The Attack on Iran: has the countdown begun?

It seems the vilification of Iran, to soften up the British electorate for a future military campaign against the country, may have begun. Without producing any evidence, Britain has announced that it holds Iran responsible for the deaths of eight British soldiers by way of supplying technology to a Shia group in Iraq.

Without any independent body on the ground to give an assessment, it is impossible to know the truth. However Iran has strongly denied the claim, and it turns out the anonymous British official himself has no more than suspicions about who even carried out the attack. Asked to suggest Iran’s motive, he could only say that maybe Iran felt it had to show that it could not be "pushed around".

Whatever the truth of this story, it is worth bearing in mind that the UK and US feel at liberty to supply arms to warring factions, stir up national unrest and even invade sovereign nations which pose no particular threat, when they feel it meets their own interests or sense of adventure.

However our bitter experience from the build-up to the war against Iraq, is that to align himself with the US position, Tony Blair will use any means available to conciliate his electorate to the need for attack. A brief recap of events:

• November 2004: Jack Straw ruled out any military action in Iraq, a position which was confirmed by Tony Blair during the 2005 election campaign
• May 2005 (after the election): Tony Blair answers a question about possible action on Iran “Let’s see what happens”
• August 2005: Bush answers a question about use of force on Iran "All options are on the table”
• September 2005: Jack straw downgrades his original position to "It is not on the agenda, I happen to think that it is inconceivable"

It is early days yet, but my forecast is that if Blair is in power for long enough, he will support the US in an attack on Iran. And yet still, North Korea - the one country which absolutely possesses and is likely to use weapons of mass destruction - has no action threatened against it whatsoever.

Background

In mid-2002, it became clear that Iran had built a uranium enrichment plant, and announced that it intended to build a nuclear power plant. As Iran’s president has pointed out, the country has an inalienable right to produce nuclear fuel under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), although this is provided the country allows inspection from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The US and the UK have been most vocal in expressing the concern that Iran intends, or may intend at some future time, to build a nuclear warhead, and therefore want to prevent Iran from building a nuclear reactor. Although both the IAEA and independent researchers have said there is no evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, the US dismisses them and holds a consistent line that military action against Iran is under consideration.

It is worth making a note about international treaties and international law. The US and the UK considers Iran to be bound by the NPT, even though it is not a signatory. The US, on the other hand, do not consider themselves to be bound by the Kyoto Treaty, or subject to the International Criminal Court, because they were not signatories to it.