Internecine Squabbles, Part 12,531

by emptywheel

This Newsweek article and accompanying interview is really fun to read. When was the last time, after all, that you've seen such well-executed snark in an MSM publication?

Even one of Rice's fiercest current critics, former U.N. ambassador John Bolton—a key Cheney ally who was her subordinate only a few months ago—says that her views are ascendant in the administration. "I think those who support [the policy of nuclear negotiations with Iran] ... are riding high," Bolton told NEWSWEEK, adding that he left the administration because he believed his hard-line views toward Iran and North Korea were being eclipsed by Rice's State Department (there was also the small matter of the Democrat-controlled Congress refusing to confirm him).[my emphasis]

And such pointed follow-ups?

[Condi] The vice president has never been somebody who tries to do that on the sidelines, behind the scenes. He really doesn't.

Not even when Don Rumsfeld was around?
[Laughs] You asked about when I have been secretary of State.

The story, though, is one we've been seeing a lot lately, particularly given David Wurmser's apparently blatant attempts to scuttle Condi's more reasonable foreign policy. Dick's minions are making a last-ditch attempt to start a war with Iran. The one subject about which I would have hoped the article was more explicit about is the insinuation that Dick's minions are again trying to game intelligence, on this case with regards to arms captured in Afghanistan that might--or might not--come from Iran.

In early April, however, British forces operating under NATO command in Afghanistan's wild-west Helmand province stopped a convoy carrying what appeared to be ordnance of Iranian origin intended for delivery to the Taliban. The explosives bore suspected Iranian markings similar to those found on weapons confiscated from Shiite militias in Iraq—and the Brits intercepted another shipment a month later.

An official familiar with the interagency group's deliberations said that Cheney's aides kept asking what sounded like leading questions, demanding to know whether there was any Iranian entity other than the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps—the state security force Washington accuses of arming Iraqi insurgents—that could be responsible for the arms shipments. Cheney's aides, the official added, appeared less interested in other more mundane items on the Afghanistan policy committee's agenda. British officials who asked for anonymity because of the nature of their work emphasize that they lack hard evidence linking the shipments to the Revolutionary Guards, and that the weapons could just as easily have been bought on the black market in Iran. But according to one official familiar with the intelligence on Iranian interference in Iraq, Cheney earlier this year began exhibiting particular interest in any evidence detailing Tehran's aid to anti-American insurgents there. [my emphasis]

Here's what this says to me: once again (or still?) Cheney is ignoring the plight of Afghanistan. But he's using events there in an attempt to drum up inconclusive intelligence with which he can pressure Condi to give up her negotiations with Iran (and Syria).

Update: I do hope anyone who reads this WaPo article simultaneously reads the Newsweek.

Iran has increased arms shipments to both Iraq's Shiite extremists and Afghanistan's Taliban in recent weeks in an apparent attempt to pressure American and other Western troops operating in its two strategic neighbors, according to senior U.S. and European officials.

In Iraq, Iranian 240mm rockets, which have a range of up to 30 miles and could significantly change the battlefield, have been used recently by Shiite extremists against U.S. and British targets in Basra and Baghdad, the officials said.

This is rather uncharacteristic of Robin Wright. Was she unable to find those saying, "the weapons could just as easily have been bought on the black market"? Because, while I'm sure that the named reporting in the rest of the article is fair (that is--I'm sure Iran would like to sow managed chaos in Iraq. Big surprise there, given how the US has had Iran in its sights for 7 years), the anonymous sourcing describing the rockets as proof of Iranian sponsorship of the Taliban in Afghanistan sure sounds like a bit of Wurmser-tongue to me.

Comments

[nellieh]

Were the rockets for the pre-war aluminum centrufuge tubes? Any information coming from this administration, including the Military, has to be taken with a ton of skepticism. When has anything been what we have been told? NOTHING! What's worse the MSM still doesn't question this spin. If sunshine was permitted on this group, I would predict they wouldn't last until the next election.

[emptywheel]

neelieh

I'd suggest the Newsweek article IS questioning that spin.

[big brother]

They always need a war to stay in power. Centcom has dozens of war models with various states waiting activation. We had a weakened secular government in Iraq and our no fly zone was a deterrent to Irans ambitions Now that his army is paid by the enemy it is up to the nieghbor states to resist Iran or be dominated.
Are we supposed to be grateful to the Repubs for this. It is mind blogging.

[SW]

She payed off Lebanon.

[earlofhuntingdon]

This is bureaucratic warfare. When this ordinarily hidden process is so hotly contested neither side can keep it hidden, it is beyond brutal. This would never happen if Shrub were a CEO. He's not. He doesn't have the facts or a plan or way to get them. He doesn't direct or invigorate his team. He's a vacuum; his space has dimension only when someone else fills it, like Big Dick.

The problem is that Shrub's CEO diet has always been comprised of pre-digested scraps shaped to look like "Commander Guy" and "Decider" biscuits. But the food processor is broken and those who used to be in charge of Shrub's menu don't play well together any more. (Presumably, because their new Congressional sitter is making them pick up and count all their broken toys.)

Will Shrub learn to feed himself? Will he rise to the "greatness thrust upon him"? Or, will he wait frozen on the sidewalk for a winner to emerge from a virtual street brawl among his bureaucrats, then trumpet that winner's advice as his own?

Regardless, that's no way to run a govt or to decide whether we go to war with Iran. If Shrub is frozen to his seat, waiting for his Freudian mom or dad to wipe him and pull his pants up, then Congress will need to intervene and keep Big Dick from starting another war.

[bmaz]

"Will he rise to the greatness thrust upon him"? "If Shrub is frozen to his seat.." No, and he is. This doesn't get any better before January 2009. The only issue is whether we can minimize further damage between now and then. This group will never, NEVER, do the right thing and then follow through on it. Every now and then, they do something actually intelligent, not often mind you but every now and then, then they fuck it up on the follow through. Those are the good times; most all of the time they have really stupid and destructive ideas and manage to make it even worse in the execution.

[Sandy]

The question is -- will Bush/Cheney bomb Iran before they leave office on Jan 20 2009?

I'd be willing to bet yes.

It's all (completely) downhill from there.

[lemondloulou]

Er, can't someone like Robin Wright ask a question of a SAO such as, "Really? Iran supports the Taliban? I thought all along it was Pakistan's ISI?" And isn't that a great irony. The US supports Musharoff to the tune of some zillion dollars and then Musharoff has to buy off certain members of the ISI to keep things off kilter in Afghanistan and in the And then the ISI supported Taliban shoot at NATO troops.

[P J Evans]

Steve Benen at TPM points out that they're pulling this sh*t with Taiwan, too: Cheney's people are pushing independence (never mind what the PRC says about it being cause for shooting) and Condi's people (formerly Powell's people) have to cool things off again.

[squirm]

The explosives bore suspected Iranian markings similar to those found on weapons confiscated from Shiite militias in Iraq...

and

...Cheney's aides kept asking what sounded like leading questions, demanding to know whether there was any Iranian entity other than the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps—the state security force Washington accuses of arming Iraqi insurgents—that could be responsible for the arms shipments

This looks a bit sloppy to me. The "insurgents" are Sunni, no? This story appears to conflate the two. I mean, perhaps the Iranians are arming both sides, but, that would be kinda wacky. If the arms really are showing up in the hands of Shiites and Sunnis,
AND the Taliban, I think the simplest explanation is that these arms are just in wide circulation in the black market.