Full Release - IRmep

•Print Article-American PrOSPOOnline
o
Page 4 of6
There are other competing positions within the Israel-policy community. One Isra~1i official i!l
Washington this summer for diplomatic -meetings discussed regime change in Iran with a reporter
from The American Prospect on the condition th!lt his identity not be disclosed. He believes that
Iran is ripe for democratic revolution, that it has one ofthe most pro-Western populations in the
region, and that Iranian opposition forces would be electrified by a vigorous show ofU.S.
presidential support. But he believes that any sort ofmilitary intervention in Iran would set back
copsiderably these promising regime-change forces. Still'another group ofIsraeli policy-makers
seem more inclined toward a military option, as evidenced by Israel's well-publici~edpurchase of
500 "bunke~-buster" bombs from the United States in September and its failed efforts to launch a
spy satellite to monitor Iran's nuclear-program developments.
Yet another policy position became evident in Seymour Hersh's article in The New Yorker in
June, in which Hersh reported that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, sensing that the U.S.­
created chaos in Iraq could leave an opening for anti-Israel efforts in Iran, was pursuing a "Plan
B" that had Israeli operatives covertly training and equipping Kurds in Iraq, Iran, and Syria for
possible future covert action to counter any such measures. As Hersh reported: "Israeli
intelligence and military operatives are now quietly at work in Kurdistan, providing training for
Kurdish commando units and, most important in Israel's view, running covert operations inside
Kurdish areas oflran and Syria.... Some Israeli operatives have crossed the border into Iran,
accompanied by Kurdish commandos, to install sensors and other sensitive devices that primarily
target suspected Iranian nuclear facilities."
The Israeli government insisted the story wasn't credible, and that it was sourced by Turkey,
which is panicked, as ever, about foreign designs on Kurdistan. But a source told the Prospect
that Franklin expressed the conviction that the United States has intelligence that affirms Hersh's
report to be largely accurate. A second fonner U.S. diplomatic official who recently visited the
area told the Prospect that there are Israeli intelligence officials·operating in Kurdish Iraq as
political advisers, and others under the guise ofbusinessmen.
All ofwhich raises questions, like what exactly was in the draft NSPD that Rubin wrote and
Franklin allegedly shared with AlPAC? And does the destabilization plan pushed by
neoconservatiyes in the draft NSPD in fact advocate that the United States or its proxies ann the
Iranian opposition, including the Kurds, as part ofits efforts to pursue regime change?
The public sfatements by the neoconservatives emphasize that regime change in Iran would not
require U.S. military force. Then again, the neoconservatives' inspiration for the Iran plan has its
roots in Reagan-era NSPDs that, while providing nonmilitary support to Poland's Solidary
Movement, also had the CIA aggressively arming and training the Afghan mujahideen, the
NicaraguanContras, and other anti-communist rebels. There's also no denying that some ofthe
chief advocates ofthe Iran regime plot come out ofthe Pentagon, America's military command
center. And some ofthose same Iran hawks have discussed the Iran regime-change issue, for
instance, with Parisian-based Iran Contra arms dealer Manucher Ghorbanifar -- not exactly the
kind ofgo-to guy for a nonviolent regime change plan, one might think.
***
Whatever the nuances, the neocons are facing one oftheir biggest challenges in Washington
today: persuading the administration to adopt their regime-change policy toward Iran even while
their regime-change policy in Iraq appears to be crumbling. Since the Iraq invasion, Feith's office
has come under the intense scrutiny ofcongressional investigators, investigative journalists, and
-
file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\sdouglas\Local%20Settings\Temporary%20Inte... 10/22/2004