Mumia Abu-Jamal's Radio Broadcasts
Higher Quality Audio files available info@prisonradio.org
Copyright 2006 Mumia Abu-Jamal/Prison Radio
"The March to Tehran"
Rec. 2-25-07

1) 2:53 Radio essay Mp3
2) 3:38 Radio essay Mp3

The March to Tehran

From the toothy growl from the American vice president, Dick Cheney, to the editorial blares of the nation's newspapers, there's every indication that a war in Iran is all but inevitable. While such an idea seems counter-intuitive in light of the obvious disaster in Iraq, signs abound of the very real possibility of such a conflict.

For one thing, the U.S. surge has had one primary target, the Shia Mahdi Army of
Moqtada al-Sadr, the junior cleric who has become a thorn in the side of U.S.-backed Iraqi Prime Minister Nori al-Maliki and the U.S. itself. Several weeks ago, U.S. and Iraqi forces killed an al-Sadr deputy in his home, north of Baghdad.

For another, the recent pull-out of some 1500 British troops from the southern Iraqi city of Basra. These two indicators, while seemingly small and unrelated are harbingers of things to come.

The targeting of the Mahdi Army only makes sense if the U.S. is concerned about their capacity to cause damage in Iraq in case Iran is attacked. The partial pull-out of Brit forces from the predominantly Shia town of Basra suggests that Britain, burned once, now wants no part of a bigger, widening war.

For nearly three decades, Shia Iraqis found safe haven in Iran's holy cities. For them, during the darkest days of Saddam's repression, Iran, while not home, was a place of refuge. The ties many of the new regime feel towards Iran are personal, familial, historical, and spiritual. An attack on such a country might incite Shias across the region.

There are, of course, other indications of a will to more war.

Vincent Cannistraro, an intelligence analyst who once worked for the CIA and the National Security Council, said recently planning is going on, in spite of public disavowals by Defense Secretary Robert Gates. Targets have been selected for a bombing campaign against nuclear sites; it is quite advanced. The military assets to carry this out are being put in place. Cannistraro called these moves incredibly dangerous.

This is war planning.

Another reason? This would be an air war, not a ground war. Ground wars are messyâEURO"what with all those casualties. Air wars by comparison are neat, tidyâEURO"sexy even.

In a way, this explains the method in the madness of the recent surge requests: bring in enough troops to perhaps cowl or destroy the Mahdi Army, a kind of preemptive strike against a force that is allied with Iran.

There is, of course, yet another reason. We've seen it all before. In the build-up to Iraq we had folks from Bush on down saying, "this isn't a war; it's surgical strikes," and the like.

There's a deep fever for war in the American psyche, one which politicians like Nixon, Reagan, Bush I and II understand as a source of great political power and applause. We're now in the throes of a down-cycle of that national trend. Remember the 80-percent-plus
approval ratings for Bush when Iraq II was launched? It seems like 30 years ago!

Now it seems we know better. Or do we?

Â(c) COPYRIGHT 2007 MUMIA ABU-JAMAL