Pentagon Talks of Peace in Iran and Prepares War
Published in Izvestia
(Russia) on 18 November 2011
by Igor Yavlyansky (link to original)
In Halifax, Canada, on the grounds of the International Security Forum, which opens Nov. 18, Leon Panetta, head of the Pentagon, is scheduled to meet with Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak.
Regarding a military strike on Iran, Panetta announced to journalists the evening before the discussion with his Israeli colleague, "There are going to be unintended consequences to that, that could impact not just on our economy but the world economy...The United States feels strongly that the way to deal with that is to work with our allies, to work with the international community to develop the sanctions and the diplomatic efforts that would further isolate Iran."
Should this statement be read in good faith? Russian experts do not believe so.
"Panetta can publicly say what he wants, but the upcoming meeting will be devoted to orchestrating an act of violence in light of the latest IAEA report on Iran's nuclear program and statements by Israeli leadership about the possibility of inflicting a preemptive strike without warning from the U.S.," says Rajab Safarov, director of the Center for Contemporary Iranian Studies.
In his opinion, Washington is doing everything it can in order to provoke its allies – Israel, Great Britain and France – and aggravating the situation in the Persian Gulf.
"Panetta headed the CIA and worked in President Clinton's machine; that is, he was a politician and is now using his habitual approaches," Evgeny Satanovsky, president of the Middle East Institute, believes.
Safarov believes that Israel is not in a condition to conduct an effective military operation against Iran on its own, and the U.S. is actually fully capable assisting with technology, space surveillance capabilities and financing. Washington, however, is motivated to keep the possible conflict in the shadows.
"The words of the head of the Pentagon are an attempt to serve as the latest signal to Tehran that Americans are not interested in war. The goal is to make Iranians more compliant, including in their collaboration with the IAEA," Senator Rudik Iskuzhin, leader of the Federation Council's permanent delegation to the Asian Parliamentary Assembly, believes.
According to Iskuzhin, this fundamental topic will be raised at the meeting in Canada: In the case of a crisis, what is to be done about an abrupt activation of the network of Iranian supporters around the world? If you bomb Bushehr, they can blow up a similar facility anywhere in the U.S. or Europe in response.
"Americans and Israelis need to act with a glance to Russia and China," Iskuzhin continues.
Moscow, in his words, does not believe that economic sanctions will motivate Tehran to have a constructive dialogue, and in Iskuzhin's opinion, it is necessary to have that dialogue with Iran constantly and intensively, especially as definite progress is evident. Tehran, for example, has expressed a willingness to accept the IAEA mission.
Regarding a military strike on Iran, Panetta announced to journalists the evening before the discussion with his Israeli colleague, "There are going to be unintended consequences to that, that could impact not just on our economy but the world economy...The United States feels strongly that the way to deal with that is to work with our allies, to work with the international community to develop the sanctions and the diplomatic efforts that would further isolate Iran."
Should this statement be read in good faith? Russian experts do not believe so.
"Panetta can publicly say what he wants, but the upcoming meeting will be devoted to orchestrating an act of violence in light of the latest IAEA report on Iran's nuclear program and statements by Israeli leadership about the possibility of inflicting a preemptive strike without warning from the U.S.," says Rajab Safarov, director of the Center for Contemporary Iranian Studies.
In his opinion, Washington is doing everything it can in order to provoke its allies – Israel, Great Britain and France – and aggravating the situation in the Persian Gulf.
"Panetta headed the CIA and worked in President Clinton's machine; that is, he was a politician and is now using his habitual approaches," Evgeny Satanovsky, president of the Middle East Institute, believes.
Safarov believes that Israel is not in a condition to conduct an effective military operation against Iran on its own, and the U.S. is actually fully capable assisting with technology, space surveillance capabilities and financing. Washington, however, is motivated to keep the possible conflict in the shadows.
"The words of the head of the Pentagon are an attempt to serve as the latest signal to Tehran that Americans are not interested in war. The goal is to make Iranians more compliant, including in their collaboration with the IAEA," Senator Rudik Iskuzhin, leader of the Federation Council's permanent delegation to the Asian Parliamentary Assembly, believes.
According to Iskuzhin, this fundamental topic will be raised at the meeting in Canada: In the case of a crisis, what is to be done about an abrupt activation of the network of Iranian supporters around the world? If you bomb Bushehr, they can blow up a similar facility anywhere in the U.S. or Europe in response.
"Americans and Israelis need to act with a glance to Russia and China," Iskuzhin continues.
Moscow, in his words, does not believe that economic sanctions will motivate Tehran to have a constructive dialogue, and in Iskuzhin's opinion, it is necessary to have that dialogue with Iran constantly and intensively, especially as definite progress is evident. Tehran, for example, has expressed a willingness to accept the IAEA mission.