The Iran rhetoric that is current today has a disquieting similarity to what happened prior to the Iraq War. Once more, Iran is portrayed by American officials as a Middle East adversary that is on the verge of gaining nuclear capabilities.

Indeed, as political scientist John Mearsheimer predicted in the run-up to the Iraq War, “The administration has been making the case for war by exaggerating the threat.”Today’s Iran policy debate follows the same eerie script, with the aluminum tubes now replaced by enrichment levels, the mobile labs traded for ballistic missile capabilities, and the face of Saddam replaced by Iran’s Supreme Leader.

The invasion of Iraq in 2003 was based on assertions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, as well as operational links with terrorists that posed a threat to the United States. Both assertions were later proved to be false. The human toll was extreme. The conflict led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, with estimates ranging as high as 500,000 to one million excess deaths. Millions were displaced, with the social fabric of Iraq torn apart.

As journalist George Packer explained in his influential study of the war, “The freedom agenda became a way of justifying a war that had already been decided on other grounds.” Those responsible for this war were never held to account and are now pursuing careers in think tanks and journalism, with their reputations for judgment intact.

© Middle East Monitor