Next Target: Iran?

Here we go again. While postwarIraq continues to crumble, the Bush administration is now setting its sights on a new target—Iran—in itsso-called effort to reshape most of the Middle East and bring democracy to countries ruled by viciousdictators. But the Bush administration is again relying on flimsy evidence and thin intelligence informationin claiming that the Iran poses an immediate threat to the United States.

The U.S. still hasn’tuncovered any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, which was the prime reason for launching an attack againstthe country. Rumsfeld said in an interview reported by CNN Tuesday that it’s possible the WMD in Iraq mayhave been destroyed prior to the war. So right now, the Bush administration doesn’t have much credibilityhere or with countries that rightfully opposed the war in Iraq.

Ari Fleischer, Bush’s presssecretary, said during his daily press briefing Tuesday that Iran hasn’t taken the appropriate steps toround up al Qaeda terrorists allegedly hiding out within its borders. Moreover, Iran’s pursuit of nuclearweapons puts the U.S. in grave danger. Therefore, regime change is in order.

"The future of Iran will bedetermined by the Iranian people, and I think the Iranian people have a great yearning for government that isrepresentative of their concerns," Fleischer said.

Fleischer also said Iran'sclaim that its nuclear program is designed to produce fuel for civilian nuclear reactors is a "coverstory."

"Our strong position is thatIran is preparing instead to produce fissile materials for nuclear weapons," Fleischer said. "That is whatwe see."

An Iranian opposition groupsays the Iranian government is building two secret nuclear sites that might already be partially operational,producing enriched uranium that could be used in nuclear weapons.

Alireza Jafarzadeh, a spokesmanfor the National Council of Resistance of Iran, claims the Iranian government has "planned it" sothat it can "be able to get the bomb by 2005."

The NCRI provided detailedinformation about the previously undisclosed sites -- Lashkar-Abad and Ramandeh, about 25 miles west ofTehran, but offered no direct evidence.

Iranian officials have deniedharboring al-Qaeda operatives and said the country would vigorously defend itself against any U.S. threat,which in the eyes of the Bush administration, could set the stage for another war and further increaseanti-American sentiment and put the U.S. in more danger of terrorist attacks, according to several Democraticlawmakers.

However, the real cover storyis the one the Bush administration is spinning in order to win public support for what was already planned forIran months ago, well before "Operation Iraqi Freedom."

Before the United Statesmilitary decimated Iraq, the neocons at the highly influential think tanks the American Enterprise Instituteand the Project for the New American Century were already advising Bush administration officials, likeSecretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, on how to overthrow the ruling parties in Iran, Libya and Syria afterthe war in Iraq was over.

Many of AEI and PNAC’s formermembers are now working in Bush’s administration. PNAC’s influence on Bush’s foreign and defensepolicies are so powerful that many of its recommendations on how to transform the military have already beenadopted by the Pentagon.

But unlike Iraq, using military force in these other countries to replace therulers wasn’t being considered as a way to oust the regimes, according to former Bush administrationofficials. Whether or not that becomes the course of action now is debatable, but even if military forceisn’t used for regime change in Iran or other Middle Eastern countries the reasons for engaging in politicalwarfare in that region is just as troubling as the reasons the U.S. launched a military attack on Iraq:intelligence information that suggests these countries pose an immediate threat to the U.S. is thin andpossibly non-existent.

Still, the Bush administrationhas its agenda and it seems that Iran is indeed its next target. Instead of military action, the Bushadministration will encourage a "popular uprising" in its effort to overthrow Iran’s supreme leader, AliKhamenei, and lend financial support to Iranians to get the job done.

To get Iranians to rise upagainst its government, U.S. Senator Sam Brownback, R-Kansas, has drafted an amendment to the Senate ForeignAuthorization bill titled The Iran Democracy Act that calls for using the new Radio Farda to host programmingfrom Iranian Americans who communicate with their families inside Iran about the desire for an internationallymonitored referendum vote on what form of government Iran should have.

The amendment would also provide grants for private radio and TV stations in the U.S. that broadcastpro-democracy news and information into Iran. The amendment also provides funds to translate books, videos andother materials into Persian - specifically, information on building and organizing non-violent socialmovements.

Moreover, Brownback introduced legislation that would establish an Iran Democracy Foundation to provide grantsto the Iranian-American community and for the radio and TV Stations in the U.S. that broadcast directly intoIran.

This is the type of politicalwarfare the Bush administration believes will force Iran’s government from power. But the Bushadministration will have a hard time convincing Iranians that it can follow through on its promise. For one,anarchy is running amok in postwar Iraq and many critics have accused the Bush administration of abandoningits goal of democratizing the country. Furthermore, Iranians remember how the first President Bush encouragedthe Kurds to rise up against Saddam Hussein during the 1990s only to be abandoned by that administration andultimately slaughtered by Hussein.

But that doesn’t stop thethink tanks from believing that it can’t be done.

"ForIran, the approach might be compared to the approach the United States and other democratic states took toPoland in the 1980s," said David Frum, President Bush’s formerspeechwriter, who is credited with coining the phrase "axis of evil," in an April 5 presentation at AEI."In Poland, as in Iran, an economically incompetent authoritarian regime ruled over an increasingly angrypopulation. In Poland, as in Iran, a mass opposition movement rose up against the regime: Solidarity inPoland, the student democratic movement in Iran. Back in the 1980s, the United States and its allies neverconfronted the Polish communists directly. Instead, they imposed stringent economic sanctions on theregime--and contributed hundreds of millions of dollars to pay for its covert newspapers and radio stationsand to support the families of jailed or exiled activists…as the regimes economy disintegrated, the Polishcommunists were compelled first to open negotiations with Solidarity, next to permit Solidarity to compete insemi-free elections, and finally to step aside for a Solidarity government. Fourteen years later, Poland is ademocratic state and a staunch NATO ally."

Richard Perle, who sits on theDefense Policy Board, a group that advises Rumsfeld, is more blunt in the reasons for going after Iran and heis not shy about suggesting that military force be used if necessary.

"The idea that our victoryover Saddam will drive other dictators to develop chemical and biological weapons misses the key point: Theyare already doing so. That's why we may someday need to preempt rather than wait until we are attacked,"Perle said in a letter to AEI members earlier this month.

Michael Ledeen, anotherinfluential AEI scholar, claims that the U.S. ought to "bag" Iran’s regime because of its anti-Americanviews.

‘The Iranian people haveshown themselves to be the most pro-American population in the Muslim world, but the Iranian regime isarguably the most anti-American on Earth. Let's support the people, and help them bag the regime."

Courtesy, Znet