The United States and Israel might want to turn on Iran next, but to do so would be rank folly, writes Ahmed Abdel-Ghani* The US and several European countries have turned up the heat on Iran because of its nuclear programme. Iran claims that its nuclear activities are strictly for peaceful purposes, but Western sources claim that Iran seeks to produce a bomb within a few years. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) gave credence to that claim when its inspectors disclosed that they found weapon-quality enriched uranium in Iran. Western countries, particularly the US, have called on Iran to stop its nuclear programme. The latter refused. Although the US and European countries are putting pressure on Iran, they are not in agreement on how to deal with Tehran. The US neo-cons want military action aimed at regime change, but Europe prefers diplomatic means. As Iran traded accusations with the US and Israel, military action seems possible. But will rhetoric turn into action? Observers seem to agree that military action against Iran would be risky. It is difficult for Israel to carry out its threat to strike at Iranian nuclear facilities. For one thing, Iranian nuclear facilities are geographically spread out, which makes a lightening strike against them nearly impossible. Besides, Israel may not know the location of all of Iran's facilities. Also, Iranian officials have promised devastating retaliation if Israel were to attack Iran. One Iranian official said that the Iranian response may annihilate Israel. Iran's testing of Shihab-3, a ballistic missile with a range of 1,300 to 1,700 kilometres, sufficient to reach anywhere in Israel, confirms Tehran's ability to retaliate. As for the US, Iran is not an easy target by any means. For one thing, any US attack on Iran would invoke the wrath of all Muslims, particularly the Shia, against the US, at a time when America's reputation in the Arab and Islamic world is already damaged. The Shia have a strong presence in the Gulf region, which supplies one third of the world's oil needs. A new conflagration in the region would be a serious matter. Suffice it to note how oil prices shot up due to the violence in Iraq. And, with tens of thousands of US troops stationed in bases close to Iran, Tehran will have an easy target to retaliate against. The US is embroiled in a costly military endeavour in Iraq. Its troops are locked in deadly battles with a resistance that draws its fighters from both the Shia and Sunni communities. With President Bush facing a clear domestic backlash over Iraq, an Iranian adventure would not be a wise move -- at least not ahead of the elections. Moreover, President Bush will not be able to put together an international alliance against Iran. America's credibility has been shaken by the false pretexts Washington used to invade Iraq. The weapons of mass destruction scare and Iraq's supposed links with Al-Qaeda have turned out to be utter fiction. Spain, at one point a strong supporter of the war on Iraq, has already withdrawn its troops from that country. Only Israel would back the Americans, but its support can cause irreparable damage to Washington's standing in the region. The world's key countries, including those of the EU, have declined to participate in the economic sanctions the US decided to impose on Iran. About 20 per cent of Iran's exports go to Japan and 26 per cent go to the EU. Lately, Japan signed a $2 billion agreement with Iran to develop the Azadegan oil field, which is expected to produce 26 billion oil barrels between 2007 and 2019. A US offensive against Iran is unlikely to succeed in changing the regime. The Iranian people are likely to resist any such attempt. Since the 1979 revolution, the ratio of Iranians living under the poverty line has dropped from 47 per cent to 14 per cent. Life expectancy has risen from 59 to 70 years. Infant mortality has dropped from 12.2 per cent to 3.5 per cent. Illiteracy has dropped from 40 per cent to 15 per cent for men and from 63 per cent to 29 per cent for women. Iranian women now enjoy a degree of freedom unknown in their history. For all the above reasons, any military offensive against Iran is likely to backfire, whether mounted by the Americans or the Israelis. Just as Israel's invasion of Lebanon 1982, masterminded by Sharon, and the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, masterminded by Bush and his neo-cons, a foreign invasion of Iran would prove disastrous. * The writer is deputy chief editor of Al-Ahali. French journalists Christian Chesnot and Georges Malbrunot, abducted in Iraq, are in shock, as is the whole profession of journalism whose dignity has come under gruesome attack.
