No one listens to U.S., Israel

[bemildred]

ATHENS - At the end of November, more than a hundred officials and specialists concerned with security in the Middle East were invited to Athens to "solve the security puzzle in the eastern Mediterranean and the broader Middle East," a test which, needless to say, they failed.

---

The striking thing in Athens, on this occasion, was the total lack of concern displayed for Iran's threat, real or imaginary, by everyone else in the conference room. The general discussion proceeded on formulating an initiative to stop the fighting between Israel and Palestinians in Gaza, and on the bleak future of Israeli-Palestinian relations, neither seeming a subject of Israeli or American interest. The latter's warnings about Iran were greeted with audience indifference and trips to get coffee. No one even bothered to argue.

A recently published Israeli assessment of American opinion, written by a former intelligence official now with a think tank in the United States, said the same thing about American public attitudes. He told his readers in Israel that the American public today is obsessed with Iraq. It wants a not-wholly-disastrous way to get out. It has no interest whatever in Iran. It feels no threat from Iran. If President Bush were to initiate military action against Iran, the report said, he would be impeached.

I can't speak for the truth of the last comment as I am not currently in the United States. But it certainly seems true that American and Israeli officials, and journalists, for that matter, are whipping a dead horse when they go on and on about Iran. To promote another war of choice in the Near East seems madness to ordinary Americans - not to speak of ordinary, or official, Europeans. In 2003, attacking Iraq had, in the Western public mind, some vague connection with 9/11. After that mistake, nobody is interested in being afraid of Iran.

Korea Herald

[leveymg]

1. I'm afraid that some prominent liberal journalists may have lost some credibility by

whipping that very same dead horse, as recently as in the weeks immediately leading up to the elections.

I can only hope they were being spun by their sources, who may have had an interest in keeping up the appearance of a credible U.S. or Israeli military threat against Iran during back-channel negotations on U.S. withdrawal from Iraq.

I've been saying for well well over a year that the Iran war scare stories were more psywar than anything reflecting realistic planning for an actual preemptive attack.

Seems the obvious reality of the thing is finally being acknowledged. It was a propaganda campaign, and for some bizarre reason someone actually targeted DU and other progressive sites as a target audience.

[bemildred]

2. It seems like a serious problem to me.

The obstinate persistence in spouting the current propaganda line is very Bushlike, and crops up in other issues as well. But, when the other fellows start going to get coffee when it is your turn to speak, your attempt to get your message out is doomed, you have lost the PR game. And when you fail to get your own 2c in when the topics of interest to everybody else are discussed, that is another failure, an abandonment of issues that may in fact be of deep relevance to your interests. The interesting features then, are the single-minded flogging of one issue, and the utter failure to communicate anything. A dialog of the deaf, as the cliche says.

[leveymg]

3. That is why these clowns will be replaced, soon.

There is no U.S. foreign policy being pursued through official channels anymore. Just a skeleton crew keeping the boilers warm, but no direction, no evidence that anyone is really up top at the controls or manning the pilot house.

That's extremely dangerous, and I think what it means is that the Bush-Cheney Administration have, for all purposes other than appearances, already been fired. The military and a circle of grey eminences are running the country as custodians until January, when Congress is back and the elected officials can take over and decide what the hell to do. I can't see this leaderless vacuum continuing for another two years.

Finally, I don't think this has happened here before in this country. Weird. Some others have speculated lately about Bush and Cheney being removed, but I've been commenting on this for a while.

[bemildred]

4. Seems very dangerous to me too.

On the other hand, it's a golden opportunity for certain other countries ...

I can see the leaderless vacuum going on for some time yet. I hope I'm wrong.

[leveymg]

5. The golden opportunity for some other countries have passed.

The deal is locked in now. Iran gets its new western province, the U.S. gets a relatively easy exit. Blair's on his way out. Ohlmert is almost as paralyzed and discredited as Bush. The Saudis have tipped their hands too early, as usual, and are probably the next on the carving board. Russia's reverted to Czarist state terrorism abroad - no one wants to deal with them right now.

Who does that leave with an opportunity? Oh yes, China. They stand to pick up a lot of pieces very quickly. There is a reason they're the oldest running show on earth, as well as the largest.

I'm thinking also the oil multinationals will do well, if I'm right about Saudi hubris.

[bemildred]

6. I expect we may have a few surprises yet.

It is always a good bet that someone will do something stupid.

I agree with you about the Saudis and China. I think there is reason for concern about Iran, they may not handle "success" all that well.

The disembowelment of US hegemony in the Middle East is going to be, is already, very destabilizing. And thats the thing about chaos, you just don't know whats coming next.