Untitled Document
Now Introducing, the Office of Iranian Affairs (Formerly Doing Business
as the Office of Special Plans)
According to Laura Rozen of the Los
Angeles Times, the Office of Special Plans has been reincarnated as
the Office of Iranian Affairs, apparently housed in the same Pentagon offices
inhabited by its predecessor and involving some of the same slimy personnel.
Notably, Abram Shulsky, who headed the OSP under Douglas Feith, is
back. His crew will be reporting to none other than Elizabeth Cheney, Assistant
Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, and daughter of the Vice President.
Dick Cheney is generally understood to be the strongest advocate for an attack
on Iran in the administration. (He is also, by the way, architect of Bush's
"signing statements" appended to laws entitling him to ignore them.
He is the man behind the throne, surrounded by neocon acolytes.)
As I wrote last November,
"it is too soon to speak of the 'twilight of the neocons' while [John]
Hannah, [Stephen] Hadley, [William] Luti, [David] Wurmser, Elliott Abrams, John
Bolton, John Negroponte and other neocons remain in power, with [Michale] Ledeen
and [Abram] Shulsky still skulking about."
This was the same month that Democrats staged an abortive mini-rebellion in
the Senate, demanding that the Intelligence Committee's long-delayed Phase II
investigation focusing on Feith's OSP finally get off the ground. But this seems
to have been deliberately delayed by the initiation of a separate in-house investigation
of Feith's office by the Pentagon's inspector general. Feith's successor and
fellow neocon Eric Edelman and Rumsfeld's intelligence chief Stephen Cambone
are supposedly cooperating on that. I wouldn't expect any startling report detailing
the disinformation campaign leading to the Iraq war anytime soon.
Meanwhile, Abram Shulsky, the neocon's neocon, a scholar of Leo Strauss and
Machiavelli, who has written about the application of Strauss's
thought to intelligence, is back. The Straussians of course uphold
the use of disinformation ("noble lies") to prepare the public for
the difficult choices they, the Wise, have made. Already there is evidence
for the deliberate planting of bogus stories planted in the press, such as occurred
in the months leading up to the Iraq attack. Amir Tahiri's report on the front
page of Canada's National Post about a religious dress code adopted by the Iranian
parliament was immediately, eagerly embraced by State Department spokesman Sean
McCormick, who at a May 19 press briefing was asked by James Rozen of Fox News
the following:
QUESTION: On Iran, are you aware or is the Department aware
of published reports stating that the Iranian parliament this week passed
a measure that would require non-Muslims to wear badges that identify them
as such?
MR. MCCORMACK: I have seen the news reports. These have,
I think, recycled over time. There is -- as I understand it, there is a --
some law currently in the parliament, the exact nature of which is unclear,
so I'm not going to try to delve into giving a definitive comment or a detailed
comment about something about which I don't have all the facts.
That said, if you did have such an occurrence, whether it was in Iran or elsewhere,
it would certainly be despicable.
QUESTION: Can I just follow up for a second on it?
MR. MCCORMACK: Go ahead.
QUESTION: You said that it's been something that, to your
understanding, has been recycled over time. How long has the Department been
following it or did you just become aware of these reports today for the first
time?
MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I've seen various news -- similar news
reports and I can't give you the exact dates, you know months ago, and they
seem to be coming up again, based on the progression of -- well, I guess,
for lack of a better term -- law through the Iranian parliament. The exact
nature of that law is a little bit unclear and the exact motivations behind
that are a little unclear. So I can't offer, like I said, a detailed comment
about it.
QUESTION: Two more questions, if I might. What is the --
what kinds of means does the Department have at its disposal for verifying
the passage of laws in the Iranian parliament?
MR. MCCORMACK: Well, certainly we have access to open source
material and we also talk frequently with other countries who have diplomatic
representation in Iran.
QUESTION: And is there an effort underway right now to ascertain
more about this?
MR. MCCORMACK: Yes.
QUESTION: And why would it be despicable, if it were true?
MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I think it has clear echoes, James,
of Germany in the -- under Hitler, so I think that that's pretty clear. But
again, you know, I don't want to delve too deeply into that because we don't
have the facts.
Does anybody else smell the soggy sheets of embedded journalism here? The Canadian
paper was retracting the sensationalistic story even as McCormick spoke. There
is in fact discussion in the Iranian Majlis about a law specifying Islamic dress.
There've been laws about appropriate dress in Iran for better or worse since
the inception of the Islamic Republic, so this is nothing new. But badges? The
disinformationists may have cooked that up recalling an effort by Afghanistan's
Taliban in 2001 to require Hindus to wear yellow badges. Or maybe they were
thinking about their own press badges.
I can just imagine some brainstorming session between the Office of Iranian
Affairs guys and some Judith Miller-types.
"So what else can we do to equate Ahmadinejad to Hitler?"
"How about the dress code law?"
"Well, that's an Islamic thing, like the dress code in Saudi Arabia."
"We could say, badges."
"Badges?"
"You know, like Star of David badges in Nazi Germany."
"Do they really plan badges?"
"No, but remember the Taliban, how they put yellow badges on Hindus
in 2001?"
"Yeah, in Afghanistan."
"People will buy it. They won't distinguish Afghanistan and Iran."
"Yeah, and if the Afghans could do it, the Iranians could."
"And the Germans."
"Yeah, that works. Let's try it."
"The administration will comment on a press report. We'll cover our
ass and say we don't have all the facts. But if it's true, it's awful."
"Follow-up question will prompt the reference to the Nazis."
"Yeah, that's good. Let's get on it."
In the coming weeks I'd expect a rash of false reports emanating from the duplicitous
fear-mongering apparatus straddling the press and the Bush administration as
the western alliance heatedly debates Cheney's plans to attack Iran, as Israel
intensifies its campaign to encourage such an attack, and as U.S. efforts to
legitimatize the use of force through the UN Security Council run their course.
Jorge Hirsch makes a good case for the possibility that the administration will
accuse Iran of spreading bird flu into the west. Yes, it's nuts. (Just as nuts
as the reports by Martin Arostegui in Insight
Magazine after 9-11 suggesting "evidence pointing to [Fidel] Castro's
involvement with the introduction of West Nile virus into the U.S. via migratory
birds." John Bolton and Pat Robertson have used such material to build
a case for regime change in Cuba.)
Justin Raimondo of antiwar.com dissects a report in Israel's most popular newspaper
Yedioth Ahronoth to the effect that the Lebanese Shiite party Hizbollah, aligned
with Iran, plans a terrorist attack on the World Cup soccer tournament in Germany.
Here's another story to watch warily. The Europeans only last year, reluctantly
and under U.S. pressure, added Hizbollah to their list of international terrorist
organizations. But demonizing Hizbollah is key to the U.S. and Israeli policy
of effecting regime change in Syria and Lebanon. The still mysterious assassination
last February of Rafiq Hariri was immediately attributed by U.S. officials to
Hizbollah's patron Syria. Iran is an even more important Hizbollah supporter.
There was a real attack by some Arabs on a sports event in Munich, Germany
in 1972. Palestinian terrorists seized the Israeli athletes' quarters and killed
eleven. Maybe some are thinking, "What if something like that happened
again? People would be so outraged! And if we could blame Iran---well,
enough said!"
The strategy is clear. Define a target as evil. Find some kind of connection
with weapons of mass destruction---chemical, biological, nuclear---or just to
low-tech "terrorism," draw some sort of Hitler parallel and get strategically
placed press people on board. Plant the stories, then cite them as though they
were troubling news to you. Then cite "intelligence"---this mystical
reservoir of wisdom restricted to the elite (rather like the gnosis of ancient
mystery religions)---trusting that the foolish masses will accept it on faith,
at least until the job's all done and the noble lies are inevitably exposed.
You can always scapegoat the intelligence community for any errors. It can't,
by its very nature, resist that scapegoating.
And maybe, just maybe, the neocon-led administration will stage something in
Germany or elsewhere that could serve as another 9-11. In his Universal
Fascism (1995), prominent neocon Michael Ledeen (widely accused of involvement
in the Niger uranium forgery) wrote, "In order to achieve the most noble
accomplishments, the leader may have to 'enter into evil.' This is the chilling
insight that has made Machiavelli so feared, admired and challenging... [W]e
[ordinary people] are rotten.... It's true that we can achieve greatness if,
and only if, we are properly led."
What I'd call "proper leadership" at this point is calling
for regime change in this country, through impeachment or more radical methods.
There is a race for time, a battle to create public opinion, lopsided given
the mainstream press's abject deference to the neocon project. There is no emotion
stronger than fear, and the Bush administration so clumsy about everything else
deploys this weapon with extraordinary deftness. In opposition the antiwar movement
at its best wields critical reason, humanism, truth. However powerful the lies,
that truth will ultimately out.
Sooner better than later.
Gary Leupp is Professor of History at Tufts University,
and Adjunct Professor of Comparative Religion. He is the author of Servants,
Shophands and Laborers in in the Cities of Tokugawa Japan;
Male Colors: The Construction of Homosexuality in Tokugawa Japan; and
Interracial
Intimacy in Japan: Western Men and Japanese Women, 1543-1900. He is
also a contributor to CounterPunch's merciless chronicle of the wars on Iraq,
Afghanistan and Yugoslavia, Imperial
Crusades.
He can be reached at: gleupp@granite.tufts.edu