Report: US has contingency plan to strike Iran enrichment site

John ByrnePublished: Thursday February 1, 2007

The US continues to develop plans to strike Iran, according to an article in the UK Times which was detailed Wednesday in the Jerusalem Post.

According to the Times, the Bush Administration has been inviting defense consultants and Middle East experts to meetings for "tactical advice." RAW STORY has reported frequenly on US-Iran tensions, revealing that Vice President Cheney's office is the biggest advocate of a military strike.

Bush Administration officials deny the claim. Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns said in a radio interview Thursday that the US still believes tensions with Iran can be resolved diplomatically.

Still, Burns notes that "all options are on the table."

"We've been very clear we don't intend to cross the border into Iran, we don't intend to strike into Iran, in terms of what we are doing in Iraq," Burns told NPR.

The Times report indicated that the most likely US plan would be to strike the Iranian enrichment site at Natanz, where Iran recently said they would deploy upwards of 3,000 centrifuges.

"Despite speculations and divided opinions, the favored US scenario is to attack the Iranian nuclear plant with a small number of ground attack aircraft flying out of the British dependency of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean," the Jerusalem Times said. The Times report could not be found online.

"The British would however have to approve the use of the American base there for an attack and would be asked to play a supporting role by providing air-to-air re-fuelling or sending out surveillance aircraft, ships and submarines," the Post added.

Pentagon officials and analysts also told the Associated Press in a little-noticed article Wednesday that any small catalyst could ignite a war.

A U.S. military official in the Gulf likened the U.S.-Iran standoff to the buildup in hostility in Europe before World War I, when the assassination of an Austrian archduke sparked a war based on alliances of multiple European powers, the AP said.

"A mistake could be made and you could end up in something that neither side ever really wanted, and suddenly it's August 1914 all over again," the U.S. officer told AP on condition of anonymity, because of the sensitivity of the issue. "I really believe neither side wants a fight."

In September, RAW STORY's Larisa Alexandrovna reported that the Pentagon's top brass had moved into second-stage contingency planning for a potential military strike on Iran, according to a senior intelligence official familiar with the plans.

The official, who is close to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the highest ranking officials of each branch of the US military, said the Chiefs have started what is called "branches and sequels" contingency planning.

"The JCS has accepted the inevitable," the intelligence official said, "and is engaged in serious contingency planning to deal with the worst case scenarios that the intelligence community has been painting."

A second military official, although unfamiliar with these latest scenarios, said there is a difference between contingency planning -- which he described as "what if, then what" planning -- and "branches and sequels," which takes place after an initial plan has been decided upon.

READ THE JERUSALEM POST ARTICLE HERE.