In Iran War, Media Sounds the Horn

Tensions are running high between the United States and Iran right now, maybe a bit more than usual. That's the thing though, it's usual these days. Ever since the last president invaded Iraq to rid that regime of its' imagined weapons of mass destruction, the Middle East has become increasingly destabilized. Iraq, for all its faults, at least kept the far more radical Iranian government in check. But with Saddam Hussein's overthrow, Iran was left with few obstacles to grab a more prominent position in the Middle East and the world. And now we're in the midst of a struggle with Iran over nuclear weapons. They want nuclear capability and contest they do not seek a nuclear weapon. The United States, much at the behest of Israel, seeks to keep them from obtaining any sort of nuclear weapon, while simultaneous diplomacy is working to not over extend our influence in a wary Middle East and allow them nuclear capacity for energy if they so choose.

Throughout the last several weeks, the rhetoric has escalated. Israel is threatening a preemptive strike on Iran's nuclear facilities. Iran is vowing to strike back. This, for some reason, means they are the aggressors. Matt Taibbi over at Rolling Stone nails it here:

Virtually all of the Iran stories of late have contained some version of this sort of rhetorical sophistry. The news “hook” in most all of these stories is that intelligence reports reveal Iran is “willing” to attack us or go to war – but then there’s usually an asterisk next to the headline, and when you follow the asterisk, it reads something like, “In the event that we attack Iran first.”

As Glenn Greenwald points out, it's the media (and the Senate) this time frantically beating the drums of war with Iran, not the Presidential administration. Erin Burnett over at CNN seems to me the worst offender. It's Sunday morning as I write this. Of the stories currently listed on the front page of her blog, she has not 1, not 2, but 3 out of 5 stories rabble rousing the public to believe Iran is some sort of serious threat (and why-oh-why is Rudy Guiliani still talking).

The main problem is that Iran is in no way a major threat to the United States, or even to Israel. As both Taibbi and Greenwald point out, James Clapper, head of US Director of National Intelligence, has explicitly stated that he does not believe Iran is seeking a nuclear weapon, in line with thinking Iran abandoned its' nuclear weapons program back in 2003. Even Leon Panetta, Defense Secretary, said, "The intelligence does not show that they've made the decision to proceed with developing a nuclear weapon."

So why the drowning media coverage? For one, the media likes war. It's something that can be followed and reported 24-7. War offers filler, and the Republican presidential debates can only fill so much time!

Second, the reporting is also partly to blame on the public (and again, the Republican candidates share some culpability here). The presidential candidates have all talked-up the Iranian threat and how their government can under no circumstances be allowed to have a nuclear weapon. They have called President Obama weak for his diplomatic approach, even though, as we've established, the threat of Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon is very slim right now. But the problem is that people actually watch these debates and they begin to think Iran actually does have the capacity for nuclear arms and to strike American soil. In fact, nearly 50% of the country currently believes we should use military force to keep Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. This is the same war-weary public that wants to end the conflict in Afghanistan. This is the ouroboros. The media schedules debates, where they question the candidates' stance on Iran's nuclear program. The candidates then tout their puissance on the issue, how threatening Iran is, and how the United States must stand by Israel. The public then thinks Iran is a serious threat, and the next time the media does a poll, more people are suddenly in favor of military action. The media pretends the issue is dire. They ask more about it and frighten ever-more people.