Behind the attack on Iran, demand for weapons

Some of the new revelations gained from the content of diplomatic cables allege the US spied on leaders in the UN and made disparaging remarks about certain heads of state. Hardly earth shattering stuff. However, what is revealing is the reaction by the US to the leaks.

Back in the 1920s, US commentator Walter Lippmann believed that ‘responsible men’ make decisions and had to be protected from the bewildered herd — the public. The public should be subdued, obedient and distracted from what is really happening. Screaming patriotic slogans and fearing for their lives, they should be admiring with awe the leaders who save them from destruction and provide peace.

Based on such a notion of democracy, it’s not too surprising that officials express outrage whenever Wikileaks exposes irresponsibleness and cuts through the charade to provide the public with a glimpse of ‘democracy’ in action. The ‘bewildered herd’ then becomes a little less bewildered and leaders become jittery.

Hillary Clinton stated that the latest disclosures are not just an attack on US foreign policy, but also an attack on the international community, the alliances and partnerships, the conventions and negotiations that safeguard global security and advance economic prosperity. Peter King, a Republican congressman claimed that WikiLeaks should even be classified as a terrorist organisation.

Of course, what western politicians really mean with such lofty talk of ‘international community’, ‘global safety’ and ‘prosperity’ is the West, its security and the economic interests of the corporations who are really running the show. If Hillary Clinton’s was a predictable establishment reaction, then Peter Assange, founder of Wikileaks, responded by saying that abusive, titanic organisations when found out, in true Lippman-esque style, grasp at all sorts of ridiculous straws to try and distract the public from the true nature of the abuse.

But perhaps what is most disconcerting about the current batch of leaks is the manner by which politicians are playing fast and loose with the lives of millions of people by plying the wares of the arms trade. What’s more, the murky world of arms dealing seems to dislike public scrutiny, at least if comments comments by Prince Andrew of the UK are anything to go by.

One particular cable shows him criticising British anti-corruption investigators, who demonstrated ‘idiocy’ in almost scuttling a UK arms deal with Saudi Arabia. He also criticised journalists too for poking “their noses everywhere” — for investigating the deal. How dare they! Unsurprisingly, the investigation into alleged corruption was dropped after it was decided that ‘national security’ was at risk.

However, what is more revealing and troubling is the military shopping list that Wikileaks has exposed, much of which centres on West Asia. For instance, the crown prince of Bahrain, seems to support US missile defence systems aimed at Iran. Then there is the the chief of staff of the UAE’s armed forces who told an American ambassador he wanted the US government to deploy Patriot batteries to the UAE, fearful that an Israeli strike on Iran would result in a retaliatory attack on other countries by Iran.

Demand for UAVs

US state-of-the-art unmanned aerial (UAVs) vehicles were also in demand. One cable said Turkey requested the sale of armed UAVs. The UAE also wanted UAVs to protect itself against Iran.

It’s a fine balancing act though. For instance, the Israeli government expressed concern over the F-15 sale to Saudi Arabia and additional concerns about stationing these new aircraft at Tabuk airfield, close to the Israeli border. At the same meeting, the Israelis complained about the sale to Jordan of air-to-air missiles that could pose a threat to Israeli warplanes.

Yemen, according to one cable, asked the US for 12 armed helicopters, and Turkey not only wants to buy US-designed military helicopters but an international version of the Black Hawk helicopter too.

Disclosures discuss weapons sales between other countries as well. A message to the US Embassy in Paris notes US anger over a French company’s sales to China because the technology is supposedly being passed on to Iran. And then there is Armenia, which sold armaments to Iran that were subsequently used against the US in Iraq.

Apart from huge deals that hit the news, much of this sinister merry go round of pass the death-laced parcel remains low key and under the radar of public attention for the most part. It’s great business, and fears manufactured about the regional bogeyman, Iran, are the stuff of dreams for arms trade profiteers. Far from saving us from destruction, as Lippman wanted the public to regard the democratic system as doing, the powerful arms lobby seems to be cranking up tensions and leading us towards it, while happily walking off with both politicians and money stuffed in its collective back pocket.

While claims by President Ahmadinejad about the leaks being manipulated by the US to increase anti-Iran sentiment and gain political capital must certainly be taken seriously, the ongoing series of disclosures do little to engender public confidence in the machinations of political leaders.

Under the cloak that such disclosures ‘cost lives’, Hillary Clinton and others are trying to win the moral high ground against Assange and Wikileaks. But it’s a ground they surrendered long ago when the US decided to embark on wars that cost the lives of hundreds of thousands in West Asia. What they really mean is US lives. Then again, they have wasted so many of those too — in the military: just “dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns,” as Henry Kissinger is reported to have once stated.