http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070201/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_war_clouds;_ylt=3DA=
nfdCjfqqV82mqGzrkBMK3ELewgF;_ylu=3DX3oDMTBjMHVqMTQ4BHNlYwN5bnN1YmNhdA--
U=2ES.-Iran tensions could trigger war
By JIM KRANE
Wed Jan 31, 8:16 PM ET
Citing Iranian involvement with Iraqi militias and Tehran's nuclear
ambitions, the Bush administration has shifted to offense in its
confrontation with Iran =E2=80=94 building up the U.S. military in the Pers=
ian
Gulf and promising more aggressive moves against Iranian operatives in
Iraq and Lebanon.
The behind-the-scenes struggle between the two nations could explode
into open warfare over a single misstep, analysts and U.S. military
officials warn.
Iraq has become a proxy battleground between Washington and Tehran,
which is challenging =E2=80=94 at least rhetorically =E2=80=94 America's do=
minance of
the Gulf. That has worried even Iraq's U.S.-backed Shiite prime
minister, who =E2=80=94 in a reflection of Iraq's complexity =E2=80=94 also=
has close
ties to Iran.
Iran and the United States are already sparring on the ground.
On Jan. 20, militants kidnapped and killed four American soldiers in a
raid in Karbala, and a fifth was killed in the firefight. A U.S.
defense official said one possibility under study is that Iranian
agents either executed or masterminded the attack, a suspicion based
on the sophisticated and unusual methods used in the attack, including
weapons and uniforms that may have been American.
He spoke on condition of anonymity because the probe is ongoing.
There has been speculation that the Karbala assault may have been in
retaliation for the arrest of five Iranians by U.S. troops in northern
Iraq.
Those five Iranians, who were arrested in the northern city of Irbil,
included two members of an Iranian Revolutionary Guard force that
provides weapons, training and other support to Shiite militants in
the Middle East, U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said last week.
Iraqi and Iranian officials maintain the five were diplomats.
Since the Karbala raid, U.S. saber-rattling has intensified. President
Bush said this week that U.S. forces in Iraq would take action against
Iranian operatives in the country, while insisting he had no intention
of attacking Iran.
"If Iran escalates its military action in Iraq to the detriment of our
troops and/or innocent Iraqi people, we will respond firmly," Bush
told National Public Radio.
Although little evidence has been made public, U.S. officials have
long insisted that Iran was supplying weapons and training to Shiite
militias in Iraq, including some that have killed American troops.
The No. 2 U.S. general in Iraq told USA Today in an interview
published Tuesday that Iran was supplying Iraqi Shiite militias with a
variety of powerful weapons, including Katyusha rockets and armor-
piercing rocket-propelled grenades.
"We have weapons that we know through serial numbers ... trace back to
Iran," Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno said.
The Air Force is considering more forceful patrols on the Iraqi side
of the border with Iran to counter the smuggling of weapons and bomb
supplies, the Los Angeles Times reported, citing senior Pentagon
officials.
The U.S. is also building up its military presence in the Gulf in what
it says is a show of strength directed at Iran. A second aircraft
carrier is heading for the region, and Patriot missile batteries are
being deployed.
Since Bush announced his new Iraq strategy in early January, Iranian
officials have raised the alarm repeatedly that the U.S. intends to
attack. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Iran is "ready for
anything" in its confrontation with the United States.
A newspaper close to Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei last
week threatened retaliation for any U.S. military action =E2=80=94 including
stopping oil traffic through the Gulf's strategic Hormuz Straits and
attacks on U.S. interests. The top editor of the Kayhan daily warned
that Iran will turn the Middle East into "hell" for the United States
and Israel if America attacks.
Iran expert Ray Takeyh said the risks are all the greater because
Tehran has an "unhealthy" disregard for American power, which
"enhances the prospect of a miscalculation."
Prof. Gary Sick, a leading authority on Iran, believes the U.S. is
seeking to divert world attention from the crisis in Iraq and organize
a coalition of Israel and conservative Sunni Arab states to confront
Iran.
"I see this as a very dangerous long-term policy because it promotes
the idea that Sunnis and Shiites should be distrustful of each other,
and I think that could come back and bite us later on," he said.
Iran and the U.S. also are in dispute over Tehran's nuclear program.
The United States accuses Iran of secretly developing atomic weapons =E2=80=
=94
an allegation Tehran denies. Iran's defiant refusal to suspend uranium
enrichment prompted the U.N. Security Council to impose limited
economic sanctions.
The U.S. has also beefed up support for Lebanon's government in its
power struggle with Hezbollah, the Shiite militia that Washington
accuses of acting in Iran's interests.
But Lee Feinstein of the Council on Foreign Relations said the U.S.
was finding it hard "to calibrate its message" to distinguish "between
a stern message and a warning of attack."
The war of words has raised fears among both Democrats and Republicans
in Congress that the United States and Iran are drifting toward armed
conflict at a time when America is struggling against determined foes
in Iraq and Afghanistan.
It has also unnerved the Iraqi government, many of whose members have
close ties to Iran.
"We have told the Iranians and the Americans, `We know that you have a
problem with each other but we're asking you, please, solve your
problems outside of Iraq,'" Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite,
told CNN on Wednesday. "We do not want the American forces to take
Iraq as a base to attack Iran ... we will not accept Iran using Iraq
to attack American forces. But does this exist? It exists and I assure
you it exists."
As the rhetoric grows more strident, a U.S. military official in the
Gulf likened the U.S.-Iran standoff to the buildup in hostility in
Europe before World War I, when the assassination of the heir to the
Austrian throne triggered a tragic war that engulfed a continent.
"A mistake could be made and you could end up in something that
neither side ever really wanted, and suddenly it's August 1914 all
over again," the U.S. officer said on condition of anonymity, because
of the sensitivity of the issue. "I really believe neither side wants
a fight."
Iranian coast guard vessels recently veered into territorial waters on
the Arab side of the Gulf, an event that could have been viewed as
either a mistake or a provocation, the officer said. Both sides are on
tenterhooks. "A boat crosses a line ... but what does it mean? You've
got to be very careful about overreacting," the officer said.
Even if Iran pulled back from Iraq's conflict, it might not end the
country's violence, said Kenneth M. Pollack, research director at the
Saban Center for Middle East Policy.
"The truth is that Iraq is a mess. It is in a state of low-level civil
war. And all of these groups are largely self-motivated," he said on
the Council on Foreign Relations Web site. "But its much easier to
blame it on the Iranians."
In Tehran, political analyst Hermidas Bavand said U.S. force increases
were leading many Iranians to believe Washington is looking to pick a
fight.
"It's an extremely dangerous situation," Bavand said. "I don't think
Tehran wants war under any circumstances. But there might be an
accidental event that could escalate into a large confrontation."
___
AP writer Jim Krane reported from Doha, Qatar. AP writer Tracee
Herbaugh in New York contributed to this report.
.
|
