The downing of a sophisticated U.S. RQ-170 Sentinel drone
over Iran is the latest ratcheting of tension between Washington and Tehran and
Jerusalem. Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities have been crippled by
sophisticated cyber attacks; key Iranian scientists and officials have been killed,
including a senior Iranian Revolutionary Guard
Commander who died when a rocket research site was hit by a spectacular and
still unexplained explosion.
That we know. But what else is going on in this murky, perilous game?
In July, 2008, Seymour
Hersh reported in the New
Yorker that in 2007 the U.S. Congress agreed to a request from President George
W. Bush “to fund a major escalation of
covert operations against Iran, according to current and former military,
intelligence, and congressional sources. These operations, for which the
President sought up to four hundred million dollars, were described in a
Presidential Finding signed by Bush, and are designed to destabilize the
country’s religious leadership. The covert activities involve support of the
minority Ahwazi Arab and Baluchi groups and other dissident organizations. They
also include gathering intelligence about Iran’s suspected nuclear-weapons
program."
That American backing included support for actions,
which, were they to be committed against the United States or one of its allies,
would definitely qualify as “terrorism”.
Has
the support for such operations continued under President Obama? If so, what does
it include? Just financial backing? Training? Logistics? Clandestine raids into
Iran? American “boots on the ground”?
Predictably,
such aggressive acts will provoke retaliation from Iran—a situation, which, in
the context of America’s superheated presidential primaries, could spiral
dangerously out of control. Which is just what militants in Tehran, Jerusalem,
and Washington may be out to provoke.
We
know from President George H.W. Bush’s decision to fund the opposition to
Saddam Hussein in 1991, that once such a program is launched it takes on a life
of its own--extremely tricky to control, even more difficult to shut down by
succeeding presidents, as Bill Clinton would discover. The funding created its
own lobby, ready to run to the media and sympathetic congressman at any attempt
to rein it in.
Such
a potentially explosive situation would be nothing new. Washington has already
been involved in a much more violent clandestine war against Iran, via its de facto ally of the time, Saddam Hussein,
who invaded Iran in 1980.
From
early in the conflict, the U.S. secretly supplied Saddam with arms as well as
satellite intelligence. By 1987, Washington was shipping American-made weapons
directly to Iraq from the sprawling U.S. Rhine-Mein Airbase in Frankfurt. Some
of Saddam's elite troops were even being sent to the United States for
instruction in unconventional warfare by U.S. Special Forces at Fort Bragg.
As I
detail in my book, Web
of Deceit, the Reagan administration would be dangerously sucked even
deeper into the conflict. Encouraged by the U.S., Saddam intensified his
attacks against vital Iranian economic targets, including neutral tankers in
the Gulf. Iran of course retaliated. Concerned about the safety of their own
ships, the Kuwaitis asked for protection.
Some
U.S. officials worried back then--just as they do today--that by venturing into
the narrow confines of the Gulf, the U.S. risked direct conflict with Iran.
Despite such concerns, American warships were dispatched.
On May 1987, it became dramatically clear how dangerous that
policy was. An Iraqi Air Force plane mistakenly attacked an American frigate,
the U.S.S. Stark, killing thirty-seven of the crew.
Then, to counter mounting congressional opposition to the
operation, the Reagan administration decided to go one step further. They would
justify a continued U.S. presence in the Gulf by permitting Kuwaiti ships to
operate under the American flag.
That fiction would give the Kuwaitis the right to American
protection.
A U.S. liaison officer was stationed in Baghdad to avoid a
repeat of the Stark incident.
That, at least, was the cover story; in fact, over the
following months, American officers would help Iraq carry out long-range
strikes against key Iranian targets, using U.S. ships as navigational aids.
"We became", as one senior U.S. officer told ABC's
Nightline, "forward air
controllers for the Iraqi Air Force."
The Reagan administration, in effect, decided to undertake a
secret war, not bothering with congressional authorization.
Heavily armed U.S. Special Operations helicopters, stealthy,
sophisticated killing machines that could operate by day or night, were ordered
to the Persian Gulf. Their mission was to destroy any Iranian gunboats they
could find. Other small, swift American vessels, posing as commercial ships,
lured Iranian naval vessels into international waters to attack them. The
Americans often claimed they attacked the Iranian ships only after the Iranians
first menaced neutral ships plying the Gulf. In some cases however, the neutral
ships which the Americans claimed to be defending didn't even exist.
Beginning in July 1987, the CIA also began sending covert
spy planes and helicopters over Iranian bases. Several engaged in secret
bombing runs, at one point destroying an Iranian warehouse full of mines. In
September 1987, a special operations helicopter team attacked an Iranian
mine-laying ship with a hail or rockets and machine-gun fire, killing three
Iranian sailors. Official authorization for those clandestine attacks was
purposely restricted to a low level in the Reagan administration so that top
government officials could deny all knowledge of the illegal operations.
By early 1988, officers from the Pentagon's Defense
Intelligence Agency dispatched to Baghdad were actually planning day-by-day
strategic bombing strikes for the Iraqi Air Force. In April 1988, the day
before a key Iraqi offensive, U.S. forces sank or demolished half the Iranian
navy--one destroyer and a couple of frigates.
If Saddam had not ultimately prevailed, the Pentagon had
prepared an even more ambitious strategy: to launch an attack against the
Iranian mainland. "The real plans were for a secret war, with the U.S. on
the side of Iraq against Iran, on a daily basis," retired Lieutenant
Colonel Roger Charles, who was serving in the office of the secretary of
defense at the time, told British reporter
Alan Friedman.
As Admiral James A. "Ace" Lyons, who was commander
in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet put it, "We were prepared, I would say
at the time, to drill them back to the fourth century."
Relatively cooler heads prevailed. According to Richard L.
Armitage, who at the time was assistant secretary of defense "The decision
was made not to completely obliterate Iran. We didn't want a naked Iran. We
wanted a calm, quiet peaceful Iran. However, had things not gone well in the
Gulf, I've no doubt that we would have put those plans into effect."
Which
brings us back today.
Hello Barry,
ReplyDeleteInteresting analysis. check my blog on the CIA and Hezbollah
http://www.thearabdigest.com/2011/12/no-nonsense-guide-to-cia-in-lebanon.html