Don’t Fear Iranian Nukes
By Anthony Gregory | Wednesday January 11, 2012 at 2:27 PM PDT
In his speech after the Iowa caucuses, Newt Gingrich warned that “an Iranian nuclear weapon is one of the most frightening things we have to confront.” He was criticizing the non-interventionist views of Ron Paul, but beyond the presidential campaign, we seem to have this bundle of assumptions overtaking the media and most political discourse: Iran is seeking nuclear weapons, and only an unreasonable person would think the U.S. should not do nearly anything to prevent Iran from achieving this goal.
The last wave of this hysteria began in response to the newest report from the International Atomic Energy Agency about Iran’s nuclear program released two months ago. Yet the new smoking gun in that document, as it was confusingly described in one media account after another, was based on questionable and old intelligence going back to 2003. There was nothing new. Seymour Hersh reports:
Robert Kelley, a retired I.A.E.A. director and nuclear engineer who previously spent more than thirty years with the Department of Energy’s nuclear-weapons program, told me that he could find very little new information in the I.A.E.A. report. He noted that hundreds of pages of material appears to come from a single source: a laptop computer, allegedly supplied to the I.A.E.A. by a Western intelligence agency, whose provenance could not be established. Those materials, and others, “were old news,” Kelley said, and known to many journalists. “I wonder why this same stuff is now considered ‘new information’ by the same reporters.
Indeed, the IAEA “continues to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material” as it has in its previous reports.
Some more important facts to keep in mind:
(1) Iran is reported to be attempting to enrich its uranium to 19.75% LEU —well below the 95% used for nuclear weapons, and there is no evidence Iran has the potential to reach such high enrichment any time soon;
(2) According to the relevant U.S. National Intelligence Estimate, agreed on by both the Bush and Obama administrations, Iran has not even sought nuclear weapons in nearly a decade;
(3) The Iranian military state is run by the clerics, not by President Ahmadinejad, whose statements about Israel have been taken out of context and have little bearing on actual Iranian policy;
(4) even if somehow Iran did get nuclear weapons, they would not be any more dangerous than the thousands of other nuclear weapons in the world, some of which have gone missing;
(5) even the head of Israel’s Mossad does not see Iran with nuclear weapons as an “existential threat” to Israel—and it certainly wouldn’t be such a threat to the United States;
(6) Indeed, attacking Iran, whether over alleged nuclear program or any other pretext, is a far greater threat to Israel to anything Iran is posing just being left alone (the linked interview between Scott Horton and Gareth Porter is well worth hearing in full);
(7) During the Cold War, the U.S. faced the Soviet Union, which was an existential threat, and was a much more belligerent and repressive regime than the one ruling Iran.
The Iranian regime is not particularly belligerent, either. Iran may be guilty of an extrajudicial conviction of an accused American-born spy, but this is hardly any worse than the U.S. government’s own show trials involving charges just as dubious and does not justify war. All this talk about Iran’s weapons testing and other transgressions against America’s sense of what’s right in the world does not negate the fact that the U.S. has been the greater instigator in all relations with Iran.
In 1953, the Eisenhower administration overthrew the democratically elected government and replaced it with the brutal Shah, whose torturers were later trained by the CIA. In the 1980s, the U.S. sided with Iraq’s aggressive war with Iran. In the last few years, the U.S. has been imposing sanctions on Iran and waging a covert war, most likely supporting such terrorist groups as Jundallah, itself possibly tied to al Qaeda, and the Marxist Mujahedeen-e Khalq.
Compared to America’s record in waging aggressive wars—indeed, compared to most of the world—Iran is a fairly peaceful country. Juan Cole writes:
Unlike Israel (Egypt 1956, 1967; Lebanon 1982, 2006) or the US (Iraq 2003), Iran has not unilaterally attacked a nation that had not attacked it, and Iran has not occupied other states’ territory. Both Israel and the US have stockpiles of nuclear warheads. Iran doesn’t have a single one and doesn’t even have a nuclear weapons program. Since Iran has not attacked anyone (and hasn’t done so for over a century), and since the UNSC has not authorized the use of force against Tehran, it would be illegal under the UN Charter for the US or Israel to attack Iran.
Moreover, the toxic and radioactive materials released on civilians in Isfahan as a result of an attack on the Natanz facilities would pose a significant hazard to civilian life in that city– another war crime.
So why all the U.S. saber rattling? The Obama administration’s latest assault on Iran, the new round of sanctions, is not targeting any sort of actual weapons program, but is instead designed to evoke “public discontent” among the Iranian people, in the words of one administration official. Is the goal regime change? It is simply to flex geopolitical muscle or to benefit Israel? Perhaps, but even in terms of realpolitik, war with Iran would be utterly disastrous.
Regardless of the precise reason behind the propaganda campaign, there is no reason to worry about Iranian nukes. There is no real evidence of a nuclear weapons program, despite every tiny thing being blown out of proportion in the media as proof of Iran’s nefariousness and impending development of such weapons. Even if the Iranians had such weapons, it would not be nearly the threat to Israel it’s made out to be, and it would be virtually no threat at all to the United States. War with Iran, however, would be a grand calamity, potentially far worse than the folly of the Iraq war, and would likely destabilize the whole region and make matters much worse for Israel anyway.
This is not how most of the establishment is interpreting reality. But there is one final reason to be highly suspicious of all the warmongering out there. Most of the people in government and connected to the war party are known to play fast with the truth in fomenting wars. This same group was wrong about Iraq and misled the nation into a horrible war, either intentionally or with negligence rising to the level of gross criminality, and hundreds of thousands of people were killed as a result. We should never listen to what they have to say without a grain—make that a truckload—of salt. The cost of action is so much higher than the cost of inaction.
Don’t listen to the propagandists. They are flirting with an international cataclysm, and fudging the facts in the process.
Tags: Imperialism, Iran, Nuclear Weapons, The State, Uncategorized, War, Weapons 
A Newt Gingrich Presidency is one of the most frightening things we would have to confront.
marty | Jan 11, 2012 | Reply
Facts don’t matter to the Neocons.
CIA Jon | Jan 11, 2012 | Reply
Excellent article.
Simply paying a fair price for the oil and returning soundness to the dollar would be a much better alternative to senselessly spilling the blood of our young men and women who lose arms, legs, get burned, and suffer all manner of injury just to enforce the policy that the U.S. can buy oil with paper dollars. It is morally the right thing to do and would be much more economical.
The people who want these inane, non-stop wars do not realize what it is doing to our economy. No matter how much money Raytheon, General Dynamics, Exxon, Northrop Grumman, Boeing, etc. make from the the war, it is still net/net wealth destruction — for the world in general and especially our country. Bomb ‘em, rebuild ‘em. Rinse and repeat. Without the senseless wars our economy and nation could thrive beyond all expectations.
Bob Baker | Jan 11, 2012 | Reply
This is the worst piece of writing I have ever seen. The Iranian’s themselves have announced they are seeking a nuclear weapon. Does it have to be a fissionable device, the one most people are familiar with?? No, it doesn’t, it can simply a radioactive material spread by a dirty bomb. The damage is worse, psychologically in that type of attack. And to say that Iran is a peaceful country may be true of it’s citizenry but certainly not of it’s government. I guess you are willing to ignore the captured Iranian built devices found in Iraq being used to kill not just Americans but also other Muslims. You and Neville Chamberlain would have gotten along famously....
Rick | Jan 11, 2012 | Reply
Anthony,
I’m totally with the thrust of your article. 90% of it but then there is always this obligatory mea culpaing (OK, I made up the verb!):
“In 1953, the Eisenhower administration overthrew the democratically elected government and replaced it with the brutal Shah, whose torturers were later trained by the CIA. In the 1980s, the U.S. sided with Iraq’s aggressive war with Iran.”
There is no reason for the saber rattling or the “Dr. Strangelove” reaction BUT . . . the but is the Iranian regime is not without faults (I don’t see anything here about sponsoring terrorism, repression of their own people, especially the theocracy of the place which is stifling and humiliating to Iranians). Yes, the USA supported Shah (and the dictatorship that blossomed into South Korea and Taiwan). It helps to recall that “sometimes things can get worse – or no better.” Think 1979 onward.
As libertarians we can criticize our government’s foreign policy (and should) but that is no reason to refrain from calling out Iranian theocrats for their heinous rule as well. I have libertarian friends who are more afraid of the Religious Right est. theocracy in this country (a terrible thing, to be sure). Well, what if you were Iranian? My Iranian gym buddy (retired airline pilot) just returned and next year he can finally get US citizenship and not have to go back to that “miserable country ruined by the clerics.” His quote, not mine.
Jonathan Bean | Jan 11, 2012 | Reply
Plus let’s hear it for a closed internet in Iran:
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-04/18/iran-halal-internet
People like Hersh have made the same mistake as opponents of the Vietnam War: they were antiwar (good) but then became anti-anti-communist (couldn’t denounce communism and overlooked its travesties). Basically, “no enemies outside our own country.” Hersh took similar tack on North Korea: well, so what? USA has worse record? Doesn’t mean anything? The world is full of nukes?
There may be something to the “nuclear peace” argument (I agree with that one).
But then nothing about North Korea as a living hell hole. Or perhaps our view of North Korea is all doctored as well, ditto the anti-anti apologies for Pol Pot and so many others. (I see Hersh, et al. often cite Bruce Cumming who has been thoroughly debunked on Korea since documents opened from USSR and China!).
I wish we who loath communism and theocracy could criticize U.S. foreign policy while also (or on other occasions) noting how anathema said regimes are to our beliefs.
Jonathan Bean | Jan 11, 2012 | Reply
Jon, I of course agree that the Iranian state is oppressive, worse internally in most senses—including social freedom—than the United States, although I wouldn’t put it in the same category at all as North Korea.
Incidentally, one sad thing about U.S. saber rattling is it emboldens the theocrats in Iran and encourages national unity behind that horrible regime, stifling the natural pro-Western, pro-democracy movement of the large Iranian youth which, I believe, can bring a much freer future to that country without U.S. meddling.
Anthony Gregory | Jan 11, 2012 | Reply
Isreal wants and will get the USA to wage war on Iran. No other reason is required.
richard | Jan 12, 2012 | Reply
Another point I should mention: I don’t consider it moral for any state to have nuclear weapons, whether Iran, the U.S., Israel, Russia, or any other. I don’t think possession of nukes is justified, nor does such possession justify war. I don’t worry as much about Iran’s potential of getting a nuke as I do about the U.S. already having thousands of them. And I repeat that the case that Iran is pursuing nukes is very weak.
Anthony Gregory | Jan 12, 2012 | Reply
Anthony,
I know you know but when citing anti-anti’s like Seymour Hersh it helps to not get lumped with his one-eyed views of these events.
That said, I agree with your assessment but I despise the regime in Iran and wish my Iranian friends here (and their families over there) will be free sooner rather than later. Sadly, the lesson of Arab Spring is to shoot the hell out of your own people to retain power, then shut off the Internet and close your country to the outside world.
Jonathan Bean | Jan 12, 2012 | Reply
Excellent article, Anthony.
Robert Higgs | Jan 12, 2012 | Reply
Jonathan Bean does not the US sponsor Terrorism we Know that it has and does sponsor along with Israel various groups like the MEK that commit terrorist acts in Iran so this shock gasp Horror attitude that Iran is a sponsor of Terrorism is a bit disingenuous. As is the US who have committed Terrorist acts in Iran since the CIA was given the power to do more than actually spy. Want to bet the Iranians have spent much less money on Terror against the US than the US has spent in relation to terror against Iran. Want to bet the US has killed more Iranians in their terrorist funded activities than the Iranians have killed Americans.
Would the overthrown Regime that was Democratically elected have become as bad as the Hated by its citizen regime of the Shah or in fact the Mad Mullahs. I doubt it so what is this, nothing less than the long established CIA Blowback so oft spoke about!
Time to leave Iran alone let them work out their own problems with the Proviso, attack ANYBODY and your toast. Remember it takes twenty odd minutes to permanently get rid of Iran if they were to attack anyone. Of course that doesn’t sell the Armaments that the US Military industrial complex which by the way Israel is today such a player, both in the US and in Israel.
Of course though this isn’t about Iran at all nor Israel, its about Energy and China was in 1954 was in the 70s and still is now!
The lion | Jan 13, 2012 | Reply
To all you Iran bashers...
As an Iranian, let me tell you that Iran is the most free Country in the middle east outside Turkey and we Iranians love our country. Why don’t you take a trip there before you judge and witness how bad a country Iran is and how unwelcoming Iranians are. We are a third world country. Sorry about that! Sorry to all those idiot Iranians who come to the US and assume that their poor third world country should live by the same standard as the US. Sorry we had to fight an 8-year long war against Saddam who was supplied and financed by all the world while we were all alone. Sorry that you feel you have to get a foreign passport and run off to the US with the money you stole rather than stay and try to help your country modernize, like the poor 32-year-old nuclear scientist who was murdered the other day. Most of all, Sorry that the most powerful country in the world has been waging war against us and trying to destroy out poor third world country the last 30 years. We have had much to contend with. If the racist American government wants to attack us, we cannot control that, but every country has the right to self-defense and you can expect that from Iran as well
reza | Jan 13, 2012 | Reply
Iran has probably correctly assumed that nothing they do will change the so-called “West’s” behavior. Having nukes doesn’t necessarily imply safety. Look at Pakistan. The ones who think nukes will hold the Banksters at bay fail to realize just how many tools they have in their bag of tricks. Look at what they did to Sukarno way back in the 50′s. They made fake Porn with him in fer cryin’ out loud! That’s just a snowflake on the tip of iceberg. Say what you want about Iran’s leadership, they know how to keep their decision making process entirely their own, and they’re certainly not stupid.
liveload | Jan 14, 2012 | Reply
A main point that always seems to be overlooked...especially by a few of the more jingoist respondents to your germane article...is that the internal affairs of Iran (or any other country, for that matter) is simply none of our d*** business regardless of whether we approve, or not. Who the h*** delegated the busybody U.S. to be ramrod of the world?! It wasn’t God, that’s for sure.
shootist66 | Jan 14, 2012 | Reply
Not too long ago some polls showed that about 70% of those polled, who represent the views of the nation as a whole, believed that Iran now has nuclear weapons. Since this is untrue, isn’t it some concern that in a nation that advertises itself as a beacon of freedom of the press, people are so ill-informed on an estremely important issue. Maybe Iran and North Korea could take a lesson on enforcing thought control from the United States, as we hseem to have progressed to another level from them.
Robert Charron | Jan 14, 2012 | Reply
Bob.
You forgot the Z word. The Zionists — the prime movers behind these US war througout the region
Joe | Jan 14, 2012 | Reply
Anthony did a pretty good job of linking to all of his sources in the article. Could you link to a source where Iran is claiming to be seeking a nuclear weapon?
Chesley Elkins | Jan 14, 2012 | Reply
My previous comment was directed to Rick:
Anthony did a pretty good job of linking to all of his sources in the article. Could you link to a source where Iran is claiming to be seeking a nuclear weapon?
Chesley Elkins | Jan 14, 2012 | Reply
Rick, I can’t wait to meet you on the spaceship as we join the other abductees for a spin around the galaxy.
Gregorio | Jan 14, 2012 | Reply
I would not expect you to think otherwise, a whole life propaganda against Muslims and their threats and lately against Iran.
but I’m telling you if you think like many others(majority),it’s time for you to stop and rethink.
we keep hearing Iran’s government is this, is that! and bunch of those you know what!
but it’s clear for me now, if warmongers say that Iran seeking nukes,SO they do not.
If IDF says Iran is a threat,So They are not.
If CNN reports on Iran terrorism against world, So it’s Vice Versa.
If UN security council veto any thing against Israel, So there is something.
and many other So....
but I still do not expect you, because your mind is shaped like this it’s not your fault.
but at least you can try to rethink, reconsider.
Ralf | Jan 15, 2012 | Reply
@Chesley,
Just for fun I Googled it, 2nd hit:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17741
And this was a year ago, might be worse now with the new IAEA report.
W C Freed | Jan 15, 2012 | Reply
I would have loved to visit Iran. I read all about it and the people, places to visit when there and reports from other people that had vacationed there. All good reports and that they were going to return. Sorry Reza that those goons in DC are telling lies against your wonderful nation. If it ever this could be that this all blows over, I will be making plans to visit there. Just saying my own country is wrong about nukes in Iran or going to war against Iran is wrong could now get me ending up in gitmo. This is to let you know that I will not be against the people or the country of Iran. I have done my homework and can see through the lies.
James | Jan 16, 2012 | Reply
I wanted to get a Visa to visit Iran. I never did get a response from their embassy. Airfares seemed quite high too.
That aside, on the deterrence side, I understand that Israel already has missiles, and a number of Nukes. The USA is thought to have over 5000, and the ability to hit anywhere on earth within an hour. Iran could get a bomb, but if they use it for an act of aggression, they’re probably history. Doesn’t sound too likely to me...
Safariman | Jan 17, 2012 | Reply