Nonbelligerent Iran v. Nuclear Armed and Dangerous Israel
by Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org – Home – Stephen Lendman)
The agenda of both countries are world’s apart. Iran is the region’s leading advocate of peace, stability, and mutual cooperations with other nations.
It fully observes its JCPOA and NPT obligations. It resists major power pressures, maintains its sovereign independence, and opposes neocolonialism, especially US-led Western domination.
It’s been a Non-Aligned Movement member since its 1979 revolution. At the NAM summit in Havana that year, Fidel Castro said the following:
The NAM’s purpose is to ensure “the national independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity, and security of non-aligned countries (in their) struggle against imperialism, colonialism, neocolonialism, racism, and all forms of foreign aggression, occupation, domination, interference or hegemony as well as as against great power and bloc politic.”
Like Cuba, Bolivarian Venezuela, and other nations unwilling to abandon their sovereign independence to a higher power in Washington, the Islamic Republic of Iran’s adherence to these principles made it a prime US target for regime change — notably because of its world’s third largest oil reserves and second largest natural gas deposits, along with being Israel’s main regional rival and challenging its revanchist aims.
Israel is nuclear-armed and dangerous, developing these weapons since the mid-1950s, its well-known open secret the official narrative conceals.
Its ruling authorities refused to sign the NPT or abide by its provisions. Nor do they permit IAEA inspections of their nuclear facilities.
According to the Federation of American Scientists and other experts, its nuke warheads can be launched by air, ground, sea, or sub-surface — able to strike targets in the Middle East and elsewhere.
It’s believed the Jewish state also has 100 or more laser-guided mini-nuke bunker-buster bombs — able to penetrate and destroy underground targets.
According to the establishment front organization Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), “US inspections of Israeli nuclear sites in the 1960s proved largely fruitless because of restrictions placed on the inspectors.”
The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s Joseph Circincione earlier said (e)veryone knows about Israel’s bombs in the closet.”
Yet the West fails to contest their threat to regional peace and security.
Iran’s nuclear program has no military component and never did, its ruling authorities wanting these weapons eliminated everywhere.
Unlike the US and Israel, permitting no inspections of their nuclear weapons sites, Iran’s legitimate nuclear facilities are the world’s most heavily monitored, its ruling authorities fully cooperating with IAEA inspectors.
Iran’s ballistic, cruise, and other missiles are solely for self-defense, its program fully complying with its obligations under Security Council Res. 2231, unanimously affirming the JCPOA nuclear deal.
No Iranian ballistic or other missiles are designed to carry nuclear warheads, conventional ones alone. No evidence suggests otherwise.
Neither SC 2231 or any other SC resolutions prohibit Tehran’s legitimate ballistic missile development, testing and production.
The right to self-defense is inviolable under international law, UN Charter Article 51 stating:
“Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.”
The right of self-defense pertains solely to deterring armed attacks, preventing future ones after initial assaults, or reversing the consequences of enemy aggression.
At the same time, force must conform to the principles of necessity, distinction, and proportionality — what US-dominated NATO and Israel ignore when waging preemptive wars.
Necessity permits only attacking military targets. Distinction pertains to distinguishing between civilian and military ones.
Proportionality prohibits disproportionate force, likely to damage nonmilitary sites and/or harm civilian lives.
A fourth consideration requires prevention of unnecessary suffering, especially affecting noncombatants.
Anticipatory self-defense is permitted when compelling evidence shows likely imminent threats or further attacks after initial ones.
Iran hasn’t attacked another country in centuries — what US-dominated NATO and Israel do repeatedly.
According to Israeli media Friday, the IDF conducted a missile test, launched from a military base in central Israel, a statement saying:
“The defense establishment (sic) conducted a launch test a few minutes ago of a rocket propulsion system from (its Palmachim airbase south of Tel Aviv). The test was scheduled in advance and was carried out as planned.”
The Times of Israel reported the following:
“Israel does not publicly acknowledge having ballistic missiles in its arsenals, though according to foreign reports, the Jewish state possesses a nuclear-capable variety known as the Jericho that has a multi-stage engine, a 5,000-kilometer range and is capable of carrying a 1,000-kilogram warhead.”
According to Haaretz, Friday’s test came “amid increasing tension between Israel and Iran and was intended to send a clear message.”
Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif slammed Israel’s test, saying the following:
“Israel today tested a nuke-missile, aimed at Iran. E3 (UK, France, and Germany) and US never complain about the only nuclear arsenal in West Asia – armed with missiles actually DESIGNED to be capable of carrying nukes.”
The West has “fits of apoplexy over our conventional and defensive” missiles, capable of carrying conventional warheads alone.
In response to Britain, France, and Germany falsely accusing Iran of breaching SC Res. 2231 by developing “nuclear-capable ballistic missiles” by letter to UN Secretary General Guterres, Zarif responded sharply, tweeting:
“Latest E3 (Britain, France and Germany) letter to UNSG on missiles is a desperate falsehood to cover up their miserable incompetence in fulfilling bare minimum of their own #JCPOA obligations.”
“If E3 want a modicum of global credibility, they can begin by exerting sovereignty rather than bowing to US bullying.”
On Monday, he tweeted: “@SecPompeo once again admits that US #Economic Terrorism on Iran is designed to starve, and in the case of medical supplies, kill our innocent citizens.”
Earlier to the E3 and EU, he tweeted: “To my EU/E3 Colleagues
“Fully upheld commitments under JCPOA…YOU? Really?
Just show ONE that you’ve upheld in the last 18 months”
On Wednesday, US under secretary of war for policy John Rood falsely accused Iran of building up a “hidden arsenal of short-range ballistic missiles in Iraq,” adding:
“We also continue to see indications, and for obvious reasons I won’t go into the details, that potential Iranian aggression could occur.”
A Wednesday NYT report, reading like a Pentagon press release, said:
“Iran has used the continuing chaos in Iraq to build up a hidden arsenal of short-range ballistic missiles in Iraq (sic), part of a widening effort to try to intimidate the Middle East and assert its power (sic)” — citing unnamed US military and intelligence officials, adding:
Iran “pose(s) a threat to American allies and partners in the region, including Israel and Saudi Arabia, and could endanger American troops (sic).”
Phony claims about any Iranian nuclear and regional threat posed by the nation were debunked time and again.
Tehran has military advisors in Syria and Iraq at the behest of their ruling authorities. They’re involved in combatting US-supported ISIS and likeminded jihadists.
The Islamic Republic threatens no other nations. US-dominated NATO and Israel threaten humanity.
VISIT MY WEBSITE: stephenlendman.org (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at email@example.com.
My newest book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”