Deep undercurrents stir in the Middle East

Jul 29, 2010

By Victor Kotsev

On the surface, the Middle East is so still it is almost unbelievable. Not that nothing is happening, on the contrary, but the comparison with just a few weeks ago is enough to raise an eyebrow. Back then, amid military maneuvers and loud threats, every other analyst (including this one, though with some caution <1> was predicting an imminent flare-up.

So far, not only has the cataclysm not happened, but the voices have quieted down somewhat. "Plainly I was wrong," writes Bret Stephens for the Wall Street Journal, discussing his earlier prediction of an Israeli strike on Iran <2>.

There is some violence in Gaza; recently, we hear a lot from Hezbollah in Lebanon, too, as the Shi'ite organization keeps getting entangled in various intrigues. There is also vague talk about conservative pressure on US President Barack Obama and the military option against Iran being back on the table for the US administration.

An American attack on Iran "seems inexorable", former Central Intelligence Agency chief Michael Hayden said on Sunday, but he did not give a specific time frame. Moreover, we remain to hear anything nearly as strong from a current administration official, and there are good reasons to believe that any American attack on Iran would be preceded by a very clear public relations effort. (We do hear a bit more in counter-threats from Iran, whose President Mahmud Ahmadinejad proclaimed on Tuesday that America was planning to attack two Middle East countries in the next three months, without offering any further details.)

in full: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/LG29Ak01.html