The sudden tension between US and Iran has again drawn world's attention recently -- will Iran become the next target of Washington?

The news came out as New Yorker carried an article in its latest issue in which the author, a Pulitzer Prize winner, revealed that the Pentagon had sent a special force to Iran for collecting intelligence and locating the whereabouts of the potential nuclear sites. Then UK-based The Guardian run a report saying Pentagon hardliners were preparing to destroy Tehran's 'nuclear threats'. The US and Europe media hype reminds people of the public opinion preparation on the eve of the Iraqi war.

Despite of that, a cool-headed analysis shows a rather slim chance of US attack on Iran. Firstly, the United States is still mired in Iraq, with its death toll (which already reached 1,570) increasing every day. Domestic anti-war cries have been surging as if apparently Pentagon would not be allowed to launch another war with a waster of both money and manpower.

Second, Iran not only possesses a terrain more sophisticated than Iraq, but also is as four times as Iraq in size and population. Its political situation is fairly stable and its national strength, combat capability and cohesion among people are all far unmatched if compared with Iraq. All these weigh heavily on American mind.

Third, once going to war with Iran, the US will see no allies following except Israel, and even Britain will not. Considering its large number of contacts signed with Iran, Russian will certainly oppose.

Iran also boasts a better strategic position than Iraq. In case of war outbreak, it will seal off the Strait of Hormuz at any cost. It is from this strait that 40 percent of Gulf crude oil goes to every corner of the world, so once supply is blocked the impact on oil markets and global economy will be fatal. Considering this, even countries supporting the Iraqi war such as Japan and the ROK will not be in favor of a war on Iran.

The European Union has still more reasons to adhere to 'diplomatic approach'. It leaves the impression that it has been playing a double-role play with the United States ¡ª the former offers the carrot while the latter holds up the stick. Such a tacit agreement between the two cannot be ruled out. But on the other hand, trying to insure its trade and oil interests with Iran, EU is certainly unwilling to see a war on Iran.

People have noticed that the Pentagon denied New Yorker's report but didn't make a comment on The Guardian article. US Vice President Dick Cheney made it clear on the very day of his inauguration that the United State will continue to seek diplomatic means for the Iranian nuclear issue; but he added that Iran tops the Administration's list of 'potentially troubled regions'. Bush once also made remarks that diplomatic approach is the first to be considered but other choices are also possible.

According to experts' assessment, it's still several years before Iran comes into possession of nuclear weapons, which leaves time for mediation and explaining Washington's patience. Of course, no military attacks at present doesn't mean no plans or preparations, and the possibility of US target bombing on Iranian nuclear facilities can never be ruled out. Iranian President Mohammad Khatami, on the one hand, warned the United States seriously, but on the other hand believed a war is of low possibility since Washington is weighed down by various considerations. It seems that the US is launching a psychological war to press obedience out of Iran through pressure and threats.



--This article is carried on the first page of the People's Daily (Overseas Edition), January 24 and translated by People's Daily Online