Rein in Israel from madness and mayhem by Ian Williams Tribune January 27th, 2012 The financial and

fornicatory hypocrisy of the Republican candidates is nauseatin g. But the salacious interest it excites allows the media and the electorate to overlook foreign policy. But then, in some ways we are fortunate that the rest o f the world has not been a big item in the debates. Texas Governor Rick Perry dr opped out shortly after saying Turkey, a Nato member and recently a voice of bal anced reason in the region, was run by an Islamic dictator and should not be all owed to be a member. However, the other turkeys are every bit as bad, as they pander their way to see who can get most primary votes from Christian Zionists and cheques from Likud r eactionaries. British leaders still bask in the illusion of the special relations hip, but on Capitol Hill, the term is almost exclusively used for Israel and the U nited States. For better or worse, two world wars, Korea, Iraq and Afghanistan, and the half century of Britain being a prime nuclear target on Americas behalf, is not exactly at the front of legislative thoughts. Between them, the candidates seem to have made it axiomatic that Israel should a ttack Iran, with US support. However, polls suggest, not surprisingly after the d ebacles of Iraq and Afghanistan, that one of the few points of unity for an othe rwise bitterly divided American electorate is opposition to a new war. Even in Is rael only 41 per cent support an attack, which is surprisingly high, considering who would suffer most in any exchange of weapons with Tehran. But Republican can didates happily cheer terrorist assassinations of Iranian scientists. The one exception among the candidates, Ron Paul, has become the standard bearer of some on Americas alleged left, who are prepared to overlook his profoundly re actionary domestic policies because his America-firster views lead him to oppose Israeli influence in Washington. This is no time to get sentimental about ayatollahs, and the appropriate respons e to Israeli threats is certainly not adulation for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The reg ime in Iran is almost as attached to fundamentalist religion and the death penal ty as a southern Republican governor. It does appear to have stolen the last ele ction, but some informed observers think that it might have won anyway. However, if there is one thing that seems to unite Iranians, it is the nuclear p rogramme, with many Iranians probably going beyond the government, which still d isclaims a military nuclear option. As an aside, I am often invited as a pundit on Irans Press TV, and have told them, live, that they should disclaim civilian, let alone military nuclear programmes, abide by even unjust United Nations resol utions, and invest in their refining capacity instead. Last week I reached the l imits of their tolerance. They called me about the Falklands, and when I told them I would say that even English speakers had the right to self-determination, my slot was immediately dropped. I also said that Argentina used the issue to divert domestic discontent about th e economy which is a role that Iran plays for Benjamin Netanyahu and his support ers in the Israel lobby in the US, where Iran can whip the majority of liberal-m inded Jews into support for the occupying state. So, begin with principles. It is useful to treat it like a mathematical equation and substitute the terms. Take out Iran and put it in Israel, Pakistan or India , the real rogue states. The difference is that Iran has signed the non-prolifer ation treaty and they have not. However, it could withdraw from the treaty, like North Korea, and it has not. If Israel attacks Iranian facilities and murders i ts citizens, it should not complain if its Dimona nuclear facility is targeted.

Even the International Atomic Energy Agency, despite some worries, has not concl uded that Iran has moved decisively towards military nuclear capability. The UN Security Council only became involved when a kangaroo court on the IAEAs ruling bo dy referred the case with nuclear India one of those supporting the referral, st rongly instigated by Israel, the one definite nuclear state in the Middle East, w ith its several hundred war heads. So is this a crusade, or jihad (since the Saudis seem to be onside) for civil ri ghts? The Wahhabi theocracy in Saudi Arabia makes the most conservative ayatolla hs appear positively Anglican in their tolerance. We are being invited to support or condone an illegal and unethical war that would unite Iranians and much of t he Middle East against Israel and the West, and risk the destruction of Israel w ith collateral damage to its neighbours not to mention a high chance of casualti es among the oppressed Iranians. One does not expect our lords and masters to be too concerned about mere human bo dy counts, but they should worry that one sure consequence would be a drastic sp ike in oil prices that could push the world economy, already teetering on the br ink, over the edge, with a calculable chance of escalation. It seems a high pric e to pay so Netanyahu can keep on building settlements.