Bombs Away: explode a nuke in Israel, then blame it on the Iranians?

If an attack on Iran is to carry traction with world public opinion, there must be definite proofs that she really does intend to expunge Israel from the face of the earth. A nuclear weapon exploding somewhere inside Israel in the next few months, allegedly fired by the Iranians, would appear to supply all the necessary grounds for massive retaliation.

The US/Israeli problem rests on the plain fact that not everyone is fully convinced that Iran seeks nuclear weapons. Or, even allowing this, she would then undertake an insane mission to aim at Israel, thus ensuring a massive counter strike. We are back with the weapons of mass destruction fable which led to the disastrous invasion of Iraq.

In any event, is the regime in Iran actually that stupid? Israel has at least fifty warheads capable of hitting Iran, her cities and oilfields. A first strike by Iran would ensure that Iran herself was wiped off the map. The logic is so obvious, why does anyone believe the war talk coming out of Washington and Israel, not to mention a score of western capitals?.

American spinners are careful to concentrate on bunker-busting bombs intended to wreck underground facilities associated with the nuclear program. This would avoid civilian casualties, or at least largely so. Job done then?

Not quite. If fact, not at all. As with the last western-inspired overthrow of an Iranian regime back in 1953, the real issue is the country's huge oil reserves. Sixty years ago the government of the aristocratic, deeply conservative Dr Mohammad Mosaddegh was taken out just because he picked a fight with the Anglo Iranian Oil Company. The dispute was rooted in the well-judged Iranian conviction that British accountants were cheating on the fair distribution of revenues.

Mosaddegh nationalised the company, Britain's most precious overseas asset. The US and the UK then spread the false alarm that the Soviets would be invited take over its activities.

The CIA's legendary Operation Ajax sprang into action. The Iranian government was duly wrecked by a huge urban guerilla campaign costing millions of dollars even in those times.

Much of the money went on recruiting and arming violent mobs of demonstrators. The weak constitutional monarch, Mohammad Reza Shah Pevlavi, was levered into power as a puppet of western interests.

The Anglo Iranian Oil Company became British Petroleum. Game set and match.

Iran's passion to acquire nuclear weapons is the cover story that conceals the west's real interest in Iran. As before, this scrap is all about oil. Blowing up Iran's nuclear facilities will leave large holes in the ground but the government intact. Indeed, such attacks would almost certainly harden public support for the west's great bogeyman President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the conservative clerics who are the real power in the land.

If US strategic planners aim to stir internal rebellion as a precursor to an Ajax-style coup, they may be sorely disappointed.

It is correct that many Iranians would indeed prefer a more western, relaxed liberal style of government. Sanctions are having a serious impact on the wealthier, mainly secular classes. The restless young envy the freedoms of their western counterparts. Restrictions on foreign travel are more than just irritating. They are bad for trade and business in an ancient trading nation. But an apparently popular revolt, even with all the means at the disposal of western intelligence, will not be quite so easily accomplished this time around.

No-one in Iran wants another Shah imposed by foreign powers.

I am quite sure that the increasing internal disturbances inside Iran are part and parcel of a grand destabilisation exercise, the opening stages of Operation Ajax Mark Two. But in themselves they are little more than pinpricks. There is no obvious indication that they are having any significant impact on public opinion.

Anyway, all Iranians suspect that the real game is oil grabbing. History is their guide after all. They are not sure that finding themselves in another dystopian American colony, like Iraq and Afghanistan, is such an appealing prospect. American soldiers and lawless 'contractors' have proved their own unfortunate ambassadors.

In any event, to secure control of the Iranian oil fields, the west must either instal a pliant government or invade. An invasion is always far easier if the target country's national infrastructure is first obliterated.

The perfect excuse might be a nuclear detonation on Israeli soil. There are portents. Recent mysterious explosions in sites reputed to house finished nuclear warheads are blamed by western and especially Israel intelligence on failed attempts to cap missiles with atomic warheads. Storyline: Iran is already preparing to arm missiles and then use them against Israel.

This incredible nonsense duly made its unquestioned way to all the corporate headline spinners.

If the intention is to let off an Israeli nuclear weapon, possibly somewhere in the remote Sinai Desert and then blame it on Iran, then this would be no more than a modern adaptation of the ancient history of war.The Israelis could posture in the classic position of the injured party that struck back with a massive conventional response, aided by the US, instead of revealing the existence of her own ultra-secret nuclear armoury. With Iran suitably smashed up, the conditions are ripe for ground occupation of key points - such as the oil fields.

The new IAEA report implying that Iran will soon be a nuclear armed state has raised the alarm. The agency has played softball on the Iranian weapons conspiracy until now, insisting that inspections reveal nothing more threatening than civilian reactor research and development. Such a remarkable - and timely - reversal of previous agency statements seems to rank as obvious propaganda produced by long distance arm-twisting from Washington.

There are interesting clues pointing to internal friction within Israel. Elements of the intelligence services, Mossad and Shin Bet, are demonstrably nervous. Meir Dagan and Ephraim Halevy, both former heads of Mossad, have spoken out openly against attacking Iran. They question why a country that gets billions from the US taxpayer every year to defend itself is at any serious risk from Iran.

Why should attacking Iran provoke such uncertainties in unlikely quarters?. Could it be the prospect of the mother and father of all 9/11's inside Israel's borders? The military are unusually disturbed about something, when normally they would go after Iran like greyhounds on steroids.

Prime Minister Netanyahu has problems concerning Iran within his own cabinet. Thousands have protested outside the Likud party's headquarters over the perceived slippage into a protofascist state which threatens draconian clamps on free speech. Israelis are clearly unsettled. Iran hangs over everything, like a bleak thundercloud.

Israel has a long history of blaming responsibility for incoming rockets on the Hamas authorities in Gaza, or Hezbollah when missiles apparently appear from the direction of Lebanon. This is simply a matter of record. Israel has attacked her own citizens, like NATO's secret Gladio armies attacked European citizens during the 'years of lead' of the 70s and 80s in order to scare voters away from Left wing parties. Gangs of urban Marxist guerillas, surreptitiously steered by western intelligence interlopers, duly got the blame.

The claim that Iran is arming missiles to attack Israel in the near future should be judged in the same light. The issue comes down to proof offered on the world stage. A controlled nuclear explosion - or an event that at least appeared to be atomic in nature - conducted within Israel's borders, then convincingly blamed on the Iranians, would settle the issue.

I sincerely hope that I am wrong.

Richard Cottrell