May 25, 2007:
With the recent media exposure of
covert operations against the Iranian government, the United States has
suffered a serious setback in the global war on terror. In essence, a leak not
only scrapped a plan to destabilize a state sponsor of terrorism, but it also
placed CIA agents and their Iranian allies in danger. The Iranian people in
general are now at greater risk because a military confrontation more likely.
The American plan was to destabilize the Iranian
government through supporting various opposition groups. This is a logical
step, given the general unpopularity of the mullahs among the Iranian people.
If opposition groups can gain traction, there is a chance to end the Iranian
nuclear crisis in a non-violent manner. For an example of similar covert
operations, look at the operations against the Soviet Union in the 1980s.
Solidarity in Poland was one such group that became a major recipient of CIA
support.
With the exposure of the operation, this has been
greatly set back. It goes beyond the fact that this particular operation has
been compromised. One of the immediate effects is that now, Iranian president
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the mullah will claim that other domestic opposition
groups are being funded by the United States. This will push them back in some
areas, and it will also hinder their growth. After all, nobody likes a foreign
government messing with their domestic political situation - and the folks who
the foreign government are backing will have lower support within Iran. Well,
the lucky ones will. The unlucky ones will end up in prison. The really unlucky
ones will end up dead.
But the least-realized consequence is the fact that
the Iranian people have now been placed at greater risk. This is because a
non-military option has been taken off the table for a while. As Iran continues
its uranium enrichment and progress towards a nuclear weapon, the United States
will be facing a tough decision. Iran's nuclear program is of great concern
because Iran not only has had generally bad relations with the United States
(this is the predictable result of the storming of the embassy in Tehran back
in 1979), but also because Iran is known to be a major sponsor of Hizbollah, a
terrorist organization with a propensity for large-scale suicide attacks (like
the bombing of the Marine barracks in 1983). In effect, Hizbollah can be seen
as a delivery system for an Iranian WMD strike. What scares a lot of people
about Iran is not that they seek nuclear weapons for deterrence (say, against
an attack), but that they could provide WMD to Hizbollah, who then use it on an
Israeli or American target.
When that happens, the United States will have to
respond in kind. This would be a case where not using nuclear weapons would be
seen as an act of weakness. The targets would probably be extensive (Iran has
at least four major chemical weapons facilities, at least one biological
weapons facility, plus the nuclear research program, which includes enrichment
facilities in at least three locations). Even a limited strike would push the
death toll into the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, and a limited
strike would risk missing some of the Iranian systems. The only way to be sure
Iran would be incapable of launching a second attack would be to wipe Iran off
the map. The Iranian people would pay a fearsome price for the decisions of the
mullahs and/or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
The exposure of the covert operation will have many
consequences, and will make dealing with Iran much more difficult. Not only was
one operation compromised, others will have to lay low. Iran will also be
expecting trouble. As a result, Iran will take measures to defend against
future operations. This makes it more likely that the solution to the Iranian
nuclear crisis will be a violent one. - Harold C. Hutchison
([email protected])