Iran Snap Analysis: Walking Back from War?

A Bush-Era Cartoon on Drumbeats of WarA week ago, the media was dominated by the prospect of an Israeli strike and Tehran's reaction. But then President Obama, publicly and privately, let visiting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu know of Washington's line against this. The Supreme Leader, within his rhetoric of defiance, welcomed Obama's position with Israel, and the European Union accepted Tehran's offer for a resumption of talks about the Iranian nuclear programme.

So yesterday the Associated Press, rather than post yet another warning of Iran's threat, published this feature, "Iran's UN Fact Sheet: Weapons Track Not Confirmed", with the introduction:

Nine years ago, the United States invaded Iraq after telling the world that Saddam Hussein had covert weapons programs that could build nuclear arms. In the end, nothing was found. Today, acting on similar fears, Israel is threatening to attack Iran.

While much is known about Iran's nuclear activities from U.N. inspection visits, significant questions remain uncertain, fueling fears of worst-case scenarios and calls for new Mideast military action.

This much shapes the anxieties: In just one decade, Iran's modest nuclear program has expanded into a mature operation that some experts say has the capability to produce a warhead in less than a year.

And this much is verified: Iran has the equipment and raw materials to produce the fissile core of a nuclear weapon, as does any country that can produce its own reactor fuel.

But there is no evidence that the Islamic Republic has taken steps in that direction.

Finally, this much is suspected: The U.N. nuclear watchdog says there are credible indications Iran is researching the intricate technology needed to turn a core into an actual bomb. Tehran denies it, and there's not conclusive proof or any sign it has actually succeeded, but the research alone if confirmed would be seen as clear proof of Iran's intentions.

There is still the get-out clause that Tehran could be deceiving and preparing for a nuclear weapon, but the balance of the article --- especially that warning analogy with Iraq 2003 --- is against an attack based on an exaggeration of Iran's capabilities.

National Public Radio also moves towards a recognition, and thus an exposure, of the push for war with its question:

In recent weeks and days, the divisions over how to deal with Iran and its nuclear program have sharpened. The only undisputed fact is that Iran is developing a nuclear energy program, but after that things get murky.

Israel and some European countries believe Iran is moving toward a nuclear weapons program, but U.S. intelligence agencies disagree. Israel argues that a nuclear-armed Iran poses an existential threat, and there's much speculation in the media about a possible Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear sites.

Are we heading toward a self-fulfilling prophecy or is some of it strategic bluster designed to spook Iran?

This could change, of course. The preparations for the nuclear discussions, likely to take place in Turkey in early April, could break down. More likely, the talks will lead nowhere, with Iran blaming the "West" of intransigence and the US and partners claiming that Tehran was only stalling with no intention of a serious offer.

Israel --- and some Obama Administration officials and many Congressmen who complement the Israeli approach of Threaten First, No Talks Laer --- may be able to re-gain the public initative for war. Even during the thaw this week, the story was being put out of an Israeli request for Amerian bunker-busting bombs and refuelling plane.

For now, however, there appears to be a month-long pause in most drumbeats of war. What will happen during that time, and after? Well, that's a far more difficult question to evaluate.