The Iranian crisis shows European submission

During this summer, relations between the European Union and Iran have noticeably deteriorated and Washington has multiplied its aggressive and hostile statements. The specter of a military intervention is closer and as should be done in such circumstances, the Atlantist circles are mobilizing public opinion, so that it get ready for war.
For two days, the journal of the French left elite, Le Monde, published the analyses made by experts who legitimized the American viewpoint. On September 1st., the French journal published François Heisbourg’s article and that of Therese Delpech the next day. Both experts are members of the International Institute for Strategic Studies (although their biographies in Le Monde do not mention it) and they were among those who sold the fiction on the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction in France before the War in Iraq (we devoted part of a Focus to them on February 4, 2004, “Les experts qui ont donné raison à la CIA”. Even when these “experts” have proved to be incompetent, they still have a wide audience in the media.
In his forum, François Heisbourg did not believe that the development of a civil nuclear program could be Iran’s only goal. Therefore, Teheran has just been trying to fool the international community to develop a military nuclear program. After legitimizing Washington’s reasons to attack Iran, he said war was not a good solution although “coolness” was not a position to be maintained either. Likewise, Heisbourg suggested Iran should be pressured by the United States and the European Union. For the author, Beijing should forget about its commercial interests with Iran and should work for the preservation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty to prevent Seoul, Tokyo or Taipei from getting the nuclear weapon. Should it be concluded then that if the United States attacked Iran, China would be held responsible for it?
On her part, Therese Delpech tried to justify the thesis of an Iranian secret nuclear program and that of an Iranian fraud regarding the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Based on certain articles of the militaristic Wall Street Journal and on the statements of the mujaheddin, a sectarian group of Iranian opponents, she affirmed Iran would have benefited a lot from the Pakistani aid. The sources’ lack of reliability did not seem to bother the expert who has said President Ahmadineyad has participated personally in maneuvers aimed at deceiving the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The expert of the Royal United Institute for Defense Studies, Dan Plesch, made an objective and sad analysis of the Iranian crisis and the independence of his country in The Guardian. A war against Iran will have terrible global consequences, for it will destabilize the Middle East and will provoke an international recession. However, the United States will launch it because Washington wants to maintain its worldwide supremacy and to deprive China of its petroleum resources. Considering the submission of the British political and military machine to the United States, London will follow Washington. The author made a call again in favor of the autonomy of the British Intelligence Services with regard to the United States.
This situation has worried Turki Al-Soudairi, editor in chief of the Saudi journal Alriyadh, who has a made a call to Europe so that it mediates between Iran and the United States. If the war begins, the whole region will burn for the Iraqi and Lebanese Shiite will fight with Teherean. For the author, the only solution to prevent an apocalyptic situation is the intervention of the European Union, an option that seems to be getting beyond reach. After summer tensions, Iran has already accepted it won’t count on Europe to avoid the confrontation. Vedette editorialist Hassan Hanizadeh of the Tehran Times, the Anglophone journal of Teheran, has condemned France, Germany and the United Kingdom for their incompetence to develop a foreign policy that is independent from Washington. For him, the United States and the Zionists have sabotaged the negotiation process. He has also said Iran is interested in finding in the East the alliances it couldn’t find in the West. Despite its shocking style, this editorial has done nothing but recognized an-already-advanced process: Iran has decided to have pacts with the Asian countries and Russia, a fact that links it to China, India, Pakistan and Russia in economic and/or military terms. Russian site Iran.Ru has published two interviews showing the Moscow-Teheran good relations.
The Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council of Iran, Ali Laridjani, recalled the good relations his country has with China and Russia. Considering these alliances and the lines of Moscow and Beijing, the European Troika can’t expect to represent the international community. The interviewee also affirmed that he didn’t feel concerned about the presentation of his country’s dossier before the UN Security Council because Iran’s goals are legitimate and the implementation of a civil nuclear program is not forbidden at all. This analysis was confirmed by Russian expert on the Iranian nuclear program Anton Khlopkov. In his interview, he said Iran has the right to have a civil nuclear program and up to now, that’s its goal. He’s more open to the Europeans than the Iranians and has pointed out that what has prevented the signature of an agreement in the negotiation process has been the influence of the United States upon Europe. For him, if the European Union wants results, it must negotiate completely alone.