Attacking Ayatollah Khamene'i: a Dangerous Misunderstanding

Shi'aphobia II--Attacking Ayatollah Khamene'i: a Dangerous Misunderstanding: "Shi'aphobia II--Attacking Ayatollah Khamene'i: a Dangerous Misunderstanding


William O. Beeman and Donald Weadon


The United States government is unable to abandon an obsessive view that the Iranian government is working to destroy the success of the U.S. Occupation of Iraq. The Administration and its neoconservative surrogates fear a Shi'a victory in upcoming Iraqi elections. They also cling to the false assumption that the Iraqi Shi'a are being supported by the Iranian state, and derive all of their power from Tehran. This view has generated many bizarre suggestions for action which, being misguided and counterproductive, should be abandoned.

Rather than attack the Iraqi Shi'a directly-an action that even the most ham-fisted policy wonk can see as disastrous - the Administration, a stampeded Congress and neoconservative conflict enthusiasts have chosen to attack Iran. The accepted theory seems to be that if Iran is destroyed, the power of the Iraqi Shi'a will atrophy.

The ongoing squabble over Iranian nuclear development is a transparent ploy to give the United States a plausible excuse for launching a widely-discussed military enterprise. The probability of such an attack is now so high that the debates in Washington revolve around how to do the deed, rather than if. Rumors of a signed Presidential Directive for covert and military action abound.

One perscription for constructive action short of military attack was recently forwarded by The Committee on the Present Danger, a neoconservative group 'Dedicated to Winning the War on Terrorism' and to that end, dedicated to regime change in Iran. Their paper, 'Iran-A New Approach,' was published on"