Iran: The Next Strategic Target

By Amy Goodman, Democracy Now!. Posted January 19, 2005.

Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh reported in The New Yorker magazine this week that the Pentagon has already secretly sent in forces to Iran to identify possible future military targets. In the article, titled “The Coming Wars: What the Pentagon Can Now Do in Secret,” Hersh wrote that he had been repeatedly told by intelligence and military officials, on condition of anonymity that "the next strategic target was Iran."

The covert reconnaissance missions have been underway since at least last summer, aided by Pakistan as well as Israel. According to Hersh's article, the president has authorized the Pentagon to send secret commando forces into as many as 10 nations in the Middle East and South Asia. These forces could potentially carry out combat operations or even terrorist acts. Bush reportedly used the Pentagon for the missions instead of the CIA to avoid having to report to Congress.

On Monday, the Pentagon criticized major aspects of the article, saying in a written statement "Hersh's article is so riddled with errors of fundamental fact that the credibility of his entire piece is destroyed." But President Bush, when asked by NBC’s David Gregory whether he would rule out military action against Iran, said: “I hope we can solve it diplomatically, but I will never take any option off the table.”

AMY GOODMAN: Your response to what President Bush has said?

SEYMOUR HERSH: Well, I mean, the thing that's wonderful about that is that, of course, if he really hopes we're doing something politically, he should join in with the talks that have been underway for more than a year. Since 2003, the European Union, primarily led by England, France and Germany, has been in extensive negotiations with the Iranians. I think there's an understanding that Iran has ambitions to become a nuclear power. It's not there yet. The goal of these talks is to offer them, I guess, to use a cliche, the carrot they need in terms of increased trade and increased credits and dual-use goods, goods that they have been denied by sanctions because of their activities, in exchange for a commitment to stop.

The United States has not joined in those talks, absolutely has nothing to do with them. In the article, I quoted senior Western diplomats — everyone's so nervous about being quoted about anything these days with this administration — anyway, a senior European diplomat said to me, we're in a lose-lose position, because as long as America doesn't join in these negotiations we really don't have the leverage. What kind of a commitment can we make for Iran's security if America stays out of it? And as long as they don't join in, we're eventually going to have to go to the United Nations for sanctions because we can't do it through diplomacy to stop them, and at that point, everybody understands that Russia and China will probably veto it, and then the Bush administration can claim, ‘Aha! The U.N. is not working again,’ which is analogous to what happened in 2003 when we went into Iraq. We didn't give the negotiations there a chance to work. So, if you really are interested in negotiations, it's simple. Start talking to Iran.

Can you explain where the CIA and the Pentagon fit into this picture?

Well, that's actually to me the most interesting part to the story that I wrote — not about Iran, because you can almost argue that, of course, we're doing surveillance. I'm sort of amazed that it became such a big story in the last 24 hours or 36 hours. The real issue — what the story is about, is the fact that the diminution of the CIA is unbelievable. The president has really gone after the agency with (Vice President Dick) Cheney and (Secretary of Defense Donald) Rumsfeld, and at this point, as I say, there's never been more significant or more intellectual or more intelligence capability for not only operations, but for analysis. More is totally centralized in the White House and the Pentagon than since the rise of the national security state after World War II in the Cold War. We now have the White House and a Pentagon that basically dominates the process. The C.I.A. has been marginalized.

All of the noise that you heard about the new CIA Director (Porter) Goss, going after people in the operations division — the so-called dirty tricks division — really has masked what's going on. His real mission, his real agenda — and it wasn't his, he was carrying out a White House agenda — was to get rid of a number of analysts, senior analysts, who work for the intelligence side of the CIA, old-timers who have been skeptical of many of the White House's and Pentagon's operations, and so, as somebody said to me, they really went after the apostates, and they want only true believers in there. That's what the mission has been.

Amy Goodman is the host of the nationally syndicated radio news program Democracy Now!

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »