Jump to content

"Unholy Alliance against Iran" The Times


Rob W
 Share

Recommended Posts

Opinion - Anatole Kaletsky

 

The Times January 04, 2007

+ Post a Comment

 

An unholy alliance threatening catastrophe

Anatole Kaletsky

 

Most people think that the bungled invasion of Iraq, climaxing last week with the bungled execution-assassination of Saddam Hussein, will go down in history as the ultimate symbol of the Bush Administration’s hubris and incompetence. They should think again. With the dawning of a new year, the Bush-Blair partnership is working on an even more horrendous foreign policy disaster.

 

What now seems to be in preparation at the White House, with the usual unquestioning support from Downing Street, is a Middle Eastern equivalent of the Second World War. The trigger for this all-embracing war would be the formation of a previously unthinkable alliance between America, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Britain, to confront Iran and the rise of the power of Shia Islam.

 

The logical outcome of this “pinning back” process would be an air strike by Israel against Iran’s nuclear facilities, combined with a renewed Israeli military campaign against Hezbollah in Lebanon, aggressive action by American and British soldiers to crush Iraq’s Shia militias, while Saudi-backed Sunni terrorists undermined the increasingly precarious pro-Iranian Government in Baghdad.

 

Consider the ominous events that occurred in the Middle East and Washington over the holiday season, while most people were paying more attention to their turkeys and Christmas stockings. The first in this sequence of events was Tony Blair’s abrupt announcement that members of the Saudi Royal Family accused of taking bribes from British defence contractors would be exempted from the application of British law. To risk a confrontation with the Saudi Royal Family, Mr Blair asserted, would have jeopardised Britain’s security interests in Iraq and in the war against terrorism, as well as dashing hopes of progress towards peace between Israel and the Palestinians. This embarrassing announcement by Mr Blair was quickly followed by his Dubai speech, in which he called for an “arc of moderation” to “pin back” Iran’s advances in the Middle East.

 

The second event, almost simultaneous with Mr Blair’s bribery announcement, was the equally unexpected resignation of Saudi Arabia’s Ambassador to Washington, Prince Turki al-Faisal, on December 15. Prince Turki has long been a key figure in the Saudi security establishment, whose last abrupt career move occurred in the autumn of 2001, when he suddenly resigned as liaison between the Saudi Royal Family and the Taleban terrorists that they had been financing until just before September 11. Turki was a leading member of a faction in the Saudi Royal Family that has for months been advocating a more conciliatory response towards the Shia hegemony in Iraq, including an effort to open direct negotiations between America and Iran, as recommended by James Baker’s Iraq Study Group. The Turki group’s main rivals in the Saudi establishment have by contrast argued for much tougher military action against what they called the “Christian-Shia conspiracy” created by the US toleration of Iranian influence over Iraq.

 

The Saudi power struggle came into the open through an article published in The Washington Post in mid-December, by Nawaf Obeid, a Saudi security consultant ostensibly working for Turki, but actually closer to the hardliners. Obeid cautioned that if American troops were withdrawn from Iraq prematurely, in line with the Baker report’s recommendations, Saudi Arabia would have no choice but to intervene forcibly “to stop Iranian-backed Shi a militias from butchering Iraq’s Sunnis”. Turki immediately fired Obeid, but shortly afterwards was himself replaced by a hardliner.

 

Within Saudi Arabia itself, meanwhile, the anti-Iranian rhetoric is gathering strength. Take this example from al-Salafi magazine, quoted in The New York Times: “Iran has become more dangerous than Israel itself. The Iranian revolution has come to renew the Persian presence in our region. This is the real clash of civilisations.”

 

The link between Israel and Iran in Saudi thinking brings us to the third event in this chillingly unfestive sequence: the confrontation over nuclear proliferation between the UN Security Council and Iran. If Iran is now really hell-bent on developing nuclear weapons, Israel has made it abundantly clear that it is equally hell-bent on stopping it — whether by diplomatic or military means. Whether Israeli bombing would in practice do serious damage to the Iranian nuclear programme is far from clear, but there are certainly hotheads in the Israeli Government and military establishment who are itching to try.

 

There is, however, one binding constraint on Israel’s freedom of action against Iran. This is the US. It is unlikely that Israel would bomb Iran without explicit American approval and it is certain that a US president would stop Israel if he believed America’s national interest demanded it.

 

That has been the situation until recently, since America has depended on Iranian-backed Shia politicians to prevent a total collapse of order and a humiliating Saigon-style expulsion of American soldiers in Iraq.

 

Although Israel has never signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, many Israeli politicians believe that they are entitled to punish Iran for its non-compliance with the treaty. For these trigger-happy Israelis, Iran’s backdoor influence over Washington via the Iraqi Shia has become a nightmare. The same is true of the Saudi princes. The Saudi Royal Family rules a largely Shia country on the basis of a fanatically enforced state religion whose senior spokesmen denounce the Shia as heretic scum. These feelings are entirely mutual — Iran’s mad mullahs hate the Wahhabis every bit as much.

 

Thus, if there is one country in the world more worried than Israel about an Iranian A-bomb, it is Saudi Arabia. And if there are two countries in the world with real influence on the Bush White House, they are Saudi Arabia and Israel. Now both these countries are telling President Bush that he must pull the plug on Iraq’s Shia Government, tear up the Baker report, whose most important advice was to open diplomatic channels to Tehran, and prepare to attack Iran, either directly or using the Israelis as a proxy. This is the basis of the unholy alliance between Israel, Saudi Arabia and America, with Mr Blair contributing a few choice soundbites.

 

The anti-Iranian “arc of moderation” may seem like another meaningless Blairism, not nearly as threatening as Mr Bush’s “axis of evil”. But this soundbite could unleash a disaster on the Middle East, beside which the war in Iraq would be a mere sideshow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

what worries me is the author - kaletsky is almost a neo-con; certainly a 200% Murdoch man, and very well connected as the Foreign Editior of the Times normally is

 

if he's getting the shits then the rest of us should start hiding in deep holes I think................

 

I'm trying to get a response from my arab mates in the Gulf

Link to post
Share on other sites

what worries me is the author - kaletsky is almost a neo-con; certainly a 200% Murdoch man, and very well connected as the Foreign Editior of the Times normally is

 

if he's getting the shits then the rest of us should start hiding in deep holes I think................

 

I'm trying to get a response from my arab mates in the Gulf

 

This is big. The 'good' Saudi's need to start making themselves heard. I'd hate to think the survival of Wahabbism will be responsible for another war.

WE need to disengage from this sharpish, it ain't gonna be gentle like last time, Iran is a whole other kettle of fish inc the huge Shia diaspora.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am old enough to remember that Suez started with " a little chat between "concerned" parties........."

 

You can see it - a "surge" in Eeyrak, an attack on the Al Sadr mob, blame Iran for their "interference", a nod and wink to the Israelis, followed by a surgical strike on Iran by their guys (with promises of replenishment etc etc from the USA) and a crack down in Saudi and the Gulf States on the Shia

 

all too beleivable I'm afraid - and no need for anyone to ask anyones "permission" - just friends all travelling down the same road ....................

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am old enough to remember that Suez started with " a little chat between "concerned" parties........."

 

You can see it - a "surge" in Eeyrak, an attack on the Al Sadr mob, blame Iran for their "interference", a nod and wink to the Israelis, followed by a surgical strike on Iran by their guys (with promises of replenishment etc etc from the USA) and a crack down in Saudi and the Gulf States on the Shia

 

all too beleivable I'm afraid - and no need for anyone to ask anyones "permission" - just friends all travelling down the same road ....................

 

iirc it's our boys in Sadr city right? The Al Sadr mob have actually been very helpful to us in bringing order in their areas albeit with some real brutality.

Link to post
Share on other sites

al sadr is the main shiite militia throughout Iraq - they are a bunch of thugs TBH - but then so are the other side

 

The problem the yanks have is that they are undoubtedly supported by their friends to the North east

 

the Saudis aren't very happy about having them as neighbours either

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

we'll just sit on the sidelines bleating 

 

just hope our lads are out of Basra before teh shit hits the fan

 

Agreed. We really don't want to get mixed up in some pan-political and gloves off all ecompassing war with Shia Islam, cause beleive me they will fight everywhere. Israel better be sure that air power will be enough. I don't think it will. Iran has been taking delivery of the latest Russian SAM packages for two or three years now, they are all squak resistant and highly mobile. Most of the nuclear facilities are ringed with hardened counter air systems.

Iran had advance warning going back to Gulf War I no one should imagine this is going to be run of the mill.

 

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/792417.html

 

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1532563/posts

 

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2005/12/iran-buying-sa15/tor-m1-sam-systems-from-russia/index.php

Link to post
Share on other sites

unless they have acces to stealth bombers and cruise missiles they could be in for roughish ride - but you know they will have the details of the AA defences, frequencies etc etc  from the yanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

unless they have acces to stealth bombers and cruise missiles they could be in for roughish ride - but you know they will have the details of the AA defences, frequencies etc etc  from the yanks

 

This won't be some Iraq scenario with divided loyalties and and untrained volunteers thrust to the front line, poorly motivated etc.. The Iranians will be fully motivated and compared to Iraq will really be up for it. Also they don't really give a shit about casualties and such like. Israel's key weapon is the Air Force which will have to perform and is well able to do so....But will it be enough??

 

Isreal must have done the run throughs by now, but I hope they see sense and don't go ahead with this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm - their LRange  F-15's are quite good but they will have to hit a lot of targets

 

But I think its a bloody certainty - they can only look forward and see how things are moving against them - the yanks will go into a post_eyrak funk, the Russians and the Chinese are getting more powerful, Iran will get a Bomb, even Iraq  might get its act together..................... 

 

If they don't act now they may not be able to do owt in a few years

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm - their LRange  F-15's are quite good but they will have to hit a lot of targets

 

But I think its a bloody certainty - they can only look forward and see how things are moving against them - the yanks will go into a post_eyrak funk, the Russians and the Chinese are getting more powerful, Iran will get a Bomb, even Iraq  might get its act together..................... 

 

If they don't act now they may not be able to do owt in a few years

 

 

This is the thing Rob. You are aware Russia and China are helping Iran out?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm - their LRange  F-15's are quite good but they will have to hit a lot of targets

 

But I think its a bloody certainty - they can only look forward and see how things are moving against them - the yanks will go into a post_eyrak funk, the Russians and the Chinese are getting more powerful, Iran will get a Bomb, even Iraq  might get its act together..................... 

 

If they don't act now they may not be able to do owt in a few years

 

 

This is the thing Rob. You are aware Russia and China are helping Iran out?

what do you mean by "helping out" ?there are two forms of arming.
Link to post
Share on other sites

coming from a country who has just stopped a criminal investigation to bribery so we can sell 72 more Typhoon fighters to the  Saudi's I don't think the UK can point the finger at anyone when it comes to arming unstable states

 

and we were very keen on selling arms to Saddam, Indonesia and other sunny spots as well

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm - their LRange  F-15's are quite good but they will have to hit a lot of targets

 

But I think its a bloody certainty - they can only look forward and see how things are moving against them - the yanks will go into a post_eyrak funk, the Russians and the Chinese are getting more powerful, Iran will get a Bomb, even Iraq  might get its act together..................... 

 

If they don't act now they may not be able to do owt in a few years

 

 

This is the thing Rob. You are aware Russia and China are helping Iran out?

 

Iran is a big customer for Russian aerospace products - they buy Russian airliners so they aren't affected by US embargoes for example

 

China has some decent long range anti ship missiles (I wonder why? they seem to have a range equal to ........ HK - Taipei.....)  but is otherwise not up to much in the hi-tech stakes

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...