Waiting for a Gulf of Persia Incident

Always worth reading, Seymour Hersh has a new article out: Preparing the Battlefield. It's an overview of recent developments in the U.S.-Iran relationship vis-à-vis secret operations. The reason insiders are speaking up about this is because the U.S. government – in order to destabilize Iran – is backing small separatist movements who use terrorist tactics, and the insiders do not consider this an effective approach in dealing with Iran. Their goals are not any nobler, but they are concerned about the tactics.

While pointing out that the U.S. is repeating the same behavior that helped create the Taliban, it's asserted by one of the interviewees that "the violence [from U.S. support of terrorist fringe groups], rather than weakening Iran’s religious government, may generate support for it." This is just a continuation of policy shifted since the late 90s when the U.S. "diplomatic" approach to Iran helped strengthen support for the regime at a time when democratic elements had seemed to be gaining strength.

The other important factor here is the search for an accelerator into the conflict. (Hersh seems to chalk it up to the will of Cheney, but the desire to regain Iran is more widespread in the ruling echelons.) Polls have taught the administration something important: that an incident like the patrol boat scare in January 2008 could sway American public opinion enough to justify their war. A meeting following this incident was described thus: "The subject was how to create a casus belli between Tehran and Washington". In other words, another contrived incident like the Gulf of Tonkin Incident could be used to push the U.S. into a war with Iran.

Just remember, when they used this ruse in 1964, it was with a Democrat in office who'd paid lip service to the idea of keeping us out of war. The Tonkin situation, likewise, was the culmination of years of secret operations (including Operation 34A) against the Vietnamese government.