Skip to content or view screen version

"Theater Iran Near Term" (TIRANNT)

Michel Chossudovsky | 21.02.2007 23:14 | Analysis | Anti-militarism | Terror War | Sheffield | World

DUBAI, UAE, 21 February 2007. Code named by US military planners as TIRANNT, "Theater Iran Near Term" has identified several thousand targets inside Iran as part of a "Shock and Awe" Blitzkrieg, which is now in the final planning stages.


According to the Kuwait-based Arab Times, an attack on Iran under TIRANNT could occur any time between late February and the end of April. This assessment, however, does not take into account the disarray of US ground forces in Iraq as well as the untimely withdrawal of several thousand British troops from the Iraq war theater, many of whom were stationed in Southern Iraq on the immediate border with Iran.

Revealed last April by William Arkin, a former US intelligence analyst, writing in the Washington Post, TIRANNT was first established in May 2003, following the invasion of Iraq.

"In early 2003, even as U.S. forces were on the brink of war with Iraq, the Army had already begun conducting an analysis for a full-scale war with Iran. The analysis, called TIRANNT, for "theater Iran near term," was coupled with a mock scenario for a Marine Corps invasion and a simulation of the Iranian missile force. U.S. and British planners conducted a Caspian Sea war game around the same time. And Bush directed the U.S. Strategic Command to draw up a global strike war plan for an attack against Iranian weapons of mass destruction. All of this will ultimately feed into a new war plan for "major combat operations" against Iran that military sources confirm now exists in draft form. [This contingency plan entitled CONPLAN 8022 would be activated in the eventuality of a Second 9/11, on the presumption that Iran would be behind it]

... Under TIRANNT, Army and U.S. Central Command planners have been examining both near-term and out-year scenarios for war with Iran, including all aspects of a major combat operation, from mobilization and deployment of forces through postwar stability operations after regime change." (William Arkin, Washington Post, 16 April 2006)

The decision to target Iran should come as no surprise. Already during the Clinton administration, US Central Command (USCENTCOM) had formulated in 1995 "in war theater plans" to invade first Iraq and then Iran.

"The broad national security interests and objectives expressed in the President's National Security Strategy (NSS) and the Chairman's National Military Strategy (NMS) form the foundation of the United States Central Command's theater strategy. The NSS directs implementation of a strategy of dual containment of the rogue states of Iraq and Iran as long as those states pose a threat to U.S. interests, to other states in the region, and to their own citizens. Dual containment is designed to maintain the balance of power in the region without depending on either Iraq or Iran. USCENTCOM's theater strategy is interest-based and threat-focused. The purpose of U.S. engagement, as espoused in the NSS, is to protect the United States' vital interest in the region - uninterrupted, secure U.S./Allied access to Gulf oil."

(USCENTCOM, http://www.milnet.com/milnet/pentagon/centcom/chap1/stratgic.htm#USPolicy , emphasis added)i

Consistent with CENTCOM's 1995 sequencing of theater operations, the plans to target Iran were activated under TIRANNT in the immediate wake of the invasion of Iraq Confirmed by Arkin, the operational component of the Iran military agenda was launched in May 2003 "when modelers and intelligence specialists pulled together the data needed for theater-level (meaning large-scale) scenario analysis for Iran." (Arkin, op cit) In October 2003, different theater scenarios for an Iran war were contemplated:

"The US army, navy, air force and marines have all prepared battle plans and spent four years building bases and training for "Operation Iranian Freedom". Admiral Fallon, the new head of US Central Command, has inherited computerized plans under the name TIRANNT (Theatre Iran Near Term)." (New Statesman, 19 Feb 2007)

Concurrently, the various parallel components of TIRANNT were put in place including the Marines "Concept of Operations":

"The Marines, meanwhile, have not only been involved in CENTCOM's war planning, but have been focused on their own specialty, "forcible entry." In April 2003, the Corps published its "Concept of Operations" for a maneuver against a mock country that explores the possibility of moving forces from ship to shore against a determined enemy without establishing a beachhead first. Though the Marine Corps enemy is described only as a deeply religious revolutionary country named Karona, it is -- with its Revolutionary Guards, WMD and oil wealth -- unmistakably meant to be Iran.

Various scenarios involving Iran's missile force have also been examined in another study, initiated in 2004 and known as BMD-I (ballistic missile defense -- Iran). In this study, the Center for Army Analysis modeled the performance of U.S. and Iranian weapons systems to determine the number of Iranian missiles expected to leak through a coalition defense.

The day-to-day planning for dealing with Iran's missile force falls to the U.S. Strategic Command in Omaha. In June 2004, Rumsfeld alerted the command to be prepared to implement CONPLAN 8022, a global strike plan that includes Iran. CONPLAN 8022 calls for bombers and missiles to be able to act within 12 hours of a presidential order. The new task force, sources have told me, mostly worries that if it were called upon to deliver "prompt" global strikes against certain targets in Iran under some emergency circumstances, the president might have to be told that the only option is a nuclear one. William Arkin, Washington Post, 16 April 2006)

"Shock and Awe"

US military planning includes specific roles to be performed by NATO and Israel in the event of an attack on Iran. The German navy is deployed formally un der a UN mandate in the Eastern Mediterranean. NATO bases in Europe would also be involved.

Documented by Global Research, extensive war games were conducted since last Summer by Iran and its allies of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, including Russia and China. In turn, the US has conducted war games off the Iranian coastline.

What is now being contemplated by Washington is an overwhelming use of military force in retaliation to Iran's alleged non-compliance. This of course is the pretext, the justification for waging war. The Pentagon has also contemplated retaliating against Iran in the case of second 9/11 attack, which it characterizes as both an opportunity "which is lacking" and a justification to going after "known targets".

This plan is predicated on the possibility of a Second 911 and the need to retaliate if and when the US is attacked:

"A third plan sets out how the military can both disrupt and respond to another major terrorist strike on the United States. It includes lengthy annexes that offer a menu of options for the military to retaliate quickly against specific terrorist groups, individuals or state sponsors depending on who is believed to be behind an attack. Another attack could create both a justification and an opportunity that is lacking today to retaliate against some known targets, according to current and former defense officials familiar with the plan.

This plan details "what terrorists or bad guys we would hit if the gloves came off. The gloves are not off," said one official, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject. (italics added, WP 23 April 2006)

The presumption of this military document, is that a Second 911 attack "which is lacking today" would usefully create both a "justification and an opportunity" to wage war on "some known targets [Iran and Syria]".

Civilian Targets

Press reports in the Middle East confirm that the planned air strikes are by no means limited to Iran's nuclear facilities. Central Command Headquarters in Florida (CENTCOM) has already selected a comprehensive list of military and civilian targets. Industrial sites, civilian infrastructure including roads, water systems, bridges, electric power plants telecommunications towers, government buildings are part of the assumptions underlying the Blitzkrieg. "A single raid could result in 10,000 targets being hit with warplanes flying from the Us and Diego Garcia" (Gulf News, 21 Feb 2007)

Meanwhile, the US has been mustering support for its agenda following the holding of a regional Security Conference in the UAE.

Nuclear War

Military planners are said to favor the use of conventional weapons. The use of tactical nuclear weapons, which are now part of the Middle East war theater arsenal, are not contemplated at least in the first round of the US sponsored Blitzkrieg. However, the fact nuclear weapons are acknowledged as a possible choice in the conventional war theater is indicative that their use is an integral part of military planning.

If Iran were to respond to US attacks in the form of targeted strikes on US military facilities in the Iraq and the Gulf States, the war will escalate to the entire region and the US could retaliate in the form of "pre-emptive" nuclear attacks on Iran. The most likely scenario is that Iran, in the logic of its own military planning, would respond to US attacks as well as deploy ground forces inside occupied Iraq.

Naval Deployment

Three strike groups including the Stennis, the Eisenhower and the Nimitz are being deployed in the Persian Gulf. According to Gulf News, "The Stennis strike group... is now strengthening a high level of US Navy presence in the Gulf. The Stennis and the carrier Dwight D. Eisenhower, already in the region, will soon be joined by the carrier Nimitz. (Gulf News, 21 Feb 2007). According to British military sources, the US navy can put six carriers into battle at a month's notice.

Redeployment of US Troops

Confirmed by military sources, thousands of US troops are being redeployed from US military facilities in Germany and Italy to undisclosed destinations. One assumes that they are being dispatched to the Middle East war theater in the eventuality that the air strikes will lead into a ground war with Iran.

The Pentagon, contradicting its own statements, has dismissed as "ludicrous" the press reports that the US is planning an all out attack on Iran in the "near term".

Meanwhile, Iran has launched a three days war games entitled Eghtedar or Grandeur. These exercises which involve naval, air and ground forces are larger than those conducted last Summer. They are slated to take place in 16 out of Iran's 30 provinces. The stated objective is to establish a state of readiness to defend Iran in the eventuality of a US attack.

The complacency of Western public opinion (including the US anti-war movement) is disturbing. No concern has been expressed at the political level as to the likely consequences of these attacks, which could evolve towards a World War III scenario, with Russia and China siding with Iran. With the exception of the Middle East, the war on Iran and the dangers of escalation are not considered "front page news." All of which contributes to the real possibility that the war could be carried out, leading to the unthinkable: a nuclear holocaust over a large part of the Middle East. It should be noted that a nuclear nighmare would occur even if nuclear weapons are not used. The bombing of Iran's nuclear facitlities using conventional weapons would contribute to unleashing a Chernobyl type disaster with extensive radioactive fallout.

Michel Chossudovsky
- Homepage: http://globalresearch.ca/

Comments

Hide the following 4 comments

Crowing again

22.02.2007 00:35

Just a reminder to the eagle eyed among you, "you read it here first".
Unless you are all regular readers of the Kuwait Arab Times. I just stumbled upon it myself.

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/01/360862.html?c=on#c165329
28.01.2007 13:54


 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/02/361472.html
John Pilger | 04.02.2007 11:22

Unlike John Pilger, I would like to point out that the Kuwait Arab Times isn't the soundest source for intelligence. though I personally much prefer Pilger to Chossudovsky. I'm glad they both follow up on IndyMedias many leads though. I'd also recommend reading the Sunday Heralds story simply for its differentiated source.

deep


bulgarian and romanian bases being readied for April

22.02.2007 10:36


article appeared in Sunday Herald of Scotland

link to www.sundayherald.com

America "Poised to Strike at Iran's Nuclear Sites" From Bases in Bulgaria and Romania
By Gabriel Ronay
The Sunday Herald UK

Sunday 28 January 2007

Reports suggest that "US defensive ring" may be new front in war on terror.
President Bush is preparing to attack Iran's nuclear facilities before the end of April and the US Air Force's new bases in Bulgaria and Romania would be used as back-up in the onslaught, according to an official report from Sofia.

"American forces could be using their two USAF bases in Bulgaria and one at Romania's Black Sea coast to launch an attack on Iran in April," the Bulgarian news agency Novinite said.

The American build-up along the Black Sea, coupled with the recent positioning of two US aircraft carrier battle groups off the Straits of Hormuz, appears to indicate president Bush has run out of patience with Tehran's nuclear misrepresentation and non-compliance with the UN Security Council's resolution. President Ahmeninejad of Iran has further ratcheted up tension in the region by putting on show his newly purchased state of the art Russian TOR-Ml anti-missile defence system.

Whether the Bulgarian news report is a tactical feint or a strategic event is hard to gauge at this stage. But, in conjunction with the beefing up of America's Italian bases and the acquisition of anti-missile defence bases in the Czech Republic and Poland, the Balkan developments seem to indicate a new phase in Bush's global war on terror.

Sofia's news of advanced war preparations along the Black Sea is backed up by some chilling details. One is the setting up of new refuelling places for US Stealth bombers, which would spearhead an attack on Iran. "The USAF's positioning of vital refuelling facilities for its B-2 bombers in unusual places, including Bulgaria, falls within the perspective of such an attack." Novinite named colonel Sam Gardiner, "a US secret service officer stationed in Bulgaria", as the source of this revelation.

Curiously, the report noted that although Tony Blair, Bush's main ally in the global war on terror, would be leaving office, the president had opted to press on with his attack on Iran in April.

Before the end of March, 3000 US military personnel are scheduled to arrive "on a rotating basis" at America's Bulgarian bases. Under the US-Bulgarian military co-operation accord, signed in April, 2006, an air base at Bezmer, a second airfield at Graf Ignitievo and a shooting range at Novo Selo were leased to America. Significantly, last year's bases negotiations had at one point run into difficulties due to Sofia's demand "for advance warning if Washington intends to use Bulgarian soil for attacks against other nations, particularly Iran".

Romania, the other Black Sea host to the US military, is enjoying a dollar bonanza as its Mihail Kogalniceanu base at Constanta is being transformed into an American "place d'arme". It is also vital to the Iran scenario.

Last week, the Bucharest daily Evenimentual Zilei revealed the USAF is to site several flights of F-l5, F-l6 and Al0 aircraft at the Kogalniceanu base. Admiral Gheorghe Marin, Romania's chief of staff, confirmed "up to 2000 American military personnel will be temporarily stationed in Romania".

In Central Europe, the Czech Republic and Poland have also found themselves in the Pentagon's strategic focus. Last week, Mirek Topolanek, the Czech prime minister, and the country's national security council agreed to the siting of a US anti-missile radar defence system at Nepolisy. Poland has also agreed to having a US anti-missile missile base and interceptor aircraft stationed in the country.

Russia, however, does not see the chain of new US bases on its doorstep as a "defensive ring". Russia's defence chief has branded the planned US anti-missile missile sites on Czech and Polish soil as "an open threat to Russia".

Sergey Ivanov, Russia's defence minister, spoke more circumspectly while emphasising Moscow's concern. He said: "Russia is not worried. Its strategic nuclear forces can assure in any circumstance its safety. Since neither Tehran, nor Pyongyang possess intercontinental missiles capable of threatening the USA, from whom is this new missile shield supposed to protect the West? All it actually amounts to is that Prague and Warsaw want to demonstrate their loyalty to Washington."

Bush's Iran attack plan has brought into sharp focus the possible costs to Central and Eastern Europe of being "pillars of Pax Americana."

andrea psx


My son is serving on the USS John Stennis.

22.02.2007 12:50


The scenario that is described in the artcle is basically true.I am saddened as a parent and private citizen that our world has come down to this showdown of egos.Up until a few days ago, we communicated via the computer, but they are not allowed to receive transmissions now.The Navy fleet is armed and is programmed to hit Iran with unrelenting and unbridled force.Let's collectively try and stop this madness through protests, letters to our representatives and encourage diplomacy.This insanity of the Bush administration must be stopped.

(1st posted as a comment to this article on indymedia portland, USA)

navy dad


what to do, what to do

22.02.2007 14:08

Since it is too long for Indymedia. You have to cut n paste these two together.

 http://www.sundayherald.com/international/shinternational/display.var.1152839.0.america_
poised_to_strike_at_irans_nuclear_sites_from_bases_in_bulgaria_and_romania.php

Also, the Sunday Herald online seems to missoutspaces so you've had to edit it, eh Andrea ? I'm guessing that is so people will buy the paper.

There are a few questions that immediately pop up though. Firstly, according to every other source, Tony Blair isn't leaving in April, he is staying until after May to 'take the blame' when New Labour get hammered in the Scottish elections as they surely will.

Plus why would it be important to Bush to have Blair in power during an attack ? Because he is such a lap-dog that he is a guaranteed cheerleader or because such an attack will trigger an Iranaian response on the British troops in Basra that could be used as a pretence for Blair to stay in power ? I don't like either option but find them both credible.

Also, both stories appeared within days on each other at a time when even Indymedia has been suffering from a campaign of Iran disformation. According to 'The War On Truth', Neil Mackays book on the lead up to the Iraq war, false stories were often placed by MI5 in foriegn newspapers so that lazy or corrupt British journalists could then report them in the British press as true, while maintaining deniability. The fact that book is released by the Sunday Herald doesn't mean that the Sunday Herald is not as susceptible as any other paper to this sort of disinformation. The stories could be part of a propaganda campaign to destabilise Iran without firing a shot, although I personally believe we are being conditioned to expect an attack.

The important question is what we can do to prevent it. Well, we could pray for the police to arrest Blair before April or to charge so many of his corrupt cronies that he is embarrassed into an early retirement. I haven't checked but I'm betting there isn't a Downing Street website petition for the impeachment of Blair. Nobody has ever successfully petitioned for their rights or for peace, you fight for them or you get ignored at best.

Or we could organise in the existing peace groups and march in our millions through London - after the event. That will give you roughly two weeks before the pro-war press stirs up jingoism when British troops start getting massacred. My personal opinion is the existing peace groups are so heavily infiltrated and incompetent that we'd be better off praying. Actually, praying is what they are best at. My proof of that is the Iraq war being allowed to happen when it was so well signalled. Another proof is the amount of anti-Iranian disinformation posted on sites like this. Really, it is a far from perfect country and there is a lot to criticise about it, but basically most Iranians don't want to be bombed and don't want yet another war. Any anti-Iranian criticism can surely wait until Blair resigns or be rightly condemned as war-mongering.

I'm not trying to discourage you from taking action. What I'd suggest to anyone who does believe we are only two months away from bombing Iran is to break into small groups of perhaps two or three people you have known all your life and really escalate opposition. Don't go for the police, don't go for the army, hit businesses and the economy, and especially the Labour party politicians. For the inactive among you, oppose and doubt any anti-Iran information you see here or anywhere else.

See, the leaked Bush plans aren't to hit Iranian nuclear facilities, they are to bomb the oil infrastructure and civilian targets. The Iraq debacle has made Iran too strong regionally in neo-con eyes. And just as the aftermath of the Iraq invasion was perfectly obvious beforehand, the aftermath of an attack on Iran is equally obvious. Firstly, Prince Harry and all his working class buddies are suddenly on the front-line of not just an insurgency, but a major army. Secondly, attacking Iran isn't going to divide the Muslim world, it will unite it - after all who is next ? The US threatened to invade Saudi Arabia back in 1973 after all, and it effectively has. Now the US will struggle on in declension, but Europe, without oil, with a large muslim population and with no appetite for war, we are fucked.

Call me a defeatist or an extremist or an Iranian lover or whatever, if you value the next thirty years of your life then you should be prepared to act in the next sixty days. I know you all have your main issues, and I respect that normally. But nothing contributes to global warming like a nuclear missile. Nothing causes more suffering to animals than the mass-slaughter of humans. You think the refugees on our shores are being persecuted just now - wait until we are losing the next war.

We have been told the US is about to attack Iran. It may be a lie but we have to take it seriously. This isn't a manifesto but it is a call to arms. Do I need to explicity state how non-violent hippies and other assorted idiots are just as culpable for the millions dead in Iraq as Blair is ? I guess I do.

You know, as an aside, if you follow an petrol tanker at the end of a day then you find out where the petrol tankers are parked, unguarded. One person, one can of petrol, no more petrol in the garages. If you know which way the oil and gas pipelines run then it is easy to locate them through 'pinch-points' through geographical features such as valleys. Every few miles they have access points.

I just had an innocent friend murdered by British agents I met here through my carelessness. Shit really does happen - be paranoid and safe. Don't trust anyone you don't need to. Unlike the people I oppose, I condemn all violence against people. Don't do terrorism. Don't scare or hurt innocent people, that just makes things worse for everyone. And don't be scared by the media into hating. If you sink to their level or you become the monster you oppose. Infrastructure is just property, it can be repaired. Use your brain, and close the country down.

allegedly