in like flynn

Iran Hawks Take the White House
Philip Giraldi, AmConMag, Feb 9 2017

Pindostan is adding new sanctions on Iran over that country’s alleged misdeeds, and nearly all of those allegations are either out-and-out lies or half-truths. It has a familiar ring to it, as demonizing Tehran has been rather more the norm than not since 1979, a phenomenon that has included fabricated claims that the Iranians killed Pindo soldiers after Pindostan’s armed interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq. This time around, the administration focused on the perfectly legal Iranian test of a non-nuclear-capable MRBM and the reported attack on what was initially claimed to be a Pindo warship by allegedly Iranian-backed Yemeni Houthi fighters. The ship was later revealed to be a Saudi frigate. Trump’s national security adviser Mike Flynn “officially” put Iran “on notice” while declaring:

The Trump Administration will no longer tolerate Iran’s provocations that threaten our interests. The days of turning a blind eye to Iran’s hostile and belligerent actions toward Pindostan and the world community are over.

Ignoring the fact that Iran cannot actually threaten Pindostan or any genuine vital national interests, the warning and follow-up action from the White House also contradict Trump’s campaign pledge to avoid yet another war in the Middle East, which appears to have escaped Flynn’s notice. The increase in tension and the lack of any diplomatic dialogue mean that an actual shooting war might now be one “false flag” operation, one false intelligence report, or one accidental naval encounter away. If it all sounds like a reprise of the baseless allegations and intentionally unproductive negotiations that led to the catastrophic Iraq War, then it should. What “belligerent actions against Pindostan” Flynn was referring to was not completely clear, and that lack of precision may have been intentional, to permit instant vilification of anything Tehran attempts to do to counter the hostility coming out of Faschingstein. Hating Iran has a considerable pedigree. I must confess that contempt for Iran was in the DNA of my generation of federal government employees. I nursed a personal grudge against the mullahs, because an Iranian government agent tried to kill me in Turkey in the 1980s. But more often the animosity was generic, sometimes expressed humorously at CIA station staff meetings. I recall how one fellow officer who was undercover at a consular office would positively gloat as he described how many Iranian visa applicants he had turned down in the past week, and everyone would bang their fists on the conference table, signifying their approval.

Of course, we all felt fully justified in our Iranophobia, due to the 1979 embassy hostage crisis, which was still very fresh in our minds. But my rancor toward Iran has long since faded. I have Iranian friends and have come around to the view that Iran has much more been sinned against than sinned in its relationship with the United States. With the signing of the JCPoA in Jul 2015, I even began to believe that the two nations might well be able to resume something like normal diplomatic relations, which would benefit everyone involved. Alas, such hopes appear to be scuppered by a recent wave of Iran hysteria that bids fair to eclipse the Russian panic that has consumed the media and chattering classes during the past six months. I should have seen it coming. In Dec 2015, I was present at a conference in Moscow where General Flynn explained his concept of 21st century geo-economic-political strategy. At least I think that was what he was talking about, though one can understand the frustration of the interviewer, Sophie Shevardnadze, as she tried to get him to explain what he meant during a largely incoherent presentation.

At the time I knew little about Flynn and his views, but I was particularly taken aback by a random shot he took at the Iranians (16m 53s in the above tape) stating very clearly that Iran was responsible for “fueling four proxy wars in the Middle East.” He was presumably referring to Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, and Yemen. The audience, which included a number of international journalists and genuine foreign-policy experts, became somewhat restless and began to mutter. I was standing in the back of the room and witnessed Flynn’s son responding to the expressions of disbelief by waving his arms around and shouting:

Right! Right! Check the intel!

Two minutes later, the elder Flynn returned to the theme, mentioning the “terrible nuclear deal with Iran.” Now I am accustomed to hearing nasty things about Iran, but they usually come from Israeli partisans who persist in falsely describing the Iranians as a global threat. It is in their interests to do so, and many pliable Pindo pols and talking heads have picked up the refrain, so much so that a Pindo attack on Iran would likely be endorsed overwhelmingly by Congress and applauded in the media. But I believed that Flynn was not particularly in with that group, which consisted largely of neocons, and his disdain for Iran seemed to be at least somewhat sincere in that it appeared to be rooted in his own experience as head of the DIA. But I was wrong and should have paid more attention to the people Flynn was talking to. For instance, Michael Ledeen believes that invading Iran should have been the first priority in 2003, rather than Iraq. He believes that “everything traces back to Tehran,” and that Iran manipulates both sides of the Shi’ite/ Sunni conflict, leading Peter Beinart to write in the NYT:

(Ledeen’s) effort to lay virtually every attack by Muslims against Pindostan at Tehran’s feet takes him into rather bizarre territory.

Even as Flynn was speaking in Moscow he was collaborating with Ledeen on a book called ‘Field of Fight’ which appeared in Jul 2016. The book has two basic premises. First, the entire “civilized world” is engaged in a life-and-death struggle with a perverted form of Islam that has produced the phenomenon referred to as “radical Islamic terrorism,” a phrase that may have been embraced by the Trump administration largely thanks to Flynn. Flynn insists on the tag including the Islamic part because of his belief that the Muslim religion is itself intrinsic to the very nature of the conflict. In fact, he prefers to call Islam a political ideology rather than a religion, and even describes it as a political ideology that has “metastasized” into a “malignant cancer.” He once tweeted that “Fear of Muslims is RATIONAL,” linking to a false claim that Islam wants 80% of humanity enslaved or exterminated. Second, Ledeen’s book views Iran as both the source and lynchpin of the massive disorder prevailing in the Middle East, with tentacles reaching throughout the region and beyond. It is itself a radical Islamic regime that uses terror as a weapon, a state sponsor of terrorism according to the State Dept, and it also is an ally of movements like Daesh and the various AQ affiliates that it only pretends to be fighting. Flynn and Ledeen also assert that Iran is intent on developing a nuclear weapon and has a secret program to do so in spite of the 2015 agreement. It would use such a weapon to threaten Israel and other Pindo interests in the Middle East and beyond, and is simultaneously developing ballistic missiles that could be used to deliver the weapons on target.

In addition to Ledeen, Flynn’s conspiratorial mindset goes back further, to his days with DIA, where he was well-known for what his staff referred to as “Flynn facts”, things he would say that were demonstrably untrue. He once insisted that three-quarters of all new cell phones were bought by Africans and maintained that Iran has killed more Pindosis than AQ. Few dared to disagree. When he took over DIA, Flynn said to his senior staff that everyone needed to know was that he was always right. His subordinates would only be right when their views became the same as his. DIA Director Flynn considered the Benghazi attack of Sep 2012 to be an incident in the global war against Islam (ie the GWOT. I think Stephens was killed because he was picking picking up local boys for sex – RB). His initial reaction was to “prove” Iranian involvement, and he pressured his analysts to come up with the evidence, including shouting at them when they couldn’t support his conclusions. He told the analysts that Benghazi was a “black swan” event that needed more creative analysis to unravel. In testimony before the House of Representatives in Jun 2015, Flynn stated:

Iran represents a clear and present danger to the region and eventually to the world. Iran’s stated desire to destroy Israel is very real. Iran has not once contributed to the greater good of the security of the region. Nor has Iran contributed to the protection of security for the people of the region. Instead and for decades, they have contributed to the severe insecurity and instability of the region, especially the sub-region of the Levant surrounding Israel. It is clear that the nuclear deal is not a permanent fix but merely a placeholder.

Flynn was eventually fired from the DIA because of his hardline views, in part because of his demonization of Iran and Islam. It would be easy to suggest that Flynn has only a tenuous grasp on what is really going on in the Middle East. Consider his assertion that Shi’ite Iran is in league with groups like AQ, which consider Shi’a to be a heresy and are willing to kill its followers on that basis alone. But the situation is actually much more dangerous than the usual Faschingstein groupthink. Flynn and Ledeen have constructed a narrative in which the world is at war with a great evil, and Iran is the central player on the enemy side. It is a viewpoint that is unfortunately shared at least in part by the new Sec Def & Sec State and endorsed by many Congress critturs. This has consequently developed into a new sensibility about Pindosi national security that is apparently driving the Trump administration’s responses to Iranian behavior. Iran certainly exhibits assertive behavior regionally, bBut much of its maneuvering is defensive in nature. It is surrounded by a sea of enemies, most of whom are better armed and funded than it is. The nuclear agreement with Iran has considerably delayed any possible development of a nuclear weapon and is in everyone’s interest. It is not plausibly a delaying tactic to acquire a weapon somewhere down the road, as Flynn and Ledeen would have us believe. Iran will be a very tough nut to crack if Flynn has his way, and the Trump White House employs military force. Iran is roughly the same size as Alaska, it has three times the population of Iraq, and the Iranian people have a strong national identity. They would fight hard, and using their sophisticated Russian-provided air defenses and Chinese missiles, they could inflict major damage on Pindo air and sea units in the Persian Gulf region. They would also be able to unleash limited but nevertheless lethal terrorist resources. It would not be a “cakewalk,” and even if there were a military victory of some sorts, the world would be left with yet another power vacuum in the heart of Asia.

I believe that Flynn is a dangerous man, possibly even mentally unhinged on some issues. He thinks that Pindostan has the preemptive right to tell countries in the Middle East what is acceptable and what is not, and is willing to exercise various repressive measures to compel good behavior. Iran as a designated “problem state” is consequently not allowed to act in support of its own national security interests. Flynn justifies his hostility by claiming that Iran is the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism and instability, which is a self-serving lie. Absent diplomacy to resolve differences, the only interaction with Tehran from Faschingstein has become the threat of economic sanctions backed up by military force. As Iran responds in kind, this will become an escalatory cycle with no easy way out. A better policy would allow Iran to diversify naturally, without a constant stream of provocations that only serve to embolden hard-liners. Iran’s young people, the majority of the population, are very pro-Western and even pro-Pindosi in their cultural affinities and sentiments. The Iranian population is closely tied to a large Iranian diaspora, with an estimated 1.5 million Iranians living in Pindostan alone. Threats of military action will strengthen the grip of the government in Tehran, producing hard responses and piling threat upon threat that will ultimately lead nowhere. Hopefully some adults in the White House cabinet room will at some to point tell Michael Flynn that it is time to sit down and listen to the facts.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.