U.S. War Plans Are Crime Against the Peace
No to War Against Iran! Oppose Sanctions!
The U.S. and its client state Israel are gearing up for war against Iran. This includes sending eleven more warships into the region, and nuclear submarines equipped with hundreds of “bunker busters.” The “bunker busters” are reportedly the most powerful bombs in the U.S. arsenal short of nuclear weapons. They would likely be used against Iranian nuclear energy facilities and military targets. Both the U.S. subs and warships also have Tomahawk missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads. President Barack Obama has specifically said he would use nuclear weapons as first-strike offensive weapons against Iran. At least one Israeli submarine, also with nuclear-weapon capability, is also heading to Iran. A massive bombing raid, by air or sea, by the U.S., Israel or both, is one likely way war could be unleashed.
We urge all to be vigilante and join in demanding No War on Iran! Voice of Revolution vigorously denounces U.S. war plans as crimes against the peace and demands All U.S. Troops Home Now!
Both the U.S. and Israel are nuclear-weapons states, while Iran is not. It is the U.S. and Israel that are positioning their warships and submarines thousands of miles from their own territory. They have no business being in the region! Iran has the right to defend her sovereignty and has already made clear she will not submit to U.S. dictate. Indeed, Iran’s refusal to submit and her stands against U.S. aggression, including defending Palestine, are a main reason the U.S. is stepping up its war plans. Use of military force is its only solution, when clearly such a path poses grave dangers for the peoples of the region and the world.
It is removal of U.S. troops and warships from the region that would decisively contribute to peace. It is the presence of the U.S. and its increasing war preparations that must be opposed. It is the U.S. and Israel that are preparing for war and responsible for any eventual conflict that might occur. Now is the time to vigorously oppose U.S. crimes — No War on Iran! U.S. Out of the Middle East Now!
With Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu visit to the White House July 6 and Congress out of session for the holidays, one can anticipate the possibility of a U.S.-Israeli attack in the coming weeks. Previous visits by Israeli leaders have been followed by Israel unleashing attacks with the U.S. blessing. These include those against Gaza in 2008-09 and against Lebanon in 2006.
There is broad and growing opposition to Israeli aggression and U.S. funding and backing for it, seen most recently in the demonstrations worldwide denouncing the Israeli attack on the civilian Gaza flotilla. This aggression was conducted in the name of “self-defense.”
Utilizing the recent United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and U.S. sanctions against Iran, Israel and the U.S. are preparing the ground for a provocation, such as attempts to board an Iranian ship on the high seas. Like with the Gaza flotilla, any resistance will be used as the basis for further aggression, utilizing the claim of “self-defense.”
Let no one be fooled by such U.S. or Israeli claims concerning self-defense or supposed attacks by Iran. The massive U.S. military presence in the region is itself a crime against the peace and it is the right of Iran and all the peoples to take action to defend their sovereignty. Indeed it is the exercise of the people’s right to self-defense that is a main factor for peace.
Voice of Revolution also condemns the sanctions imposed on Iran by President Barack Obama and the U.S. Congress. These follow U.S. dictated sanctions by the UNSC. All are being used to justify U.S. and Israeli presence in the region to supposedly enforce the sanctions, including efforts to board Iranian ships on the high seas. As well, the U.S. sanctions target third countries, whose ships the U.S. may also attempt to board. This is yet one more mechanism of the U.S. to force other countries to submit to its interests and empire building. Indeed, Senator McCain said the Congressional bill means foreign companies will be given a choice, "Do you want to do business with Iran, or do you want to do business with the United States?" This is the same "you are with us or against" stand that has justified the entire U.S. war of terror against the peoples. Emphasizing this content further indicates that the U.S. is increasing and broadening its attacks on the sovereignty of other countries and will not hesitate to use economic and military means to secure complete control of the region.
President Barack Obama justified sanctions against Iran saying, “One of my highest national security priorities is to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons.” Yet Obama, the UNSC and U.S. Congress have not condemned Israel’s nuclear weapons. There is no condemnation of Israel for having nuclear weapons, for its refusal to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) — which Iran has — and its refusal to join countries in the region, including Iran, in establishing a Middle East Nuclear Weapons Free Zone. The U.S. also continues to provide Israel with nuclear-weapons technology.
While Obama said, “The door to diplomacy remains open. Iran can prove that its intentions are peaceful,” the sanctions are also an effort to scuttle diplomatic efforts that did exactly that. Brazil, Turkey and Iran agreed on a diplomatic plan where Iran would send its enriched uranium to Turkey, which would turn it into nuclear fuel rods for Iran’s Research Reactor (TRR), which serves medical needs. The plan both shows Iran’s peaceful purposes and allows for peaceful nuclear cooperation without any confrontation with regards to the rights of sovereign nations. Obama, who had supported the negotiations, once they succeeded, opposed them and instead maneuvered to secure yet more sanctions. Turkey and Brazil voted against the sanctions, emphasizing that diplomatic measures had succeeded and sanctions serve only to further exacerbate the situation.
U.S. war plans against Iran are also taking place together with war plans against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). Like the U.S.-Israeli military build up near Iran, U.S. and south Korean war games are also to be conducted close to the DPRK’s borders in the coming weeks. Obama coupled this provocation with belligerent statements and actions at the G8/20 Summits. These were directed not only against Iran and the DPRK but China as well. In making a public show of such belligerence, Obama indicated that the potential for war on the Korean peninsula or with Iran remain very high.
Such desperate acts by U.S. imperialism show both its arrogance and its weakness. For the U.S. imperialists, the people have no role to play and absolute military superiority is the guarantee of victory. Yet repeatedly, in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, the peoples have shown that united and organized to accomplish their just cause, it is the peoples that are decisive and able to win victory. The same was seen at the G8/20 protests themselves, where the massive police attacks have only galvanized the people to step up their fight for democracy and for a world where the rights of all are guaranteed.
Let all join in advancing this fight and in opposing all U.S. aggression and wars.
No War on Iran or Korea!
Iran has warned that it will retaliate efforts to inspect its cargo ships as a result of recent sanctions approved in the United States, parodying the UN’s Council of "Anti-Security," sanctions.
The head of Maritime Transport of the Islamic Republic, Mohammad Hossein Dajmar, affirmed that "Iran will insure the use of its legal rights and retaliate if an Iranian ship is inspected."
In statements to the Iran’s state news agency, IRNA, Dajmar warned of the danger to Iran of the deployment of U.S. and Israeli war ships in the Persian Gulf, allegedly to enforce the UN resolution. He added that through many international laws and measures, all nations have the right to protect their territorial waters.
Under strong pressure from Washington. the UN Security Council approved, on June 9 a package of punitive measures against Iran for its refusal to halt its nuclear program. Iran again said its program is for civilian use, which includes enrichment of uranium. [The U.S. and UN have no evidence to the contrary, only speculation.]
The penalties include restricting the banking and military industry and authorizing countries to supervise cargo ships that travel from or to Iran in its own territorial waters.
The Iranian religious hierarchy, for its part, attacked the UN for submitting to the pressure of western powers while the Foreign Ministry confirmed sending letters to members of the Security Council protesting their support of the resolution.
A Muslim leader, Ayatollah Kazem Seddiqi, said during his prayers on Friday that he regretted the position of the world organization "that demonstrated that its Security Council is an anti-security council."
He emphasized that Iran will not only resist applications of these sanction but will also develop more resistance and solidarity to confront the growing hostility since the triumph of the revolution in 1979.
Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also expressed Friday his optimism for the future of the world stating, "Domination of arrogant powers over other nations is withering out."
The commandant of the naval forces of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution, Ali Fadavi, added that his country "will take the necessary measures of retaliation if a cargo ship destined to Iran is inspected by the West."
Two weeks ago, the UN Security Council, in a divided vote adopted Resolution 1929 imposing fresh sanctions on Iran. Turkey and Brazil voted against while Lebanon abstained in the 15 member Council. The U.S. and its allies lobbied hard for the sanctions, making concessions in order to bring Russia and China on board.
The move followed months of futile efforts to reach a negotiated settlement between Iran and the P5 (Security Council members with a veto, the U.S., Britain, France, China and Russia) plus Germany over the nuclear issue. The last minute agreement brokered by Turkey and Brazil for Iran to hand over 1200 kg of low enriched uranium failed to satisfy the U.S.
As expected, Iran has dismissed the Security Council resolution as illegal, and declared its intention to continue with its nuclear energy program. Meanwhile, the U.S. Congress has drafted a tougher sanctions package, which would affect third country companies supplying petrol or engaging in financial transactions with Iran. President Obama seems to have little choice but to approve it. The European Union has adopted its own version of tighter sanctions against Iran.
On the military front, Israel on June 22 launched a sixth spy satellite Ofek-9 specifically to focus of Iran. It has a more advanced camera with a resolution of 0.5 meters. A major military exercise took place off the Mediterranean coast on June 6-10, involving U.S. aircraft carrier Truman and associated strike group and German and Israeli ships. The exercise Juniper Stallion 10 involved practice bombing runs by U.S. and Israeli aircraft, as well as Israeli anti-missile defenses. It is significant in relation to speculation about a possible military strike against Iran.
The USS Truman battle group has since transited the Suez Canal, on June 18, headed for the Arabian Gulf to join the USS Eisenhower battle group already there.
Iran declared a state of alert on June 22, on its northwestern borders alleging that U.S. and Israeli forces are now concentrated in Azerbaijan ready to strike at Iran’s nuclear facilities. Iranian sources claim that Israel has secretly transferred a large number of bomber jets to bases in Azerbaijan, via Georgia, and that American Special Forces are also concentrated in Azerbaijan in preparation for a strike.
Dr. Uri Arad, a top adviser to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu said on June 22 that a pre-emptive military strike against Iran may “eventually” be necessary. On June 17, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert gates told U.S. Senators that Iran could fire salvoes of hundreds of missiles against targets in Europe, and argued in favor of stronger missile defense systems in Europe, despite Russian objections.
U.S. sources indicated that senior Al Qaeda operatives such as Saif al-Adel, said to be living in Iran, had been allowed to leave the country through Syria to orchestrate terrorist attacks on American targets. These reports seem aimed at further tarnishing the Iranian regime and portraying it as a supporter of international terrorism.
All these developments point to a situation of increasing tension in the region. A small incident could trigger off a larger conflagration. It is likely that Iran may resort to buying its gasoline through companies in third countries having no business operation involving the U.S.
It would be legally difficult to for third countries to apply restrictions on companies that wish to supply gasoline to Iran, in the absence of any UN Security Council ban on such trade. However, the U.S. government is likely to put pressure on countries to try and stop such indirect trade. As the Iran-U.S.-Israel drama moves into its Second Act, countries in the region should be ready to face unpleasant consequences of heightened tensions and conflict.
Dr Bhaskar Balakrishnan is a former Indian ambassador to Cuba and also served as representative at the ILO in Geneva
“Israel To Deploy Nuclear Submarines Off Iran Coast,” headlined Israeli newspaper Haaretz on June 22, reporting on an investigation by the British Sunday Times. According to a statement by an Israeli officer, one of the four Dolphin submarines provided by Germany is already positioned in the Gulf. With its cruise missiles equipped with nuclear warheads (1,500 Km range), Israel can reach any target in Iran. At the close of last week, an impressive naval squadron – consisting of more than a dozen U.S. warships and at least one Israeli missile launcher – crossed the Suez Canal on its way to the Persian Gulf, with a view to escalating military pressure on Iran. The reason is not only, as was reported, to prevent Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons in the future.
There is a more compelling factor: at the beginning of last week, Tehran signed a $7 billion agreement with Pakistan, inaugurating the construction of a gas pipeline from Iran to Pakistan. The project goes back 17 years and had, until now, been obstructed by the United States. Notwithstanding, Iran has already completed 900 kilometers of the 1500 kilometer-long gas pipeline, extending from the South Pars field to the border with Pakistan, which will build 700 kilometers more. As of 2014, 22 million cubic meters of Iranian gas will be delivered to Pakistan through this energy corridor on a daily basis. According to the original project, a branch of the pipeline was to arrive in India, but New Delhi withdrew for fear that Pakistan might interfere with the supply.
China, on the contrary, is ready to import gas from Iran. The China Petroleum Corporation signed a $5 billion agreement with Iran for the development of the South Pars field, replacing French company Total, whose contract was not renewed by Tehran (whereas the Italian ENI – Ente Nazionale Idrocarburi, Ndt – continues to operate in the South Pars and Darquain oil fields). For Iran, therefore, the project is of strategic importance: the country has the largest gas reserves after Russia and they are to a large extent still unexploited; through the energy corridor towards the East, Iran can thus elude the sanctions wanted by Washington. However, there is a weakness: South Pars, its biggest oil deposit, is located offshore in the Persian Gulf. It is therefore vulnerable to a naval blockade like the one the United States could impose by virtue of the sanctions adopted by the UN Security Council.
Washington is up in arms since Pakistan, its ally, signed the agreement with Iran just a few days after the sanctions were decided by the Security Council. Hence the military maneuvers, in line with Washington’s allies, particularly France. The aircraft carrier Truman, heading the naval squadron which is sailing towards the Persian Gulf, first made a stopover in Marseille, effecting an interoperability maneuver in the Mediterranean from June 4-7 which involved its 80 attack aircraft and the aircraft aboard the French carrier Charles de Gaulle. And, on June 14, while en route to the Suez Canal, the Truman received the visit of the German Defense Minister and Navy Chief of Staff.
Both U.S. and Israel have long had plans for a military strike on Iran, this is not new. However, now, considering the latest events, a military operation against Iran is quite possible, said Azerbaijani political expert Z. Alizadeh, commenting on a possible U.S.-Israel air strike on Iran, from Azerbaijani and Georgian territory.
"If Azerbaijan and Georgia will allow t the air strike to happen from their territories, then who says Iran will not fire back? So, the question is, do we really need all this? Azerbaijan does not need to get into these issues," said Alizadeh.
Another Azerbaijani political expert Fikrat Sadikhov believes, that Azerbaijan should not join the anti-Iranian coalition.
"I cannot speak for the Georgian side, but as far as Azerbaijan goes, no one would really want Azerbaijani-Iranian relations to get worse. Since the very beginning, Azerbaijan expressed a very solid, neutral position on issues related to this. Baku will not participate in anti-Iranian actions. Iran is a neighboring country to us, besides there are lots of Azerbaijanis living there, so there's no interest for Azerbaijan to act like that", Sadiknov explained.
Russian expert Alexei Vlasov said, "I have big doubts that the Azerbaijani government, which always thinks first, and acts second, will allow such air strikes from its territory. This kind of move goes against the diplomacy of Azerbaijani president Ilham Aliyev. The upcoming Clinton visit to Baku is a way to get Azerbaijan to answer one question — how would it behave, if a strike on Iran happens? I think Ilham Aliyev will find a way to maintain a much needed balance."
On Sunday, CIA director Leon Panetta said he "thinks" Iran has enough low-enriched uranium to produce two atomic weapons within two years, without elaborating on the source of the conjecture. Such remarks are part of U.S. psychological warfare aimed at creating a negative mentality about Iran's peaceful nuclear program, Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast said in reaction to Panetta's comments, IRNA reported.
"The US officials, especially their intelligence apparatus, know that Iran's nuclear program is not a military one, but is aimed at peaceful purposes." Mehmanparast went on to say that those who spread such false news seek to divert the world's attention from the main cause of concern, namely the nuclear arsenals of certain countries and regimes that threaten the security of all nations.
The United States, Israel and their allies accuse Iran of pursuing military objectives in its nuclear program. Iran has repeatedly rejected the allegations, reserving its right to peaceful nuclear energy as a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency (AIEA) and a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
Israeli National News is reporting:
Egypt allowed at least one Israeli and 11 American warships to pass through the Suez Canal as an Iranian flotilla approaches Gaza. What should we make of the fact that 11 U.S. warships and an Israeli warship are sailing up the Suez Canal on their way to the Red Sea?
This is — on the surface — a face-off over Iran's support for relief ships trying to sail into Gaza. Specifically, Iran has said it will have Iranian military ships escort the flotilla providing humanitarian goods to Gaza to make sure it arrives safely. On the other hand, the U.S. has backed Israel's blockade of Gaza.
Tensions are obviously high between the U.S. and Israel, on the one hand, and Iran on the other. The U.S. and Israel have talked for years of bombing Iran's nuclear sites.
As the Telegraph wrote last July:
“Israeli warships have deployed to the Red Sea for what has been described as a rehearsal for a possible attack on Iran
“Israeli and Egyptian officials said two ships had sailed through the Suez Canal into the Red Sea.
“Media reports in Israel said the two Saar-class missile ships had been sent as a "message" to the Tehran government....”
An armada of U.S. warships in the Red Sea is similarly meant to convey a credible threat to attack Iran.
Indeed, because the Red Sea connects with the Arabian Sea a large navy presence in the Red Sea will escalate tensions dramatically.
This could quickly lead to a real confrontation. This is especially true because warships from hostile nations could be in very close quarters, and one mistake (such as accidentally bumping into a foreign ship) could unintentionally lead to war.
But we cannot look at this face-off in a vacuum. Remember that there have been numerous “intelligence failures” in the past, which have led to war.
For example, the U.S. Navy's own historians now say that the sinking of the USS Maine — the justification for U.S. entry into the Spanish-American War — was probably caused by an internal explosion of coal, rather than an attack by the Spanish.
It is also now well accepted that the Gulf of Tonkin Incident which led to the Viet Nam War was a U.S. fabricated fiction.
And two lies were used to justify the 1991 Gulf War: the statement that Iraqis murdered Kuwaiti babies and the statement that a quarter of a million Iraqi troops were massed on the border with Saudi Arabia.
While — as documented above — inaccurate reports have helped rally support for war, other methods for drumming up support have been used as well.
As I wrote in February:
“Forget the claims and allegations that false flag terror — governments attacking people and then blaming others in order to create animosity towards those blamed — has been used throughout history. This essay will solely discuss government admissions to the use of false flag terror.
“The CIA admits that it hired Iranians in the 1950's to pose as Communists and stage bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its democratically-elected president
“Israel admits that an Israeli terrorist cell operating in Egypt planted bombs in several buildings, including U.S. diplomatic facilities, then left behind "evidence" implicating the Arabs as the culprits (one of the bombs detonated prematurely, allowing the Egyptians to identify the bombers, and several of the Israelis later confessed).
“The well-respected former Indonesian president admits that the government probably had a role in the Bali bombings
“The former Italian Prime Minister, an Italian judge, and the former head of Italian counterintelligence admit that NATO, with the help of the Pentagon and CIA, carried out terror bombings in Italy and blamed the communists, in order to rally people’s support for their governments in Europe in their fight against communism. As one participant in this formerly-secret program stated: "You had to attack civilians, people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, to turn to the state to ask for greater security." (Italy joined NATO in1949, years before the bombings occurred.)
“As admitted by the U.S. government, recently declassified documents show that in the 1960's, the American Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a plan to blow up American airplanes (using an elaborate plan involving the switching of airplanes), and also to commit terrorist acts on American soil, and then to blame it on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion of Cuba. (See an ABC news report; the official documents; and an interview with the former Washington Investigative Producer for ABC's World News Tonight with Peter Jennings.) [While the Joint Chiefs of Staff pushed for Operation Northwoods to be carried out, cooler heads prevailed; President Kennedy or his Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara apparently vetoed the plan.]”
There are many other instances of false flag attacks used throughout history proven by the historical evidence. The above are only some examples of governments admitting to using false flag terror.
Many high-level people have warned of the use of a false flag attack to justify war with Iran. For example:
Jimmy Carter's former National Security Adviser and Obama's initial foreign policy adviser— Zbigniew Brzezinski — told the Senate that a terrorist act might be carried out in the U.S. and falsely blamed on Iran to justify war against that nation
Congressman Ron Paul told Congress: "I am concerned, however, that a contrived Gulf of Tonkin type incident may occur to gain popular support for an attack on Iran"
And a member of the British Parliament (George Galloway) stated: "there is a very real danger" that the American government will stage a false flag terror attack in order to justify war against Iran
Thus, if any elements within the U.S. or Israeli government wish to find an excuse to attack Iran, they could either manufacture false intelligence or carry out a false flag attack.
A war with Iran would benefit no one other than the giant defense contractors and would plunge the world into a very deep depression. Indeed, if China and Russia side with Iran, the U.S. might end up losing against Iran.
May cool heads prevail.