Sic Semper Tyrannis

Superbowl Open Thread

Here's a Superbowl Open Thread to keep you all busy during the game.  Everyone party safe!

Iran's Power Structure

Adam L. Silverman, PhD*

The image above, from the National Democratic Institute (the link is to their Iran Bulletin), provides an excellent visualition of Iran's governmental power structure.  Mr. Vincent (formerly doing business as Graywolf) asked a great question in the comments to the Newshour post about Iran's leadership.  His insinuation, of course, was that they are "stupid, venal, and crazy", but his equally good point is that frustration with Israeli intransigance and ongoing attempts to manipulate American foreign policy to its benefit has deranged some of our commenters away from viewing the actual behavior and intent of the Iranian government and leadership.  This is a great couple of points that there is more to be concerned here than just the Israelis and their behavior.

In the case of Iran we do not have the greatest understanding of their leadership, specifically of their strategic decision making.  The simple reality, as demonstrated in the graphic above, is that Iran's unique hybrid form of government means that much, if not most of the decision making is going on behind the scenes.  That makes it opaque to observation and understanding.  Ahmedinijad is the bright shiny object out in front.  And he has seemed to be in an on again/off again power struggle with the Ayatollah Khameini, the Supreme Religious Authority, the council of advisors, experts, and the Guardian Council.  But what really remains difficult to discern is just how much power he has with his ties to the ageing revolutionary movement and how much power they have in relation to the Supreme Religious Authority and the other ruling clerics.

So Mr. Vincent's concerns are well merited: we need to pay attention to Iran's leadership, its strategic culture, and its strategic decision making process just as much as we need to the Israelis.  Especially if we do not want to become the third party to this dispute.

*Adam L. Silverman, PhD is the Culture and Foreign Language Advisor at the US Army War College (USAWC).  The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of USAWC and/or the US Army.

The Newshour sides with Israel concerning Iran

As an indication of how pervasive Israeli agitprop and perception management has become, I offer the following:

On the Newshour tonight there was a talking heads discussion between David Ignatius and David Makovsky the AIPAC/WiINEP person.  The moderator was Ray Suarez. 

Throughout this "contest" the assumption underlying  the discussion was that Iran has a nuclear weapons program.  This was clear in what both Makovsky and Ignatius said.

To make the matter worse, Suarez  said at one point:

"RAY SUAREZ: Before we close, I would like to hear from both of you about the cost-benefit analysis being made on both sides.

If you only slow down and don't stop the Iranian program, but unleash military strikes, could the possibilities for Iranian retaliation, for destabilization in the region be so severe, that the blowback is worse than what you accomplish with the attack?"

Ray, it is the position of the US governemnt that Iran DOES NOT have a nuclear weapons program and has not had one since 2003   That is our offical position, expressed in numerous documents of the IC as late as this week in Clapper's statement to the senate.

The administration has not repudiated any of these Intelligence Community joint opinions.  The acceptance of those judgement is why we are not presently bombing Iran.

pl

MSNBC Misleads on Iran

James Clapper, the DNI, pirouetted across the hearing room this week to tell the senate that Iran might, possibly, could be, thinking of doiing something hostile on US soil.  This was based on the supposed Iranian plot against the Saudi ambassador.  In this plot an Iranian is suposed to have suggested to an Iranian-American used car dealer from Texas that something noisy should be done in the US.  The used car dealer contacted a Mexican druggy he knew who happened to be a US government informant.  The informant suggested to the used car dealer that maybe the Saudi ambassador could be "offed."  Nothing was done to operationalize this fable but the tale has now become the basis for a propaganda theme that holds that Iran is a terrorism threat in the US.  Brilliant!

Clapper served this up as a CYA ploy to the senate and Feinstein could be heard in the background jumping up and down chanting Yup! Yup! Yup!  Knew it! Knew it! Knew it!

Why did Clapper do this?  Well, he needed this to "Balance" the unpleasant necessity of once again telling the senate that the US Intelligence Community collectively still do not have any evidence of a continuing Iranian nuclear weapons program.  Nor do they have any evidence that Iran has made a decision to have nuclear weapons.  This is not surprising since the Supreme Leader issued a fatwa some years back banning such weapons.

Nevertheless, Israel (Likud) wants to attack Iran.  IMO the principal reason they want to do this is to prevent the acquisition by Iran of sufficient military power, possibly nuclear,  to challenge Israeli hegemony in the region.  IMO. the possibility of actual use is much less of an actual concern among Israelis.  After all, Iran would be destroyed, utterly, in the aftermath of such an attack.  Anyone who doubts that is not paying attention.

To support Israeli's strategic aims, their propaganda machine is in full operation with continued shading of print media and broadcast "news" to reflect Clapper's CYA rather than the IC's opinion about the non-existence of Iranian nuclear threats.

Today, "Chuck Todd," the hyper ambitious and election besotted commentator had Richard Engel, MSNBC's "Chief Foreign Correspondent" on the air. 

TODD: (paraphrasing) Richard, what's this about the threat of Iranian attacks in the US? 

ENGEL:  Hmm, (mumble, mumble)

TODD:  All right, Richard, what are you hearing abut the Iranian threat with nuclear weapons?

ENGEL:  (broadcasting from Israel) Well I have heard the following four options that the Iranians have.  (He then listed them.  They were all posited on the absolutely crazed hostility of the Iranians and none included the US IC's opinion that the Iranians do not have a program.  Whose options were these.   Engel did not say other anything about that other than that they were the opinions of "experts.")

I SAY THIS IS PROPAAGANDA FOR WAR ON THE PART OF MSNBC<  pl

Mr. President - Tell Bibi No! - Publicly

- Panetta thinks the Israelis are likely to act against Iran soon.

- The US IC still believes that the Iranians no longer have a nuclear weapons program.

-  The Israel first crowd are not going to support BHO for president again.

- They prefer Romney or gingrich or anyone else except Paul..

- The Evangelicals are not going to support BHO.

- The cretin element in the population is not going to support BHO.  I  have talked to numerous Gentile retirees in their ghettoized communities in the warmer regions.  Many of them slaver for Iranian blood, fed in their dotage a steady diet of propaganda by Rush and faux news.  They are not going to support BHO either.

- The majority of Americans do not want another war, especially one patently boosted for and on behalf of a foreign country mired in its own delusions.  Republican support of war against Iran will cost them the election.

-BHO, Panetta and the CJCS have all told the Israeli government that we will not join in a pre-emption against them nor "bail them out" in a pre-emption against Iran.

Soooo    

Tell the world that:

If the USIC decides that Iran has a nuclear weapons program that is proceeding with weaponization, we will destroy it.  We will not welcome Israel's "help" in this.  This should generally be our policy.  The present nuclear powers are to some extent "grandfathered," but only from necessity.

An Israeli first strike on Iran has nothing to do with us and WILL have nothing to do with us.

pl

 

Dempsey and the Israelis

 "Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey told Israeli leaders Jan. 20 that the United States would not participate in a war against Iran begun by Israel without prior agreement from Washington, according to accounts from well-placed senior military officers.

Dempsey's warning, conveyed to both Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak, represents the strongest move yet by President Barack Obama to deter an Israeli attack and ensure that the United States is not caught up in a regional conflagration with Iran.

But the Israeli government remains defiant about maintaining its freedom of action to make war on Iran, and it is counting on the influence of right-wing extremist views in U.S. politics to bring pressure to bear on Obama to fall into line with a possible Israeli attack during the election campaign this fall." Gareth Porter

-------------------------------------------

I have heard the same thing from other, different sources.  I may become a "fan" of this man, Dempsey.  I notice that he usually wears just two rows of ribbons.  This is a good sign.  It is unlike the current "peacock" display of meaningless ribbons.  Notice how many rows Marshall wore.  pl

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=106621

The long shadow of the Chihuahua

"Other intelligence officials indicated that while there was no evidence of other Iranian plots in the United States, Mr. Clapper’s remarks were intended to put both the Iranians and the American intelligence community on notice that high priority would be given to ferreting out information about possible plans to stage attacks in this country.

Mr. Clapper said that the suspected assassination plot “shows that some Iranian officials — probably including supreme leader Ali Khamenei — have changed their calculus and are now more willing to conduct an attack in the United States in response to real or perceived U.S. actions that threaten the regime.”"  NY Times

--------------------------------------------

I did enjoy seeing Petraeus sitting in a subordinate position at the table.  That must have hurt.  But, on the other hand, Clapper is clearly covering his a-s against the possibility of an Iranian action in the US.  Feinstein is, of course, against whomever Bibi is against.

The now almost legendary suspected  plot against Adil (the chihuahua) Jubeir remains a very doubtful thing.  It has Zimmerman telegram written all over it.  To use THAT for evidence of Iranian intentions towards the US is enabling of deep suspicion.

At the same time the judgment that AQ has been largely disemboweled gets little play.  pl

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/01/world/intelligence-chief-sees-al-qaeda-likely-to-continue-fragmenting.html