Iran’s energy crisis?
Zeeshan Hasan has an interesting post on a recent Herald Tribune article, which claims that Iran needs nuclear power because of mismanagement of its oil industry. This isn’t the first time I’ve heard this - I remember reading it in a couple of British newspapers in the past. If this is the case, then it’s something the media needs to publicise as the US, Britain, the EU and others who are trying to stop Iran from getting nuclear power will not admit something like this as it would give Iran perceived legitimacy with the public.
The article on the Liberal Islam blog is here.
Posted
Saturday, January 13th, 2007 @ 7:42 am
Filed in middle east, politics
Permalink URL | Trackback URL | 
Comments on this post
Share post on
del.icio.us | 
Facebook | 
Reddit | 
Twitter
StumbleUpon | 
Ma.gnolia | 
Digg
Further reading
These posts may be related to the one above:
Add to browser search bar
January 13th, 2007 at 8:11 am
Cool, my first trackback =)
January 13th, 2007 at 8:13 am
I’m sure you’ll get a lot more - your blog’s really interesting
January 13th, 2007 at 11:44 am
What a wonderful world it would be if that were true, but, alas, Iran cannot wipe Israel off the map without a Nuclear bomb.
January 13th, 2007 at 11:48 am
Likewise, Israel can’t wipe Iran off the map without a nuclear bomb, which is why they have them. If Israel has the right to have the bomb for defence, surely Iran does too?
January 13th, 2007 at 10:27 pm
I must admit that I’m cynical about all this Iranian nuclear threat stuff, it seems to me that this is far more likely to be about regional dominance. The US catastrophe in Iraq has handed the Iranians a fairly sizeable strategic gain on a plate and you know the neo-cons won’t sit still for that. The Iranian oil industry is crumbling primarily because of US sanctions. The amount of foreign direct investment needed to renew their infrastructure just isn’t there due to the sanctions, so they can’t pump oil at anything like their capacity.
My guess is this is all another con-job like Saddam’s WMD, intended to provide a rationale for starting a war with Iran, so that the US military can smash up their air-force and navy to facilitate a Contra type programme aimed at regime change.
January 14th, 2007 at 11:54 am
I agree with everything you say in the first paragraph. I disagree with pretty much everything you say in the second.
Yes, it may be a con-job, but it’s nothing to do with starting a war in Iran. The US military is far too thinly spread right now, and Bush wouldn’t dare anyway because Iraq has destroyed any chance he has of convincing the American public to go to war again any time soon. Rather, it’s about ensuring that Israel keeps the upper hand in the Middle East.
January 14th, 2007 at 8:19 pm
Well, what I’m concerned about is that they’ve found a way around that little problem. I wasn’t suggesting that the US would invade. I was suggesting that Israel would mount an attack and that Bush would then use US air power to react to any Iranian retaliation, or indeed anything that could be portrayed as an Iranian retaliation, by blowing up their Air-Force, Navy and Republican Guard facilities.
That way the initial attack is portrayed as Israel responding to an existential threat, so the Democrats won’t dare say one word of criticism, and Bush’s order to flatten their military will only come after the Iranian response to the Israeli attack has given him an excuse.
January 14th, 2007 at 8:49 pm
I’m not quite sure how that relates to Iran having nuclear weapons, though.
The US stopping Iran from getting nuclear weapons would actually lessen the possibility of the situation you describe. If Iran didn’t have nuclear weapons, there would be less clear incentive for Israel to attack and thus Iran would be perceived to be more “in the right” if it defended itself.
However if Iran did get nuclear weapons, Israel could claim if it attacked that it was a pre-emptive strike to defend itself, and the US would have more basis for attacking Iran.
So by that logic - that it’s all a con-job so that Israel can attack Iran and then the US can join in - it would actually be better for the US if Iran got nuclear weapons so that it had some justification for attacking it.
Still, I think that’s all a bit of a conspiracy theory. Neither side is actually stupid enough to start a war, whatever they may both make out.