I'm with Kevin Drum. I'm skeptical of the spin on this story, in particular the contention that this reported covert action is about a committed Bush administration policy to destabilize the Iranian regime. It seems the named sources in the piece are saying if such a covert action has been authorized, it's about in fact the US deciding NOT to confront Iran militarily -- but rather, to try to gain leverage as it moves towards negotiations with Tehran, which limited to Iraq security are set to begin Monday in Baghdad. And who would like to sabotage that? Hardliners in both Washington and Iran -- potentially, some of the former may be ABC's sources, with an eye to a report that would get Iran to call off the talks. While there may be covert components to the effort, the fact that the US is trying to pressure Iran economically is hardly a secret -- Nick Burns and his counterparts at the Treasury Department have been going around the world openly for more than the past year trying to get countries and even individual banks on board to sanction Iran economically. Propaganda and disinformation ops? Perhaps. (Kevin makes a case that this may be an example of that; remember the CIA or the Pentagon for that matter aren't supposed to place propaganda in the US press. Apparently the White House did not try to dissuade the ABC report, so maybe it didn't mind the publicity, to cover its own right flank going into controversial talks with Iran next week? In any case, it takes little effort to make the Iran regime paranoid and strike out against all sorts of people who seemingly have nothing to do with any velvet revolution plan). I am also skeptical of an earlier ABC Brian Ross report that the US is indirectly funding Iranian Baluchi separatists in order to attack or destabilize the Iranian regime. What I hear -- the US is not working with Iran's separatist groups and is very much holding them at arms length. Among the disappointed and frustrated, those in Washington eager for the US to work with Iran's dissident and minority groups to overthrow the regime, including those groups. "They want to do something to interfere with the Iranians' ability to build its program," suggests a former Iran hand of the administration's rationale for the reported covert action. "They will never go far enough to be effective. ... The political goals are limited." As much as it would prefer to be dealing with a different Iranian government and would like Iran to have a different sort of government in the future, as best I can tell, the Bush administration is not seriously pursuing a policy to destabilize the Iran regime to the point of regime change, but is moving to to pressure this regime to change its behavior. What's being reported are seemingly alleged attempts to get leverage in that larger effort.

Update: Check out Steve Clemons here.

Posted by Laura at May 23, 2007 09:51 PM