|
|
Vertaal:
              De adviseurs van Obama bespreken voorbereidingen voor oorlog op Iran
Donderdag, 6 November, 2008 Door Peter Symonds | Op de vooravond van de verkiezingen van de V.S., De New York Times voorzichtig gericht op Maandag aan de totstandkoming van een tweeledige consensus in Washington voor een agressieve nieuwe strategie naar Iran. Terwijl vrijwel niets in de loop van de verkiezingscampagne werd gezegd, hebben de achter-de-scènes hoogste adviseurs van de kampen Obama en McCain de snelle escalatie van diplomatieke druk en bestraffende sancties tegen Iran besproken, die door voorbereidingen voor militaire stakingen wordt gesteund. Het gerechtigde artikel? Nieuw Debat Beltway: Wat over Iran? genoteerd met een graad van alarm: ? Het is een angstaanjagend begrip, maar het niet alleen het trigger-happy het beleid van Bush bespreken? als slechts theoretisch? de mogelijkheid van militaire actie om Iran tegen te houden? s kernwapensprogramma? [R] de easonable mensen van beide partijen onderzoeken de zogenaamde militaire optie, samen met nieuwe diplomatieke initiatieven.? Achter de ruggen van Amerikaanse kiezers, hebben de hoogste adviseurs voor Nieuwgekozen president Barack Obama het stadium voor een dramatische escalatie van confrontatie met Iran geplaatst zodra het nieuwe beleid bureau neemt. Een rapport dat in September van het Tweeledige Centrum van het Beleid, een In Washington gevestigde denkgroep wordt vrijgegeven, debatteerde dat de kernwapens geschikt Iran waren? strategisch onhoudbaar? en gedetailleerd een robuuste benadering? het opnemen van nieuwe diplomatieke, economische en militaire hulpmiddelen op een geïntegreerdeu manier?. Een zeer belangrijk lid van het Centrum? s werkgroep was Obama? s hoogste het Midden-Oosten adviseur, Dennis Ross, die goed - gekend voor zijn hawkish meningen is. Hij steunde de invasie van de V.S. van Irak en wordt dicht geassoci�ërd met neo-cons. zoals Paul Wolfowitz. Ross werkte onder Wolfowitz in de overheidsdiensten Voerman en Reagan alvorens de belangrijkste gezant van het Midden-Oosten te worden onder voorzittersBush oudste en Clinton. Na het verlaten van de Afdeling van de Staat in 2000, sloot aan hij zich bij rechts, denkgroep pro-Israël? het instituut van Washington voor het Beleid van het Nabije Oosten? en omhoog ondertekend als buitenlands beleidsanalist voor het Nieuws van de Vos. Het tweeledige rapport van het Centrum van het Beleid drong erop aan dat de tijd kort was, verklarend: ? Teheran? s de vooruitgang betekent dat het volgende beleid weinig tijd en minder opties zou kunnen hebben om deze bedreiging te behandelen.? Het verwierp uit-van-hand beide Teheran? s beweert dat zijn kernprogramma's voor vreedzame doeleinden waren, en de Raming van de Intelligentie van 2007 Nationale door de intelligentieagentschappen van de V.S. die vonden dat Iran om het even welk kernwapensprogramma in 2003 had gebeëindigd. The report was critical of the Bush administration?s failure to stop Iran?s nuclear programs, but its strategy is essentially the same?limited inducements backed by harsher economic sanctions and the threat of war. Its plan for consolidating international support is likewise premised on preemptive military action against Iran. Russia, China and the European powers are all to be warned that their failure to accede to tough sanctions, including a provocative blockade on Iranian oil exports, will only increase the likelihood of war. To underscore these warnings, the report proposed that the US would need to immediately boost its military presence in the Persian Gulf. ?This should commence the first day the new president enters office, especially as the Islamic Republic and its proxies might seek to test the new administration. It would involve pre-positioning US and allied forces, deploying additional aircraft carrier battle groups and minesweepers, [and] emplacing other war materiel in the region,? it stated. In language that closely parallels Bush?s insistence that ?all options remain on the table?, the report declared: ?We believe a military strike is a feasible option and must remain a last resort to retard Iran?s nuclear program.? Such a military strike ?would have to target not only Iran?s nuclear infrastructure, but also its conventional military infrastructure in order to suppress an Iranian response.? Significantly, the report was drafted by Michael Rubin, from the neo-conservative American Enterprise Institute, which was heavily involved in promoting the 2003 invasion of Iraq. A number of Obama?s senior Democratic advisers ?unanimously approved? the document, including Dennis Ross, former senator Charles Robb, who co-chaired the task force, and Ashton Carter, who served as assistant secretary for defense under Clinton. Carter and Ross also participated in writing a report for the bipartisan Center for a New American Security, published in September, which concluded that military action against Iran had to be ?an element of any true option?. While Ross examined the diplomatic options in detail, Carter laid out the ?military elements? that had to underpin them, including a cost/benefit analysis of a US aerial bombardment of Iran. Other senior Obama foreign policy and defense advisers have been closely involved in these discussions. A statement entitled, ?Strengthening the Partnership: How to deepen US-Israel cooperation on the Iranian nuclear challenge?, drafted in June by a Washington Institute for Near East Policy task force, recommended the next administration hold discussions with Israel over ?the entire range of policy options?, including ?preventative military action?. Ross was a taskforce co-convener, and top Obama advisers Anthony Lake, Susan Rice and Richard Clarke all put their names to the document. As the New York Times noted on Monday, Obama defense adviser Richard Danzig, former navy secretary under Clinton, attended a conference on the Middle East convened in September by the same pro-Israel think tank. He told the audience that his candidate believed that a military attack on Iran was a ?terrible? choice, but ?it may be that in some terrible world we will have to come to grips with such a terrible choice?. Richard Clarke, who was also present, declared that Obama was of the view that ?Tehran?s growing influence must be curbed and that Iran?s acquisition of a nuclear weapon is unacceptable.? While ?his first inclination is not to pull the trigger,? Clarke stated, ?if circumstances required the use of military force, Obama would not hesitate.? While the New York Times article was muted and did not examine the reports too deeply, writer Carol Giacomo was clearly concerned at the parallels with the US invasion of Iraq. After pointing out that ?the American public is largely unaware of this discussion,? she declared: ?What makes me nervous is that?s what happened in the run-up to the Iraq war.? Giacomo continued: ?Bush administration officials drove the discussion, but the cognoscenti were complicit. The question was asked and answered in policy circles before most Americans know what was happening? As a diplomatic correspondent for Reuters in those days, I feel some responsibility for not doing more to ensure that the calamitous decision to invade Iraq was more skeptically vetted.? The emerging consensus on Iran in US foreign policy circles again underscores the fact that the differences between Obama and McCain were purely tactical. While millions of Americans voted for the Democratic candidate believing he would end the war in Iraq and address their pressing economic needs, powerful sections of the American elite swung behind him as a better vehicle to prosecute US economic and strategic interests in the Middle East and Central Asia?including the use of military force against Iran. Have Your Say: Obama advisers discuss preparations for war on Iran Please read our posting guidelines before posting. Alternatively you can discuss this report here. One Response to “Obama advisers discuss preparations for war on Iran”
Related News
|
523 Architects, Engineers & Physicists question the official 911 story Euro tour Last post by Mick @ 12:57 PM Go to Forum
| Latest Topics
A historical milestone? Reflections on class and race in America Last post by Thinking Man's Idiot @ 11:08 AM We're not all fat cats Last post by Thinking Man's Idiot @ 10:48 AM Bashing Bible bashers Last post by Unregistered @ 06:53 AM Neocon Bunker Hunker Last post by ZingPao @ 03:42 AM Remember, remember, the fifth of November Last post by ZingPao @ 03:26 AM President Obama - A World Reacts Last post by ZingPao @ 03:20 AM The Hope of Obama Last post by ZingPao @ 03:12 AM Palin lays low as interview requests pile up Last post by ZingPao @ 02:18 AM Felix Rohatyn And the Nazis Last post by Nostalgia @ 01:22 AM  Email This Page To A Friend Latest Headlines
More World News  Archive |
The views expressed in the RINF news wire and newsletter are the sole responsibility of the author (s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the webmaster. RINF.COM: Breaking News & Alternative Media is Copyleft - Copy & Distribute Freely. News Forum |
Loading ...
Sure and please tell me how the US is going to finance this since you are bancrupt?