Iran, Israel and the USA

How to prevent the war that is becoming more likely?
TFF Board member who has visited Iran a number of times the last few years

The threat of a war involving Iran, Israel and USA is discussed with increasing intensity. At this time an attack by Israel is seen as the most likely risk.

Do I, decidedly not an expert, have the right to say that most contributions are lacking in depth and there is little attempt to understand the other parties? I say so, and I hope to be proven wrong.

Of the three parties, the intentions of Iran is the target of most scrutiny. Israel is considered mostly according to the preconceptions of the writer, while the USA, surprisingly, is often seen as a reacting force, without a clear agenda of it own.

The situation of Iran

Since the time of the Shah, Iran has developed a nuclear program that has become a centerpiece of national pride. For domestic reasons the program cannot be cancelled, at least not as a response to pressure from other countries.

Any nuclear weapons free country, which runs uranium enrichment, can at any time decide to leave the Non-proliferation Treaty, send the IAEA inspectors out of the country and proceed to make nuclear weapons. This applies to e.g. Japan, Brazil and Germany – and of course to Iran. To make a primitive uranium bomb of the type which destroyed Hiroshima is not complicated. A nuclear warhead for a missile will take longer, but much of the preparations can be done at any time. These aspects are discussed in recent articles by e.g. Jonathan Power on this TFF Themes and Associates Blog.

Within the leadership of Iran – and that is a very complex structure – there are likely to be different opinions about how far to proceed on the path to become a “virtual nuclear weapon state”. If they go too far, the risk of an attack from Israel or the USA will increase.

An attack by Iran on Israel would be an almost guaranteed suicide. The subsequent retaliation on Iran by a US military attack would be as thorough as devastating. Are we really to believe that the leaders of Iran intend or plan to call down such a devastation upon their own country and citizens as well as take the high risk that they themselves and their families will get killed? There are those who believe so, believe that these leaders are all suicidal fanatics. I for one disagree.

The intentions of Israel

Will Israel attack Iran? In a recent long text in the New York Times, Ronen Bergman, a journalist with good contacts in Israel, reports on several private conversations with the Israeli Minister of Defence, Ehud Barak. The minister believes there is a serious threat of an attack from Iran. He, surprisingly, does not discuss the reasons for that conclusion. And Minister Barak seems to prepare for a preemptive attack by Israel on Iran, probably in this year of 2012.

Given the limited range of the Israeli air force and missiles, only some of the widely dispersed nuclear facilities in Iran could be bombed. Nuclear weapons would not be used. An attack on the facility for uranium enrichment in Natanz is likely to release substantial amounts or radioactivity. Under certain weather conditions, the radioactive fallout could affect the population of the nearby city of Isfahan, with more than three million people. Would it be possible to see Israel as a civilized country after this?

A recent poll in Israel shows that a majority of the people would accept to give up Israel’s nuclear weapons if Iran stops it nuclear weapons program. This opinion should be expressed at the meeting for a Middle East Zone free of weapons of mass destruction this coming fall. Will the Israeli government respect this opinion of its people?

The American agenda

What are the plans of the USA? The protection of Israel is of course important. I hope and assume, without much evidence, that the White House is advising the Israeli leaders strongly against an attack on Iran. But what pressure can President Obama put on Israel, particularly now in an election year? If there is a threat of retaliation from Iran after an Israeli attack, USA will attack the Iranian air force and missile bases. Israel knows this. So does Iran.

Given the enormous military presence of the USA in the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea, with two or maybe even three aircraft carriers, Iran would think twice before retaliating against Israel. But even if they abstain the humiliation of the military and the political leaders of the mighty Iran would have serious long lasting consequences. Peace will then be more distant than ever. The groups that see Israel as the cancer of the Middle East will be strengthened and increase their attacks. While the USA might achieve an increased stature among the dictators in the area, such as in Saudi Arabia and perhaps Pakistan, it will lose whatever respect which remains in the democratic groups who brought the Arabian Spring.

But there is more on the US agenda. The Americans have not forgotten the Embassy Hostage drama in 1979. Resentment after a humiliation can last long. But first of all, it is necessary, in the minds of the Anglo-American leaders, to stop Iran from becoming a strong independent power in the area. The West, mostly Britain and USA, have for a century or more tried repeatedly – and at times successfully – to subdue Iran. The Iranian population on their side has not forgotten that these two powers removed the democratically elected Prime Minister Mossadeq in 1953. Today the USA keeps up this subversive work with rather extensive infiltration by agents hired by the CIA, trying to instigate a revolt from minority national groups in the country.

The sanctions forced by the US may be more an attempt to provoke a regime change rather than to stop the nuclear program. It is not clear whether the sanctions are effective in this regard; more likely, they’ll rather tend to unify the country behind the leaders, as has been the case in Cuba. Fidel Castro would not have survived without the US sanctions.

Nuclear weapons are not deterrents; they are a cause of war

In the preparations for the attack on Iraq, President Bush and Secretary of State Colin Powell lied to the American people telling tales of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Had not “the loud of a nuclear weapon detonation over Manhattan” been invoked, the American people would probably not have accepted the attack on Iraq. Today the appearance of a nuclear threat from Iran serves as a pretext for the US military escalation in the area, and the result may be war.

Also, we see how the nuclear weapons of Israel in no way increase the security of the country. The Israeli population seems to understand this, and they understand that the best use they can have of their nukes is to use them as a bargaining chip against the nuclear program of Iran: We give up our nukes, you stop making any. Great deal!

How to prevent war against Iran?

The war can be avoided! War is started by men, and can be prevented by men – and by women. Here are my pro-peace proposals and I hope to stimulate others to advance their proposals in the comments field below and elsewhere.

1. War is not an option!
War, initiated by any party, must be avoided. No threats of war shall be stated. In the end threats may have to be followed by action, even if this was not the intention.

2. Begin negotiations!
At present we only see coercion: If you, Iran, do not stop your nuclear program, we will cause economic ruin for your country, etc. Negotiations should offer ease of sanctions, trade and diplomatic recognition.

3. Iran should be allowed to continue its uranium enrichment program, but under close surveillance from the IAEA according to an Additional Protocol.
The recent proposal by Pierre Goldschmith of the Carnegie foundation is a good example of how this could work (The Iranian Nuclear Issue: Achieving a Win-Win Diplomatic Solution)

4. The West should stop its the attempts to overthrow the present regime.
The young people of Iran will do that themselves.

5. USA and Israel should end the terrorist acts.
They should stop killing Iranian citizens inside their own country and stop the cyber warfare exemplified by the Stuxnet cyber virus.

6. Iran should end its support of terrorist groups that attack Israel.

7. Iran should end its talks of hatred against Israel.
The Iranian leaders should make it absolutely clear that they will not attack Israel, except in the case that Iran is attacked by Israel.

8. Iran should again accept a far-reaching Additional Protocol for the inspection regime of IAEA.

9. USA should stop its coercion of the IAEA.

10. Iran should ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban treaty, thus setting a good example for the USA.

11. The establishment of a the Middle East as a Nuclear Weapons-Free Zone is absolutely essential for the future of peace in the region and the wider world.

In summary: All options are not on the table! Pre-emptive war is a war crime.

Medical education and professional career

Share

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Posts

Peace is promoted by constructive proposals and dialogue Four preceding PressInfos have expressed concern over — and criticised — the ongoing, militarisation of the EU. Some will say: but there are no alternatives. We believe that there are always alternatives, that democracies are characterised by alternatives and choice, and that openly discussed alternatives will improve the quality and legitimacy of society’s decision–making. In addition, it is an intellectual and moral challenge to not only criticise but also be constructive. If we only tell people that we think they are wrong, they are not likely to listen. However, if we say: what are your views on this set of ideas and steps? — we may sometimes engage them in dialogue and sow a seed. Most people in power circles live their daily lives in in a time frame and a social space where certain ideas, viewpoints and concepts are just not...
Photos © TFF 2000 Read PressInfo 90 “Lift the Sanctions and Bring More Aid to Yugoslavia” See Pictures from Belgrade © TFF 2000 Please reprint, copy, archive, quote or re-post this item, but please retain the source.
Av FRANK SØHOLM GREVIL 16 augusti 2004  Vi er nu nået til tredje akt i det absurde teaterstykke, der i analogi med de store skueprocesser i Moskva 1936-38 er blevet døbt ‘Grevil-sagen’. Første akt bestod i min anonyme fremlæggelse af egenhændigt nedklassificerede rapporter i Berlingske Tidende i februar og marts. Andet akt udgjordes af min fremtræden med navn og billede i Information i april samt den efterfølgende mediestorm, som uden min direkte medvirken kostede en forsvarsminister taburetten samt en sigtelse for brud på tavshedspligten. Tredje akt bliver en retssag, hvor jeg står tiltalt for at have overtrådt straffelovens bestemmelser om uberettiget videregivelse eller udnyttelse af fortrolige oplysninger. Statsanklageren har ovenikøbet valgt at påberåbe sig særligt skærpende omstændigheder. Da jeg aldrig har modtaget betaling for at stille rapporterne til rådighed eller lade mig interviewe, må det skærpende bestå i, at “videregivelsen eller udnyttelsen er sket under sådanne omstændigheder, at det påfører...

Recent Articles

Jan Oberg May 15, 2026 Go to this Fox News page and scroll the whole way down: President Donald Trump tells the world that his meeting with President Xi Jinping yielded a lot of very concrete political and economic results – of course, only where the Chinese side, according to him, agreed with him. He does not mention the Taiwan issue, but Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, says that it did not feature prominently in their talks and that the US policy on Taiwan has not changed. Then go to China Daily – or Global Times – and you will see that for the Chinese it is framework, principles, structure of cooperation etc. that matters – all embedded in the overall idea of “constructive bilateral relationship of strategic stability.” Nowhere is any concrete agreement or deal – all that Trump refers to – mentioned. At the general level, this gives you insights into the very different social...
Lena Petrova of “World Affairs In Context” with more than half a million subscribers on YouTube wanted to explore what a peace researcher like me has to say about, among other things, the First and the Second Cold War and why eethics has disappeared from politics. I am particularly happy about this conversation that also yielded an amazing number of very appreciative comments on YouTube. No doubt, people are longing for alternatives, including peace perspectives.
The MIMAC – Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex – drives the world’s rampant militarism and wars without end. Here is a short reflection of how it works against all interests of humanity. #5 deals with why there is no real enemy or threat images/analysis. It’s all ex-post constructions. And, btw, theTFF Peace Pulse is now on Rumble.

TFF on Substack

Discover more from TFF Transnational Foundation & Jan Oberg.

Most Popular

Jan Oberg May 15, 2026 Go to this Fox News page and scroll the whole way down: President Donald Trump tells the world that his meeting with President Xi Jinping yielded a lot of very concrete political and economic results – of course, only where the Chinese side, according to him, agreed with him. He does not mention the Taiwan issue, but Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, says that it did not feature prominently in their talks and that the US policy on Taiwan has not changed. Then go to China Daily – or Global Times – and you will see that for the Chinese it is framework, principles, structure of cooperation etc. that matters – all embedded in the overall idea of “constructive bilateral relationship of strategic stability.” Nowhere is any concrete agreement or deal – all that Trump refers to – mentioned. At the general level, this gives you insights into the very different social...
Lena Petrova of “World Affairs In Context” with more than half a million subscribers on YouTube wanted to explore what a peace researcher like me has to say about, among other things, the First and the Second Cold War and why eethics has disappeared from politics. I am particularly happy about this conversation that also yielded an amazing number of very appreciative comments on YouTube. No doubt, people are longing for alternatives, including peace perspectives.
The MIMAC – Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex – drives the world’s rampant militarism and wars without end. Here is a short reflection of how it works against all interests of humanity. #5 deals with why there is no real enemy or threat images/analysis. It’s all ex-post constructions. And, btw, theTFF Peace Pulse is now on Rumble.
Read More
Screenshot-2026-05-15-103534
Jan Oberg May 15, 2026 Go to this Fox News page and scroll the whole way down: President Donald Trump tells the world that his meeting with President Xi Jinping yielded a lot of very concrete political and economic results – of course, only where the Chinese side, according to him, agreed with him. He does not mention the Taiwan issue, but Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, says that it did not feature prominently in their talks and that the US policy on Taiwan has not changed. Then go to China Daily – or Global Times – and you will see that for the Chinese it is framework, principles, structure of cooperation etc. that matters – all embedded in the overall idea of “constructive bilateral relationship of strategic stability.” Nowhere is any concrete agreement or deal – all that Trump refers to – mentioned. At the general level, this gives you insights into the very different social...
Screenshot-2026-05-12-104023
Lena Petrova of “World Affairs In Context” with more than half a million subscribers on YouTube wanted to explore what a peace researcher like me has to say about, among other things, the First and the Second Cold War and why eethics has disappeared from politics. I am particularly happy about this conversation that also yielded an amazing number of very appreciative comments on YouTube. No doubt, people are longing for alternatives, including peace perspectives.
Screenshot-2026-04-13-154551 (2)
The MIMAC – Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex – drives the world’s rampant militarism and wars without end. Here is a short reflection of how it works against all interests of humanity. #5 deals with why there is no real enemy or threat images/analysis. It’s all ex-post constructions. And, btw, theTFF Peace Pulse is now on Rumble.
Screenshot-2026-04-13-154551 (1)
Jan Oberg, TFF director April 28, 2026 In this third TFF Peace Pulse, I make the important distinction between the violence and the conflict that violence is a symptom of. If you want peace, focus on the underlying conflict because that is the key to resolution, peacemaking, and a better future for the parties. The West is obsessed with violence, just look around you – and 90+ per cent of the public debate is about military issues and other violence – totally wasted for peace. These Peace Pulses will only be published here a few times. You will also not find them on YouTube and Vimeo because both platforms have blocked TFF and me; you know, peace is dangerous these days. Most TFF’s videos since 2007 are now on Rumble.
Screenshot-2026-04-13-154551
In contrast to most, we’ll bring alternatives, solutions, hope and strategies for a better future. Times are dangerous, yes, but that only intensifies the need for constructive thinking and action! Jan Oberg, TFF director April 13, 2026 The new TFF Peace Pulse uses video messages in a new way: Max 3-5-minute-long comments, ideas or perhaps mini-lectures, all about peace – positive peace. We launch them today on April 13, 2026 with a carefully crafted visual aesthetic fitting the content. We hope to publish them regularly from now on. We launch Peace Pulse (PP) – for a number of reasons. The world is in chaos, and there are countless reasons to feel concerned, frustrated, even angry. The atmosphere is saturated with doom and gloom, with negative energy and rear‑mirror thinking, while vision, imagination, alternatives, strategies and genuine future‑mindedness remain in short supply. And without them, we simply can’t save the world. Looking at problems from a hundred angles will...
IMG_5165 (1)
PART II — Publishing Peace in a System That Prioritises Militarism Jan Oberg, TFF director April 10, 2026 How TFF Maintains a Daily Voice in a Digital World Built for Noise This article is part of the series “TFF at 40″ and it invites you to learn about Four Decades of Publishing Peace. It takes a look at how a small, people‑financed peace foundation has communicated across four generations of technology — from wax stencils and fax machines to mass email and Substack — and why TFF continues to publish every single day in a system that rewards noise, conflict, and militarism. ◆ What it means to publish peace every single day in a digital system built for 24/7 news and other noise, confrontation, and militarism. How TFF’s independence, continuity, and global readership defy algorithms, donor cycles, and Western media censorhip — and why the Majority World keeps listening. When the...