As if Afghanistan, Palestine, Lebanon and Iraq were not enough nemesis for George W Bush challenging his Christian morality, there is yet another talk of strikes on Iran’s nuclear installations. There have already been three civil wars in the region, thanks US involve-ment in cahoots with Israel, however, the author of region’s jeremiad is not yet satisfied with the death and destruction brought on the innocent people of the most cultured part of the globe.

What is hugely disconcerting to any unbiased observer is the consistency of the propaganda that has been unleashed demonising the people, their belief, culture, civilisation as well as their humanity in the name of human rights, democracy and liberty. Shakespeare’s ‘fair is foul and foul is fair’ has taken over the Middle East where the central theme of the regional tragedy has gained the magnitude of a global disaster with deep and lasting repercussions.

According to reports rife in Israeli controlled media although the US does not have sufficient intelligence to launch precision attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities, it would not oppose an Israeli attack on these installations. Israeli media claimed that George W Bush did not rule out the possibility that Israel would carry out such strikes against Iran. There cannot be any other recipe for a total disaster for the world peace.

If President Bush and his acolytes are considering any such move then they must first consider the ramifications of such act. Firstly, there is an absolute eventuality that any aerial strike would at best only delay the completion of Iran’s nuclear programme by some years and would not completely neutralise the programme, however, it would have serious implications for the entire world.

Militarily Iran is far stronger today than it was a couple of years ago: challenges are a great impetus to nations. Despite the boycott and isolation which it has been suffering, Iran has made substantial progress in its military industries by producing home-made long-range missiles, jet fighters and tanks.

According to reports rife in media currently estimated Iran’s armed forces stand at more than 545,000 troops, including 350,000 infantry soldiers, 50,000 air personnel and nearly 20,600 navy men. That means militarily Iran is already superior to all GCC countries. Iran has also made great strides in missile technology. Iran’s first major home-made missiles was Shahin 2 and Iqab, with a range of between 60-150km.

Medium-range missiles have a range of between 500-600km and another updated generation with a range of 1,000 was developed in collaboration with North Korea and Russia. Iran has also produced an advanced missile named Shehab-3 with a range of 1,300km and is 17-metre long. It is capable of carrying an 800-kg warhead.

Latest version of Shahab is undetectable by enemy radars. Already work on strategic missiles with a range of 2,000km with capacity to carry non-conventional warheads weighing between 250-500kg is at advanced stage. Additional to this Iran army has Russian-built Mig29 and Sukhoi 30 as well as T-90 and T-72 tanks.

Contrary to this seventeen out of thirty-nine Brigades of US Army are already bogged down in Iraq and the rest are engaged all over the world with zero option to their relocation in the area especially now when Bush has lost majority in both houses at home.

There is no question of ground assault. Aerial strikes will greatly endanger the lives of US soldiers in Iraq. Even then Bush does not rule out possibility of aerial strikes on Iran’s nuclear installations: only a lunatic can disregard the consequences of any such act. Already bleeding nastily in Iraq and Afghanistan, despite the fact that all pro-Iran parties and groups in Iraq are cooperating with Maleki Government, the US forces would prepare another Golgota for  themselves in Iraq.

Secondly, Iran would cancel its membership in the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty and might militarise its so far peaceful nuclear programme. It would cause a great deal of agitation in the Arab world: may be this is what the US and Israeli policy makers want to happen.

In july 2005, before he handed over the power to current President Mahmoud Ahmadenajad, Khatami, the outgoing president of Iran said, ‘Iran will reject the Europeans’ proposal if the freeze of enrichment is included.’ It was his last news conference before President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took office.

Khatami said that access to nuclear energy for peaceful purposes was an ‘inalienable right.’ It is wrong to presume that Iran’s nuclear programme got impetus under its current President which Zionist-Jewish, fanatic Christian and biased international media brands as extremist. The whole nation wants its nuclear programme to succeed: advancement in nucleartechnology is symbolic of Iran’s stride toward science and technology. It is not Ahmedinejad alone, the whole nation is upright and alive to its responsibility to protect its nuclear assets.

Even further back in October 2004 Iran’s top nuclear negotiator Hossein Mousavian said, ‘We would be willing to consider any package that recognises the full right of Iran to enjoy peaceful nuclear technology within the framework of the NPT.’ He said, ‘… Iran is not prepared for cessation. Any package including a cessation of fuel cycle work would be rejected by Iran.’ In May 2005, Iran’s Guardian Council approved a parliamentary measure requiring the government to develop nuclear technology, including uranium enrichment. Since then Iran has not changed its stand on the nuclear programme.

The consistency in its approach must have been noticed by the international community. No president in Iran, today can back-track nuclear policy without earning the wrath of nation.

During his Press conference along with Iraq’s Prime Minister Maleki in Oman on Thursday, George Bush clamoured about Iran’s enrichment programme and demanded a freeze on the programme as if Iran was committing some international crime by enriching uranium. Over two dozens nations across the globe are already enriching uranium causing no ripples in International community, so why should Bush lose his sleep over Iran’s enrichment programme?

Thirdly, Iran’s military response would not target Israel alone. The US interests all over the world would become legitimate Iranian target; rather, the whole world would share the burden because any such engagement would lead to a rise in oil prices. Considering recent leap in Iran’s missile programme and its successful military exercises using those missiles in the Persian Gulf, the prospect of curtailing the soaring oil prices would be an unthinkable variable.

Information

If President Bush and his acolytes are considering any such move then they must first consider the ramifications of such act. Firstly, there is an absolute eventuality that any aerial strike would at best only delay the completion of Iran’s nuclear programme by some years and would not completely neutralise it.

First appeared in Pakistan Observer on 03-12-2006