March 25th, 2007
By Nathan Allonby
The capture of 15 British sailors and marines by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy, may be a flash point that could escalate into the long-anticipated war between the US and Iran.
On 15 January, a Raw Story article revealed that the Dutch ING bank advised that investors of the risk of a US war with Iran in a timeframe of February-March 2007.
A former NSC Director has said that the Bush administration is trying to provoke Iran into creating a pretext that would spark a US war on Iran. Hillary Mann was NSC director for Iran and the Persian Gulf area until she left the Bush Administration post in 2004.
Testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Thursday 1 February, Zbigniew Brzezinski, the national security adviser in the Carter administration, warned that the Bush administration’s policy was leading inevitably to a war with Iran. He claimed that the Bush administration was seeking a pretext for an attack on Iran…
He outlined several possible scenarios.
Brzezinski warned of a possible provocation. He called the senators’ attention to a March 27, 2006 report in the New York Times on “a private meeting between the president and Prime Minister Blair, two months before the war, based on a memorandum prepared by the British official present at this meeting.” In the article, Brzezinski said, “the president is cited as saying he is concerned that there may not be weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq, and that there must be some consideration given to finding a different basis for undertaking the action.”
He continued: “I’ll just read you what this memo allegedly says, according to the New York Times: ‘The memo states that the president and the prime minister acknowledged that no unconventional weapons had been found inside Iraq. Faced with the possibility of not finding any before the planned invasion, Mr. Bush talked about several ways to provoke a confrontation.’
“He described the several ways in which this could be done. I won’t go into that… the ways were quite sensational, at least one of them.”
It is a matter of record that the US and Britain stepped up a bombing campaign prior to the Invasion of Iraq to provoke an Iraqi retaliation that could be used to justify the Allied invasion. British government documents released to Parliament show that American and British aircraft dropped no bombs on Iraq in March 2002, 10 tons of bombs in July, and 54.6 tons in September. Nevertheless, this failed to provoke Saddam Hussein into the kind of reaction that could be used as an ostensible casus belli.
For example a White House Meeting Memo, 31 January 2003, describing a meeting between Bush and Blair describes a proposal by President Bush to Tony Blair: “The US was thinking of flying U2 reconnaissance aircraft with fighter cover over Iraq, painted in UN colours. If Saddam fired on them, he would be in breach”
Brzezinski and ING both saw the hand-over of control of operations in the Iraq / Gulf theatre from the Army to Admiral Fallon of the US Navy as an indication of the move towards military action against Iran.
A flash point involving Britain and not the US or Israel is not a scenario that has been anticipated by commentators, but it would have advantages for all three parties.
For Britain, although Tony Blair seems like he would like to support Bush, he would be unable to join a US-led war against Iran, unless Britain was attacked at the outset of the campaign. For Bush, he gets to keep his “coalition” into the next stage of the conflict, he gets Iranian “aggression” as an excuse to start war and he does not have to explain US actions to Congress. Israel can take a back seat and does not have to take the opprobrium of leading an attack on a Moslem state.
So, was the British naval action today, that led to the capturing of the 15 British sailors, a calculated act of provocation? The Iranians claim that the British were in their territorial waters - the British deny this. The disputed status of the waterway does not help. Was it all a misunderstanding?
It will be very hard to find out. Given the seniority and experience of the naval personnel involved in the ill-fated raid today, an Allied “cock-up” seems unlikely.
The raid was launched from HMS Cornwall, the flagship of Commodore Nick Lambert commanding Combined Task Group 158.1
A British Royal Navy website reported: -
On 6th March 2007, Portsmouth based Royal Navy Battle Staff commenced maritime security operations in the Northern Arabian Gulf onboard HMS Cornwall. Relieving Rear Admiral Garry Hall, United States Navy, Commodore Nick Lambert will command Combined Task Force 158 (known as “CTF 158”), a coalition force comprising up to 12 units from the US, UK, Australian and Iraqi navies. (7)
A British MoD website reported: -
Commodore Lambert has a team of around 30 supporting staff to enable the control of maritime security operations within the Northern Arabian Gulf.
HMS Cornwall’s commanding officer outlined the importance of HMS Cornwall’s and the Royal Navy’s role in this region. He said:
“I am proud to have the opportunity to be involved. This is my fourth tour in the Gulf and HMS Cornwall and my team have received extensive training to fulfil this vital role.”(8)
8 out of the 15 captured today were also captured by the Iranians in a very similar incident a few years ago.
Given that a UN Security Council vote on further action against Iran will be taken tomorrow (Saturday) it seems the timing of today’s incident could not be worse for Iran.
No comments:
Post a Comment