Welcome to Eureka Street

back to site

AUSTRALIA

Australia needs distance from US Iran attack planning

  • 03 October 2007

International concern about the risk of US air strikes on Iranian nuclear installations, and possibly on power generation and central command infrastructures also, rises and falls as the click ticks away on the Bush-Cheney regime. Here are the main factors at work.

On the US side, there is no moral or international legal constraint against a first-strike air attack on Iran. If Bush and Cheney decide the potential benefits outweigh any risks, nothing would stop them — neither scruples about taking life and destroying property, nor respect for international law. The reported Israeli air attack on an alleged Syrian nuclear facility (all the facts here are, deliberately, still obscure) may have been a trial balloon to test international reactions.

The US has achieved its main goal in Iraq — a geostrategic military placement astride the richest oil-producing region in the world. It also has a well-placed forward base from which to dominate Middle Eastern commercial oil flows and even in extremis to try to commandeer those flows or impede oil supply to the US's main potential antagonist, China. As long as the oil keeps flowing under US protection major Iraqi death and destruction and some US casualties are acceptable collateral damage for Bush and Cheney. The only irritant to complete success in Iraq is the growing Shia Iraqi guerilla resistance to US military dominance in Iraq, and the so far secure rear supply base that Iran provides to this increasingly effective resistance.

Significantly, the war has changed character over the past year. The US occupation is now increasingly siding with Sunni Iraqis, and most American casualties are now being inflicted by Shia operations.

But lashing out at Iran is risky. The US would not send US land forces into Iran, obviously, but precision bombing is in a direct sense risk-free. However, air attacks would enrage Iran and would energise the present low-level war in Iraq. This could inflame the whole Middle East, threatening pro-American regimes. Sabotage and hostage-taking could become a major issue in Arab countries where the US has a commercial presence. Iran could stress the NATO military operation in Afghanistan to breaking point, and the shaky Musharaf regime in Pakistan could fall. Russian and Chinese reactions are unpredictable but could be serious. Competent policy planners in Washington would still conclude these are unacceptable risks, and would recommend against US air strikes.

In the present power game, each side