iran seeks nuclear war

blog post one

while watching the news yesterday my housemate wondered aloud "does iran really think it could get away with using a nuclear bomb against israel or america?"

the story which prompted this question was of course yet another piece about iran's apparent nuclear ambitions, along with the noble resolve of israel and america to prevent it.

now anybody with even a passing interest in international politics would not hesitate to answer "no" to my housemate's question, probably with the same condescending tone of voice that one might use with a child trying to insert a muesli bar into a cd drive.

it would of course be nothing short of national suicide for iran to launch a major attack against the west, even with conventional weapons, let alone nuclear. the pugilistic IDF aside, even the current american military presence in the region is so overwhelming that strategists from all over recognize that the US could almost certainly set iran's military back twenty years or more in less than a month of fighting and effortlessly cripple the nations infrastructure.

this is not to say that iran would not be able to inflict serious damage to their adversaries and (further) destabilize the region, but from the regime in tehran's perspective, it would amost certainly be the end.

so why did my housemate, who is by no means completely ignorant, wonder aloud why iran wanted to begin a nuclear war with the entire western world?

the answer is that in regards to this entire issue the mainstream media has comprehensively failed to present a narrative that corresponds to reality. unless you are an avid reader of independent online news and commentary, or can remember back to performance of the mainstream media in the prelude to the second iraq war, then you might be forgiven for having the impression that iran is on the warpath.

firstly, lets consider the dominant narrative which has remained unchanged and largely unchallenged for over a year: iran is a theocratic totalitarian state intent on acquiring nuclear weapons in order to obliterate the tiny state of israel in one fell swoop.

this is the story repeated again and again by every major news outlet globally. indeed so ingrained is this narrative that in the latest us presidential debate the moderator casually stated that iran is the biggest security threatfacing america. woah!

lets start here. for one, i dont quite think that's true. certainly, iran is no friend of america (lets save this one) but there are certainly bigger threats. say, north korea? that bizarre nuclear armed prison nation still technically at war with an american ally and which not only regularly threatens military action against the south but often carries it out? (even this week the north threatened an artillery strike against the south, complete with instructions for civilians to evacuate the targeted area, but this has barely made the news)

or notorious pakistan, also nuclear armed, also seemingly perpetually on the brink of becoming a failed state.

even domestic us issues are essentially bigger national security threats: gun control, ancien regime levels of inequality, environmental collapse and access to medical services.

but no, iran is the real threat. if they get nuclear weapons, we are told, it's curtains for israel, the region, and maybe america itself.

i dont intend to get into the details of exactly how the global media is failing (again) in its responsibility to hold government to account and provide properly impartial and accurate reporting, because ill probably cry.

but hopefully i can provide some context to the issue you might not be aware of, or already knew but have forgotten.

firstly one of the big ones; israel has an illegal stockpile of nuclear weapons and has not hesitated in the past to attack other nations in the region if it feels threatened. its rhetoric towards iran is easily as hostile as iran's to israel, and it wilfully breaks international law everyday (turning gaza into one big prison, invading lebanon whenever it suits, and a hella illegal settler expansion program are some prime examples)

and some other big ones; recent history shows america can and does go crazy. imagine yourself as one of the big cogs in the iranian regime: consider that america now accounts for nearly half of global military spending. it has labelled iran part of an "axis of evil" that must be confronted. it invaded and occupied its eastern neighbour on shaky grounds, and then proceeded to invade and occupy its western neighbour on even shakier grounds. before that it armed hussien's iraq and encouraged it to attack iran, and before that the CIA directly worked to keep brutal and despotic leaders in control of the iranian people. even history aside, the american political landscape from their perspective is unpredictable in the extreme (can you say President Romney?)

but this of course is seldom mentioned in mainstream news coverage. while i do believe that iran acquiring nuclear weapons would be a bad thing, it is not the biggest problem around, and suggesting war to prevent such a development is just a tad short-sighted.

at its most basic, america does not want iran to have nuclear weapons because the regime would no longer be under any real threat of attack or invasion.

israel would lose its nuclear monopoly in the region and might no longer be able to attack and persecute its muslim neighbours whenever it likes.

the real arguments against iran having nuclear weapons are the danger of starting a regional arms race, and of course, the perennial point that nuclear weapons are plain fucking dangerous.

polls show a vast majority of egyptians would like iran to be nuclear armed. why? some would say to see israel destroyed no doubt, because everybody knows the entire region is just waiting for a chance to get those pesky zionists, consequences be damned.

or perhaps eqyptians are sick of living under the threat of attack from israel and would like to see a regional counterbalance to israeli and american military dominance.

in any case i would sure like to see a change to the current media narrative surrounding iran, although i doubt it will happen. i am but 22 years old but even i know from experience what can happen when the media unquestioningly spouts the us government line: the story eventually becomes so powerful it cannot be challenged and places get invaded.

whatever the moral deficiencies of the iranian regime are, its seeking of nuclear weapons (if actually true) is legitimate.

so next time someone wonders what the hell iran thinks its doing, arm yourself with historical context and get righteous.