavering neocon, Bill Kristol has even claimed that Bush is more likely to launch a strike himself if it looks like Obama is next in line to be Commander-in-Chief.

Bolton's prediction is, at least in part, consonant with those of Seymour Hersh in his New Yorker series on the administration's plans to attack Iran, spearheaded by the vice-president, Dick Cheney's office. Former UN weapons inspector, Scott Ritter's pronouncements also seem to side with the conviction that the Bush administration is staunchly committed to an attack on Iran before the end of the president's term, irrespective of its repercussions for the region, Iranian civilians (obviously), American troops based in Iraq and Afghanistan, oil prices and the global economy. The only question remaining, is whether it will be Israel or the United States that carries out the dastardly deed.

The obvious key difference which separates Bolton from Hersh and Ritter, is that the former has for some time been vociferously calling for an attack on Iran on Fox News and other sympathetic venues and railing against the administration's lack of 'resolve' when it comes to Iran. While at present, it's undeniable that a storm is brewing and pressure has intensified on Iran as the two presidential nominees square off and the twilight of Bush’s presidency lies on the horizon.

Though predominantly anecdotal (there are some articles which I've linked below), I've been told by numerous individuals, friends and relatives who regularly conduct business transactions internationally from inside of Iran, that the present sanctions are seriously hampering Iran's economic health, prospects etc... and have had a terrible impact far beyond Iran's nuclear activities or the personnel associated with it. I don't know of any full-length study which has been undertaken to demonstrate the wider effects of the current sanctions regime on the Iranian economy, so if anyone knows of one, please let me know.

The UAE has thus far acted like an economic lifeline, and much trade is first 'laundered' via the UAE before reaching Iran; but the Americans are bringing serious pressure to bear on the Emirati authorities to curb 'illicit trade' with Iranian companies. This week the European Union passed a new series of sanctions targeting Iranian financial institutions and most importantly Iran's Bank-e-Melli. What is being undertaken on all fronts by the so-called 'international community' i.e. the US and its European cheerleader squad, is nothing less than an asymmetrical effort to buttress the economic stranglehold on the Iranian economy in the hope of coercing Iran into divesting itself of the right to enrich uranium, guaranteed by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. No wonder that some are exclaiming that sanctions are merely warfare by other means. Clausewitz would have undoubtedly seen the parallel with his own dictum that 'war is a continuation of politics by other means' very quickly, although in this case it's a matter of economic warfare waged by means of sanctions, psychological warfare through the ceaseless threat of military force and even 'obliteration', and finally the very real and tangible threat of coercion in the form of military maneuvers, by both American warships in the Gulf and Israeli F-16s over the Mediterranean.

The choice we face is whether we are going to voice our opposition to yet another foreign policy and morally bankrupt disaster or applaud while the bombs fall and innocents are torn limb from limb. If and when a strike does occur, we can be sure Bolton will applaud, do a little dance and throw in a couple of 'hell yeahs', all in the name of 'liberty', 'justice' and 'security' for Israel...errr...I mean the world...

Telegraph.co.uk:

Israel 'will attack Iran' before new US president sworn in, John Bolton predicts

By Toby Harnden in Washington

Last updated: 9:50 AM BST 24/06/2008

John Bolton, the former American ambassador to the United Nations, has predicted that Israel could attack Iran after the November presidential election but before George W Bush's successor is sworn in.

The Arab world would be "pleased" by Israeli strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities, he said in an interview with The Daily Telegraph.

"It [the reaction] will be positive privately. I think there'll be public denunciations but no action," he said.

Mr Bolton, an unflinching hawk who proposes military action to stop Iran developing nuclear weapons, bemoaned what he sees as a lack of will by the Bush administration to itself contemplate military strikes.

"It's clear that the administration has essentially given up that possibility," he said. "I don't think it's serious any more. If you had asked me a year ago I would have said I thought it was a real possibility. I just don't think it's in the cards."

//www.telegraph.co.uk