[what would we do if a hostile foreign power put a second aircraft carrier right off our shore?]
– Defence secretary denies move is an escalation
– Tehran insists nuclear programme is peaceful
The US defence secretary, Robert Gates, said yesterday the
deployment of a second aircraft carrier to the Gulf could serve as a
“reminder” to Iran of American resolve to defend its interests in the
region.
Gates denied the arrival of a new carrier represented
an escalation, pointing out that US naval strength in the Gulf rises
and falls constantly with routine naval deployments, but it comes at a
time of heightened rhetoric from Washington about Iran’s role in the
Iraqi insurgency.
In the next few days US officers in Baghdad are
expected to mount a display of recently-made Iranian arms alleged to
have been seized from insurgents.
CBS News reported the
Pentagon has ordered commanders to explore new options for attacking
Iran and that the state department was formulating an ultimatum calling
on Iran to stop arms smuggling into Iraq. The reports were denied by US
officials.
In the past few days senior administration officials
have made a series of pointed remarks about the Iranian role in Iraq.
Gates himself claimed: “What the Iranians are doing is killing American
servicemen and women inside Iraq.”
During a visit to Mexico the
defence secretary was asked if the carrier deployment was coordinated
with the rhetoric from Washington. He replied: “I don’t see it as an
escalation. I think it could be seen, though, as a reminder.”
The
tough talk on Iran comes just before a meeting of ministers from the
permanent five members of the UN security council and Germany to
discuss incentives for Iran to suspend its work on uranium enrichment.
The
focus on incentives reflects a realisation in London and Washington
that there is not sufficient support in the Security Council for more
sanctions against Iran. However, the new package is unlikely to differ
from the one currently on the table, which includes economic
incentives, help with the establishment of a nuclear energy programme
based on technology that does not have military applications, and
direct talks with the US on a range of strategic issues.
Security
Council officials spoke yesterday in terms of the incentives being
“refreshed” rather than enhanced. Few diplomatic observers believe they
will have any more impact than the sanctions imposed so far.
Tehran
insists its nuclear programme is intended for purely peaceful energy
generation, and claims it is within its rights to pursue its
development. Earlier this month Iran’s president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
signalled his defiance of the Security Council by visiting the
country’s nuclear facility at Natanz to inspect a new upgraded
centrifuge, the IR-2, capable of enriching uranium faster than the
earlier model bought from Pakistan.
In official pictures Iran’s
defence minister, Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar, can be seen taking part in
the tour. His participation was highlighted by some western officials,
who argued it conflicted with Iran’s insistence that the programme is
for exclusively peaceful purposes.
Vincent Cannistraro, a former
senior CIA official now a security analyst, said the conflicting
signals coming from Washington reflected longstanding divisions in the
Bush administration, that have not been resolved by the publication of
a National Intelligence Estimate last year that Iran’s weapons
programme had been dormant since 2003. The NIE has been privately
disowned by President Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney, who still
leads the remaining hawks in the administration.
“Cheney believes
this administration has to take military action against Iran before it
leaves office. Gates echoes the rhetoric publicly but he doesn’t
support Cheney’s position,” Cannistraro said.