http://wpherald.com/articles/3535/1/UPI-Interview-Fomer-NATO-Commander-Gen-Wesley-Clark/Iran-should-take-US-warnings-seriously.html

UPI Interview: Fomer NATO Commander Gen. Wesley Clark


By Dalal Saoud
United Press International

JEDDAH, Saudi Arabia -- A gradual withdrawal from Iraq, a diplomatic 
offensive in the Middle East and dialogue with Iran over its nuclear 
program could help introduce needed change of policy according to NATO's 
former Supreme Allied Commander Europe Gen. Wesley Clark.

Clark, who took part in the negotiations that ended the Bosnia conflict 
and led the 19-nation NATO force to end Serb ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, 
cautioned Iran over the U.S. recent military build-up in the Gulf region 
and its determination to prevent Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

"If I were the Iranians, I would take very seriously the statements made 
by the (Bush) administration and the presence of the aircraft carriers 
(in the Gulf)," Clark said during an interview with United Press 
International, while attending the Jeddah Economic Forum.

Asked if the U.S. reinforcements in the Gulf signal preparations for a 
possible strike against Iran, he said: "Certainly, it's an indication, a 
potential... If I were the Iranians, I would take very seriously the 
U.S. capabilities present in the region."

Tehran, he said, needs not to expect "that the world is going to 
acquiesce an Iranian nuclear weapon. It's up to Iran to solve this 
diplomatically and the U.S. and Iran should have a dialogue."

Although Iranian officials repeatedly emphasized their peaceful nuclear 
activities and denied aiming at acquiring a nuclear bomb, Clark warned: 
"As Iran is persistent in trying to conceal its nuclear weapons program 
and continues to work toward acquiring a nuclear weapon, then the 
problem cannot be solved."

The question remains: Would President George W. Bush strike Iran despite 
the failure in Iraq? And would attacking Iran serve its purpose?

Such a strike "depends on a number of factors", according to Clark. "I 
think there is a military option but it's not an attractive option. The 
right solution is a diplomatic solution. Iran needs to understand that 
it's much safer and it would be able to pursue its aims much more 
effectively if it doesn't have a nuclear weapon."

While difficult to predict Bush's next move against Iran, Clark said the 
Democrats, who now control the Congress, would try to influence his 
decision by insisting that the U.S. president "completes his process of 
dialogue and uses every other alternative before he resorts to military 
force."

However, restoring trust and building up a minimum level of confidence 
is needed to help pave the way for such a dialogue.

Iran and Syria, which felt threatened when the U.S. controlled Iraq 
after toppling President Saddam Hussein and his Baath Party in 2003, 
indeed had no intention to facilitate Washington's mission.

"It shouldn't be a surprise that they (Iran and Syria) work against the 
interests of the U.S. because they knew once the U.S. succeeded in Iraq, 
they would be next," said Clark. "It is normal to believe that these two 
regimes will resist being changed."   He explained that Iran "has played 
a very nuanced game permitting the U.S. to attack (Iraq) and take off 
the Baathist threat while building up its own protective force through 
the militias and through its influence inside the political structure in 
Iraq... They took advantage of the chaos and confusion of the aftermath 
of the (2003) American military action."

According to the former NATO commander, who was also a Democratic 
candidate for U.S. presidential elections in 2004, the U.S. action in 
Iraq "has been a source of instability in the region" and this problem 
could not be solved "just by force of arms."

"What we really needed to do in Iraq and the region was not a troop 
surge but a diplomacy surge," he said. "It takes diplomacy and an 
expanded political push in the region to resolve this problem.... But I 
don't think President Bush is yet taking important steps he needs to 
take in terms of promoting a dialogue in the region."

Fears of the Iraq conflict expanding to other countries are well justified.

"I think Lebanon in particular is in peculiar position," Clark noted, 
expressing hope that the Lebanese government of Prime Minister Fouad 
Siniora will hold and Iran-backed Hezbollah turns into "a political 
movement... as it can't be permitted" to keep its weapons independently 
of the government.

What is the best way out for the U.S. in Iraq?

A slow withdrawal coupled with a diplomatic offensive that changes the 
dynamics in the region "from a dynamic of conflict to a dynamic of 
economic development" might be the answer, Clark explained.

Would a war break out between Syria and Israel?

"I would be surprised if there is war between Syria and Israel because 
Syria knows what the consequences of this would be," the 63-year-old 
retired general said. "I don't think Syria would initiate a war in order 
to restart the peace talks. They would be playing a very dangerous game."

Feeling the growing dangers in the region, Saudi Arabia -- a close U.S. 
ally -- stepped in, initiating a dialogue with Iran to avoid a widening 
of the Iraq conflict, helping promote a peaceful resolution of the 
Iranian nuclear problem and its alleged "hegemonic attempts" in the region.

It would be hard to predict whether the Saudi effort will succeed at 
this crucial time and while the stakes of the region plunging into a 
destructive Shiite-Sunni confrontation are high.

"I think the Saudi role is potentially critical in this region. It is 
very important in the sense of helping bring neighbors together to 
discuss common issues," Clark said.

But as long as Bush maintains his "Stay the Course" policy, no big 
changes are expected until the next U.S. presidential elections.

+++



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups.  See the new email design.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lOt0.A/hOaOAA/yQLSAA/TySplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com
  Subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Reply via email to