The Bomb-Iran Laundry List

As ever, the Washington press corps is playing catch-up with the White House's twisted Iran war logic. Even WaPo's Froomkin is still referring to Bush's commitment to "resolving" the "Iranian nuclear issue" before he leaves office. The truth is, BushCo has moved beyond talking about Iranian nukes in favor of the new Iran Laundry List, which Secretary Rice revealed for the first time in full last Thursday when the White House announced the latest Iran sanctions. Similar to the Iraq Laundry List, the ultimate compilation of Saddam's sins trotted out as a counterweight to the paucity of evidence supporting Iraqi WMD, the Iran Laundry List is the administration's response to the weakness of the Iranian nuclear case.

While Washington is open to a diplomatic solution, Ms. Rice said, “Unfortunately the Iranian government continues to spurn our offer of open negotiations, instead threatening peace and security by pursuing nuclear technologies that can lead to a nuclear weapon, building dangerous ballistic missiles, supporting Shia militants in Iraq and terrorists in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and the Palestinian territories, and denying the existence of a fellow member of the United Nations, threatening to wipe Israel off the map.”

In light of the stakes involved, Rice gives a whole new meaning to the "shotgun approach." Let's review.

1. Right off the bat, Rice signals the effective abandonment of the nuclear argument. As I wrote before, the administration is now saying that it's not so much worried about an Iranian nuke, but about Iranian pursuit of "nuclear technologies that can lead to a nuclear weapon." No timeline is specified because they know now the only date supported by the intelligence is so far off as to be meaningless.

2. As announced in Bush's speech to the National Defense University, we are now instructed to fear Iranian intercontinental ballistic missiles. "Iran is pursuing the technology that could be used to produce nuclear weapons," he says, "and ballistic missiles of increasing range that could deliver them... Our intelligence community assesses that, with continued foreign assistance, Iran could develop an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of reaching the United States and all of Europe before 2015." Bush artfully blurs the distinction between ballistic missiles, which he says twenty-seven countries have, "some of which are hostile regimes with ties to terrorists," and the intercontinental ballistic missile, a technology possessed only by the five most militarily advanced nations. And thus we hit two birds with one stone-- we get an even scarier Iran, plus justification for funneling more billions to that crusty bugbear beloved by Bush/Cheney, National Missile Defense, even as Bush acknowledges that the United States does not actually have a functioning missile defense system:

By the end of 2004, we had a rudimentary capability in place to defend against limited missile attacks by rogue states or an accidental launch. As new technologies come online, we continue to add to this system -- making it increasingly capable, and moving us closer to the day when we can intercept ballistic missiles of all ranges, in every stage of flight: from boost, to mid-course, and terminal... [T]he pursuit of ballistic missiles will ultimately be fruitless -- because America and our allies are building and deploying the means to defend against this threat.

3. The allegation of Iran's support of "Shia militants in Iraq" is factually supported but should be contrasted with America's support of PJAK, the Iranian branch of the Kurdish PKK fighting to expel Iranian forces from Kurdish-occupied territories, and with other U.S.-sponsored measures conducted within Iranian territory meant to destabilize Tehran.

4. Iran's support of "terrorists in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and the Palestinian territories" is broadly publicized, but as a reason to bomb and/or invade a country with its finger on half of the world's oil supplies, leaves a bit wanting.

5. And finally, Iran hates Israel. So does Egypt, Syria, Jordan and a host of other folks, but we don't see plans to invade them (yet).

This is a list the American public will see repeated ad nauseum for the next several months in speeches, op-eds, Foreign Affairs articles, and press conferences until such time as the White House decides we are ready to accept the idea of Tehran buckling under the weight of 30,000 pound bunker-busters.