Back in December, I posted a
diary about Mubarak's warning to the US, that attacking Iran would be "a mistake of catastrophic proportions".
Although Iran has partly suspended its nuclear program, both the U.S. and the U.K. have both been implying that Iran's uranium enrichment program is still in operation.
Now, Hans Blix has spoken up about the consequences of a U.S. military strike on Iran.
More below the fold.
Here's what Dr. Blix has to say.
Strike Iran and Risk Huge Backlash, Blix Warns U.S.
As Iran and the European Union go into talks in Geneva Tuesday on Tehran's nuclear programme, former U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix said the possibility of the United States attacking the Middle Eastern country, at this juncture, seemed remote.
But he warned that if a U.S. military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities were to take place, Washington could face a huge Iranian nationalist backlash.
'' I think the restraining element in this must be that the United States must know if they launch an attack, there (possibly) could be (a nuclear) retaliation,'' said Blix.
''There is uncertainty. They (the U.S.) may not know that the Iranians might be hiding some (nuclear weapons) prototype somewhere. They (the Iranians) have the designs and they have the technology,'' he told journalists late Monday at the Foreign Correspondents Club, here, in a programme organised by the Vienna-based International Peace Foundation.
''The public of Iran is divided with regard to the theocracy - a great many people in Iran are sick and tired of it and would like to see a liberalisation of the regime,'' said Blix. ''But the moment the U.S. goes strong on them, there would be a patriotic attitude - there will be a nationalist backlash.''
Added Blix: ''There is already a considerable negative attitude towards the U.S. in the Middle East. This could make things worse.''
So, the question is, does Iran have nuclear weapons? Blix isn't saying they do, or do not. He's simply saying that an attack is simply not an option.
And after Iraq, he's got the U.S. foreign policy down:
''It's conceivable that the United States is sitting on the sidelines and leaving it to the Europeans to negotiate,'' said Blix.
''I think the Europeans have been on the right track and as I said I cannot guarantee that the Iranians are not just temporizing - there could be something building up. You have to be sceptical in this business,'' revealed the former weapons inspector
For George W. Bush, "diplomacy" is a big word that doesn't make sense, althought he doesn't seem to have much of a problem with the word "unilateral".