“Just Because You Are Paranoid….”

Some, including a large segment of the Iranian people, have described the Iranian President Amadinajad as bellicose and overly confrontational. They view his public profile as doing little to promote the real issues facing the Iranian government and Iranian society. Others critics view him as a paranoid and overly defensive reactionary who acts upon fears of conspiracies and plots by the US to invade Iran (as they have done in Iraq) for the purpose of regime change. While current development of nuclear capability in Iran is on a path toward atomic energy production, Amadinajad’s rhetoric keeps fanning the suspicion that there may be underlying intent to divert research and development toward nuclear weapons capability.

Those in the Persian Gulf region who criticize the Iranian President recognize that Iran has tremendous resources and potential influence in the area, if employed in a prudent and constructive manner. These assets give Iran leverage and bargaining power to broker and participate in both economic and political deals that could help stabilize the region and promote economic development. The major forces working against such progress are religious extremism, tribal feuds and external bigotry and antagonistic policies like the Bush Administration stance toward Iran and Islam generally. These critics believe that Amadinajad is squandering the potential leverage Iran holds by his public histrionics and confrontational dialogue.

The Bush Administration hostility toward Iran goes beyond diplomatic prudence to unjustifiably irrational levels. While the prospect of Iran obtaining nuclear weapons capability should be of some concern to the rest of the world, it is no more dangerous than Israel having such capabilities. Indeed, some Arab nations have exposed the duplicity of US policy by demanding that any non-proliferation accord should call for a nuclear free “region.” This would combine a demand for Iran and Pakistan to eschew nuclear weapons with a commitment by Israel to relinquish its nuclear arsenal. In addition, the neighbors of Iran have more immediate concerns regarding Iran’s path of nuclear development than does the US. The constant drumbeat of the Bush led “Crusades” against Islamic nations, which appear to attack religion and ethnicity more than political policies, obliges Saudi Arabia, Egypt and other neighbors to defend Iran rather than spend energy on a peaceful solution.

Now the daily breaking news that Bush has ordered nine additional warships into the Gulf of Oman for “training exercises,” when added to the Battle groups already stationed in the region , lends support to the fears that the US may indeed be staging military personnel and equipment for an assault. There is no evidence of any impending threat of a hostile third party attack upon any US ally in the region that would warrant such a military buildup. At the same time Bush has issued a secret directive for the CIA to commence a covert “Black Operation” to attempt to destabilize the Iranian government regime. When considering an Iranian response, this brings to mind the old maxim: “Just because you are paranoid, doesn’t mean that they are not out to get you.” In light of the overtly hostile and unnecessary actions by the Bush Administration to provoke and intimidate the Iranian government, a defensive response by Teheran could be viewed as quite rational and prudent.

Why Bush would, at this point in time, seek to provoke or initiate warfare on a third front when he is so poorly handling the current situations in Iraq and Afghanistan is a great mystery. The philosophy of "unilateralism" as employed by Bush has failed miserably and been condemned in the international community and at home. World leaders, including Great Britain who has been his closest ally, are all maintaining a prophylactic distance from Bush. The US Congress has declared that they want Bush to end the Iraq conflict rather than continue or expand it. And his GOP colleagues have told Bush that he has absolutely no credibility. The Military leadership have acknowledged that the US military has been stretched to the breaking point by current demands and commitments. In this context, launching an offensive to embroil the US in yet another unnecessary military conflict would seem the irrational ravings of someone having taken leave of their senses. But the invasion of Iraq based upon lies in order to “get” Saddam Hussein was in many respects the same.

Just because the actions of Amadinajad may seem defensive and paranoid, the behavior of George W. Bush and his Administration tends to support the notion that Bush is “out to get” Amadinajad and that the US government is planning to invade Iran.