Next!

Apparently the Bush Administration in the United States has learned a couple of things from their first ham-handed four years on the world stage. This time around, they seem to be taking a more subtle approach to staging their agenda.

They are playing issues off against each other - in this case, North Korea, Iran and Syria. Recent appointments to the UN and the World Bank of hard-liners from the Bush Administration don't exactly speak to a cooperative policy coming from the White House.

This week, Secretary of State Rice began rattling sabres towards North Korea, perhaps to a degree that almost seems comical. In spite of a degree of muscle flexing, it's not exactly news to anyone that the US military is pretty well tied up in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Serious military action against North Korea seems a trifle unrealistic at the moment. (Although I'm not exactly an expert on military deployment, it just doesn't seem realistic to believe that the US military can successfully launch a third war in a region geographically disparate from the Middle East.

However, what if the sabre rattling in the general direction of North Korea is a red herring? The recent posturing towards Syria quickly became moot when Syria quickly agreed to pull out of Lebanon. Although I still suspect Syria is on Washington's radar as a target, it would be very difficult for the Americans (or Israelis) to justify invading Syria in the short term. Even if the Americans were to have concrete proof that Syria was supplying or training the insurgents in Iraq, it would be perceived that they were simply looking for a pretext to invade Syria.

However, America is not standing still. Far from it. Little signs of the United States digging in for a long haul presence in the Middle East are emerging. Lurking in the back pages of BBC's website is this little gem talking about an old Soviet airbase in Afghanistan. Hmmm - lessee - on one side, it's highly unlikely that the US will pull out of Iraq anytime soon, and undertaking repair and rebuilding operations on old Soviet facilities doesn't sound much like rebuilding the country, so much as settling in for a long term garrison presence. Shindand is suspicously close to the Iranian border, and no doubt within striking range of Iran's nuclear facilities.

Taking Iran from the Iraq side would involve traversing mountainous terrain that almost isolates Iran from Iraq as well as the mountains of Afghanistan isolate that nation from its neighbors. The mountains between Iran and Afghanistan are nowhere near as large as those that are on the Iraq border.

Also, on a few "not-so-mainstream" news sites that focus on "security" issues, I'm starting to see articles on Iran emerging that suggest that Iran is building up its military capabilities. (Remember, a key aspect of the so-called "Wolfowitz Doctrine" is that the US will never allow a power to emerge that rivals its own capabilities) Other parts of the "Global Security" website spend quite an amazing amount of space talking about all of the evils that Iran is engaged in.

It's certainly food for thought...