The exemplary analysis below, U.S. behind Israel's war threats on Iran, is authored by Sara Flounders, who writes for Workers World Newpaper. An Axis of Logic correspondent kindly sent the article to us for possible republication. He expressed an opinion that the article may conflict with many publications on Axis of Logic referent to the power of the Israeli lobbies in Washington some of which suggest that the "war on terror" is being fought by the United States at the behest of or on behalf of Israel. Currently, Israel's escalating push for war on Iran is widely reported in the international media. In Sara Flounder's article below, she argues that Israel is a tool of U.S. corporate power and is being used to press for an assault on Iran. We see no essential conflict between these two positions. Sara states that AIPAC, the most powerful Israeli lobby among numerous others has,
"... grown into a powerful lobby because it has always promoted policies that benefit the profit interests of the most powerful section of U.S. corporate power—the military and oil industries. It works in tandem with them."
and
"Israel is totally tied to and dependent on the Pentagon. During 60 years, billions of dollars have gone in U.S. aid to Israel—mostly to buy U.S. weapons systems, jet aircraft, tanks, etc. This in turn fuels and justifies a new round of weapons purchases by U.S.-dependent Arab regimes."
Israel and the U.S. government are joined at the hip for their mutual interest in expansion, dominance and the profits of transnational corporations which, though not exclusively a U.S. enterprise, primarily emanate from the United States. The question we raise from time to time is "Who is contolling or at least influencing the decision-making process?" - or in the old metaphor, "Is the dog wagging the tail or is the tail wagging the dog?" In our view, this becomes a moot question to the end result when we understand that the U.S. and Israel are working together, as Flounders, puts it "in tandem" with one another.
National Sovereignty and Self-Determination
The "dog's tail" metaphor comes into focus when considering national sovereignty and self-determination. It's important to emphasize the erosion of national sovereignty in all nation-states due to the trump card of corporate power. To make this point, we sometimes emphasize that contrary to what most US citizens believe, they as a people do not enjoy the national sovereignty or the right to self determination they think is theirs. In the U.S. sponsored globalization scheme, the world's only remaining sovereign entity is Global Corporate Empire (GCE), expressing itself in organizations such as the World Bank, IMF and WTO. We are told the GCE will benefit all subservient nations. The U.S. surrendered whatever sovereignty it ever had to Global Corporate Empire a long time ago. We pointed this out years ago in the example of the implementation of the U.S. "Free Trade Agreement" with China which was predicated on China's admission into the World Trade Organization on December 1, 2001.
The Battle for Dominance within the US-led Global Corporate Empire
Among countries within this corporate power structure, some trump the sovereignty of others in their battle for internal dominance. There is plenty of evidence that the Israelis were central to the U.S. decision to invade Iraq in 2003, for example. On the other hand, was the Israeli 1981 missile attack on Iraq's nuclear facilities with US built F16s really "unilateral"? We were told that the preemptive strike was roundly condemned in Washington and by the United Nations. But President Reagan himself proudly called it “a terrific piece of bombing!” One might argue, "It's not important". But if an elected official in the U.S. congress or in Israel's Knesset votes according to pressure from a foreign power, it is important to the person who voted that official into office.
The Heads of the Hydra
One significant problem for the entire capitalist apparatus comes when the source of the hydra, in its drive for power, grows a head over which it loses control. Ironically, this happened with Washington's empowerment of Saddam Hussein as a minority government in Iraq to defeat Iran in the Iran-Iraqi war. It also happened with their empowerment of Al Queda to defeat the Soviets in Afghanistan. It may be unimaginable for some, but if, and we only say if, a break occurred in the mutual objectives of Israel and the U.S., Washington would be staring at 150 nuclear weapons in Israel's possession and under their control at Dimona, ready to be unleashed against any threat to the Israeli state. It can be argued of course that the same is true for Israel which is wholly dependent on US funding and support. Should these not be matters of concern for the inhabitants of these countries?
There are many "single subject websites" on the internet with a near-total focus on Israeli power. Some of these have become myopic and some, even racist. Others have a realistic understanding of Israel's power and intent on expansionism (i.e. "Greater Israel"). Axis of Logic's primary focus is the ultimate defeat of Global Corporate Empire and its capitalist economic system wherever it raises its many ugly heads. Sara Flounders correctly sources the marsh serpent of the hydra back to the corporate government in Washington. Is Washington pushing Israel for an attack on Iran or vice versa? Either way, it does not lessen the threat of the empire to Iran and the rest of the world.
© Copyright 2008 by AxisofLogic.com
BIO AND ADDITIONAL ESSAYS BY LES BLOUGH
This material is available for republication as long as reprints include verbatim copy of the article its entirety, respecting its integrity. Reprints must cite the author and Axis of Logic as the original source including a "live link" to the article. Thank you!
U.S. behind Israel's war threats on Iran
By Sara Flounders
Workers World Newspaper
June 11, 2008
The danger of a U.S. attack on Iran, either directly by the Pentagon or through Israel, was made more explicit in the first week of June.
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was in Washington to say that Iran’s nuclear program must be stopped by “all possible means.” He and a host of U.S. politicians addressed a convention of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). The presidential contenders from both imperialist parties as well as senators on top congressional committees all repeated the same theme. Democrats and Republicans seemed united as they lined up to express unequivocal support for Israel and to threaten Iran, presenting its totally legal development of nuclear energy as a dire threat to “world peace.”
This well-coordinated threat escalated after Olmert returned to Israel from the convention. Within hours of his return, Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz called war against Iran “unavoidable.” Mofaz, a former military chief and defense minister, has been Israel’s representative in a strategic dialogue on Iran with U.S. officials. He said that if Iran continues its nuclear program, Israel will attack because it has no choice as “options are disappearing and sanctions have proven to be ineffective.”
An international media uproar began over the provocative and threatening statement. The price of oil shot up to an unprecedented $138 a barrel. Prime Minister Olmert then fanned the flames and refused to discount the possibility of a military strike against Iran. “All options, including the military option, must remain on the table,” he said, echoing Bush.
This only confirmed that Israel is a tool of U.S. policy, especially when U.S. administrations are not in a position to take action directly.
Many times Washington has given its full military, political, economic and military support for Israel’s crimes: during Israel’s repeated wars to push back the rising tide of Arab nationalism in the 1960s and 1970s; its 1981 bombing of an Iraqi nuclear reactor; its training of death squads in Central America during the 1980s; its support for South African apartheid; its 2006 bombing of Lebanon, and its recent strike on Syria.
AIPAC serves U.S. corporate power
AIPAC has grown into a powerful lobby because it has always promoted policies that benefit the profit interests of the most powerful section of U.S. corporate power—the military and oil industries. It works in tandem with them. Time and again giant U.S. military industries have used AIPAC to influence policy inside the U.S. The Zionist group was one of a whole constellation of forces that pushed for the U.S. invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.
Israel is totally tied to and dependent on the Pentagon. During 60 years, billions of dollars have gone in U.S. aid to Israel—mostly to buy U.S. weapons systems, jet aircraft, tanks, etc. This in turn fuels and justifies a new round of weapons purchases by U.S.-dependent Arab regimes.
Corporations like Lockheed Martin, General Electric Co., Northrop Grumman and Boeing are more than willing to give millions of dollars to military lobbyists and to AIPAC. They in turn give generous donations to politicians, Republican and Democrat alike, to secure multi-billion dollar weapons contracts and agitate for military strikes, expanding bases and endless wars.
Faced with the debacle of the U.S. occupations in both Iraq and Afghanistan, there is deep division within U.S. ruling circles and even within the top Pentagon brass on how and whether to proceed with an attack on Iran. This opposition is not based on any humanitarian concerns for the Iranian people, their own troops or working people in the U.S. It is based on the fear of a political explosion in the region.
Indecision and growing contention are the order of the day. The past two years have been full of leaks, in-depth exposés by Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker magazine and resignations of both civilian and military officials. Admiral William J. Fallon, head of the U.S. Central Command for the Middle East and South and Central Asia, was forced to resign after Esquire magazine wrote about his deep reservations regarding an attack on Iran.
A London paper reported over a year ago that some of the Pentagon’s most senior military commanders were prepared to resign if the White House ordered a military strike on Iran. (Sunday Times, Feb. 25, 2007)
The steamroller against Iran was set back by the release of a U.S. National Intelligence Estimate last December saying Iran did not have a nuclear weapons program and had not had one in more than five years.
The most recent top-level shakeup involved the forced resignations of Air Force Secretary Michael Wayne and Chief of Staff Gen. Michael Mosley, purportedly over a “chain of failure” in the Air Force’s handling of U.S. nuclear weapons. Four crucial components of nuclear weapons were reportedly shipped by “mistake” to Taiwan. A B-52 bomber “mistakenly” armed with six nuclear-tipped cruise missiles flew across the U.S. Both “mistakes” had been known for over a year. Does the shakeup have any connection to the rift over Iran?
Reports that the Bush administration plans to launch an air strike against Iran within the next two months continued in the May 28 Asia Times On-Line.
According to the article, two key U.S. senators briefed on the attack, Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California and Senator Richard Lugar, Republican of Indiana, plan to go public with their opposition to the move. But their projected New York Times op-ed piece has yet to appear.
Meanwhile former German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer wrote in the Israeli daily Haaretz of June 1 that Bush and Olmert seem to be planning to end Iran’s nuclear program “by military, rather than by diplomatic means.” Fischer fears the Middle East is drifting towards a new, dangerous military conflict.
Iran’s envoy to the U.N., Mohammad Khazaee, lodged a protest with Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and the Security Council over Israel’s threats. Khazaee made the point that such a dangerous threat against a sovereign state and a member of the United Nations constitutes a violation of international law, contravenes the most fundamental principles of the U.N. Charter, and requires a resolute and clear response, particularly from the Security Council.
Iran has the right under international law to develop nuclear energy. It is a signer of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The International Atomic Energy Agency has made numerous inspections of Iranian nuclear facilities.
Israel, however, has never signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. It has refused any inspections of its widely known nuclear weapons program with more than 200 nuclear warheads.
The U.S. government has developed a whole new generation of tactical nuclear weapons, which also violates the agreements and treaties attempting to limit and restrict nuclear weapons.
Today the U.S. ruling class is realizing with rising panic that it is not in control of events. Events are controlling them—from the deepening and unsolvable economic crisis to an unwinnable war. This tends to make these global predators increasingly desperate, riddled with divisions, and prone to ever more desperate military adventures.
The only real opposition to the growing danger of a new war will come from the grassroots, not from the politicians. Such forces on a global basis must take seriously the increasing push for war and begin to mobilize.
Articles copyright 1995-2008 Workers World. Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email: ww@workers.org
Subscribe wwnews-subscribe@workersworld.net
Support independent news http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php