As we remember President Bush and Tony Blair have been using the term "rogue states", which was used by Benjamin Netanyahu1 in his speech2 before the National Christian Leadership Conference for Israel3 some three years before the War on Terror, as follows:
"And you can see these rogue states, from North Korea at the edge of Asia, to Iraq and Iran right here, who are creating an unstable and potentially violent and dangerous world for us."This passage was used by G.W. Bush in his "Axis of Evil" speech, and became the basis of the present US Foreign Policy and of its central piece - War on Terror.
This is the policy to be adopted by the US as recommended by Benjamin Netanyahu in his speech at the Jewish Agency Assembly Plenary meetings on 24th June 2001:
"There is a second thing that I would have never said a few years ago, but going around the world and seeing the power of the information revolution, I think there is another possibility as well and that is that the forces of democratization, the forces of pluralism that are sweeping China, that are sweeping Iran, that are sweeping other parts of the world may get at the end, at the very end, also to the Arab regimes. You can see part of that in the Gulf. In the Gulf you see a lot freer Arab world. A lot freer with information and you see the consequences. It is less hostile; it is less aggressive and less fanatical. It is open to internal debate of a kind, limited, very limited.From the above it follows that a regime change in Iran is part of the Netanyahu doctrine, which the Americans are implementing under the label of "War on Terror".
By the way, this debate, this opening up of information is what is happening now, for example in Iran. What you saw last week in Iran is exactly the result of the fact that Iran is not a closed society like say Syria or Iraq. There are 250,000 satellite dishes in Iran and Internet. I once said to the head of the CIA that if he wants to accelerate a change in the regime in Iran, he should forget about standard CIA stuff. He should be using big transformers to broadcast Beverly Hills 2050 and Merril's Place and all that stuff, because that is subversive material. The young people in Iran see the houses and the cars and the nice clothes and they are saying, 'We want to have it too. We want to have a good life too.' That is the tension that ultimately will bring down this Ayatola regime and the Khoumeni regime, it will come down."
We also know that Tony Blair is the chief justifier of War on Terror, and here is an extract from his speech to the US Congress on 2003-07-18:
"The risk is that terrorism and states developing weapons of mass destruction come together. And when people say, 'That risk is fanciful,' I say we know the Taliban supported al-Qaeda. We know Iraq under Saddam gave haven to and supported terrorists. We know there are states in the Middle East now actively funding and helping people, who regard it as God's will in the act of suicide to take as many innocent lives with them on their way to God's judgment."This passage has more practical significance than a mere post factum justification of the war against Iraq by frightening people by an image of terrorists with nuclear bombs strapped to their belts. This is a preparation for justifying further wars as part of the "War on Terror".
Which states Tony Blair sees as the next to be hit in the American "War on Terror" becomes clear from the next paragraph of the same speech:
"Some of these states are desperately trying to acquire nuclear weapons. We know that companies and individuals with expertise sell it to the highest bidder, and we know that at least one state, North Korea, lets its people starve while spending billions of dollars on developing nuclear weapons and exporting the technology abroad.""Some of these states" are not North Korea. North Korea is named as a supplier of nuclear technology, which it already has. "Some of these states are desperately trying to acquire nuclear weapons". So, who are "some of these states"?
President Bush in a statement made after Tony Blair's speech, pointed his finger at Syria and Iran. Iran is on the Netanyahu "rogue states" list. And the US has been bombarding Iran with propaganda broadcasts (the technique suggested by Netanyahu) with the aim of fomenting opposition to the current government. So, is Tony Blair spinning justifications for a war against Iran?
And now the Americans are pressing on Iran to stop it's nuclear program.
Some say that the belligerent posturings towards Iran by the American administration is just posturing, and will not lead to an all out war. But this is what people were saying about Iraq. They were saying: "If Iraq is wise and cooperates with the UN inspectors, then it will avoid war". And the Iraqis did cooperate with the UN inspectors. But, when the US had finished their military preparations for the war against Iraq, the UN inspections were terminated and the war began.
The war against Iraq was part of the War on Terror doctrine and the UN inspections were just a smoke screen to enable the US to justify the war and prepare better for it.
So far the "War on Terror" has been unfolding as per the Netanyahu doctrine:
The difficulties experienced by the Americans in Iraq have prevented them from attacking Iran straight away, and they might even convince them that the whole idea of "War on Terror" is nonsense. But they also might want to invade Iran to distract their electorate from the Iraq failure. After all, a war does whip up patriotic fervor; it is the aftermath that brings with it sobriety. But the aftermath will be after the elections, so the American politicians might be tempted to take a gamble just before the elections, if they feel insecure about being elected.
Thus the next step of the "War of Terror" - the "regime change" in Iran depends on the situation in Iraq and the dynamics of the American presidential elections.
They might carry on with a gradual destabilisation of Iran by fomenting unrest through propaganda, or they might go for an outright war to boost their pre-elections popularity through the our boys factor, the workings of which were demonstrated at the time of the Iraq war.
1) On the role of Benjamin Netanyahu in the development and propagation of the War on Terror doctrine see: The Origins and Development of the War on Terror Doctrine and its Future Prospects.
2) The speech by Benjamin Netanyahu before the National Christian Leadership Conference for Israel on October 5, 1998.
3) The National Christian Leadership Conference for Israel (NCLCI), according to themselves "is a network of Christians from diverse racial, ethnic, political and theological backgrounds, who are united in a shared commitment to the security and well-being of Israel in today's world".