The Threat of a Military Solution to the Problem of Iran’s Nuclear Program Is Rapidly Taking Shape

Washington and its allies continue to proclaim their adherence to a diplomatic solution to Iran’s nuclear program issue. However, recent events give reason to think that the threat of a military solution is becoming more real.

Thus, the foreign minister of Bahrain, Sheikh Khaled Ahmad al-Khalifa, said yesterday in an interview with Japanese newspaper Asahi that the United States and the countries of the Persian Gulf have agreed to establish a unified missile defense system. He said that he final decision will be made by June, adding that Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Oman, Bahrain and Kuwait are having consultations with Washington in this regard. The minister did not hide whom this missile defense system, elements of which already exist in several states in the region, will target: “The threats have always been coming from Iran. We did not hear any threats from any other areas.” He said the agreement was “a way of sending the right message.”

The agreement shows the reality of Western plans to deliver a military strike on Iran, says the head of the Duma Committee on Foreign Affairs, Alexei Pushkov. He said the missile defense system is needed only if Tehran decides to counter attack. However, the MP is sure that “there is no reason to believe that Iran can be the first to strike all of a sudden.” He reiterated that there are several scenarios “now on the table,” among them the so-called military intervention option. “And, judging by the statements of a number of governments, it’s becoming increasingly likely,” the committee head stated.

The head the China’s department of West Asian and North African Affairs, Chen Xiaodong, continued the theme of a retaliatory strike against Iran and its aftermath. Reuters regarded this as “China’s strongest warning yet not to use force to resolve the dispute.”

“If force is used on Iran, it will certainly incur retaliation, cause an even greater military clash, worsen turmoil in the region, threaten the security of the Strait of Hormuz and other strategic passages, drive up global oil prices and strike a blow at the world economic recovery,” the diplomat said. Thus, according to him, “The international community has a responsibility to restrain itself from war.”

However, the U.S. and Israel do not rule out any options against Iran, including war. Reuters recalled that in March, Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman visited Beijing and made it clear that Tel Aviv is likely to “strike against Iranian nuclear installations.” Washington did not miss an opportunity to once again threaten Tehran, saying that, in the event of its intransigence, military force could be used against it. As Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said a few days ago, the U.S. wants to resolve the Iranian nuclear problem peacefully; however, their patience has its limits. “There is still time and space to pursue the objectives that we seek through diplomacy,” she said. “But the time for diplomacy is not infinite, and all options remain on the table to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.” And yet, judging by the words of the minister of foreign affairs, the U.S. administration will continue to “promote” the resolution by means of unilateral economic sanctions against Tehran.

On April 13–14, the “big six” (the five permanent members of UN Security Council, plus Germany) will be meeting with Iran. However, in these circumstances, it is premature to expect a radical turn of events, whereby there would be a settlement of the Iranian problem on peaceful terms. Indeed, Tehran — despite the sanctions and threats — is showing no signs of weakness, and the West has shown no desire to go forward.