Ret. Gen. Wesley Clark: Iran Must Renounce its Aim of Trying to Destroy Israel

MOHYELDIN: “So where — we are now here, we are in that moment. It’s quite prophetic to see that. I mean, all those countries have more or less become failed states. What do you attribute this to, that America continues to find itself embroiled in attempts of regime change, contributing to these failed states in the region?”
Clark: “Yeah. It’s very tragic. Actually, this started — I first learned of it in 1991, in a discussion with then-Undersecretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. And a plan was put forward, never got to president George H. Bush, didn’t get to Colin Powell. He would have pooh-poohed it. But then there was a study paid for by Bibi Netanyahu, Richard Perle and others participated in it, and it basically laid the framework for the Congress to demand regime change in Iraq. And behind that study was this broader approach. I’d heard of it several times. What I said in 2007 really was something I had picked up really several years previously and I was watching it unfold. And so, why is it happening? Because we’re in there. It’s a modernizing region, but you also have a regime in Iran which for 46 years has set its priority on the destruction of Israel and become an enemy of the United States. And what’s so ironic about this is, we’re the ones that really forced the shah out of power in Iran in 1978. We sent a general to Iran to tell the Iranian generals, ‘Let democracy flourish.’ Unfortunately, it didn’t, and Khomeini came back in. But the regime turned against us as a convenient enemy. So for all this time, we’ve been dealing with this regime. And that’s why I think the real point of the negotiations should not be nuclear enrichment or no nuclear enrichment. It really should be. Iran must renounce its aim of trying to destroy Israel. Just live in peace, let other people live in the region. You can have your your Shi’ism. You can talk about the next Mahdi coming and all of the things that are dear to you. But why pick on another state and try to destroy it? This has been the real source of so much trouble in the region, and I just hope that we can maneuver the diplomacy in such a way we get to the bottom line issue, rather than another hide-and-seek game on nuclear enrichment, but we won’t go for a bomb, but maybe we’ll secretly get a bomb, and you’ll see it when the mushroom cloud’s there, etc., etc., etc.. So that’s my explanation of what’s happened. It’s a troubled region, and we’ve continued to try to work it, to try to protect Americans, to try to go against terrorism, to try to protect people in Libya. But you can’t intervene militarily and try to change a regime unless you know what your end state is. It worked for us in Kosovo. I warned against it in Libya. I saw it unfolding in — Ahmed Chalabi in Iraq in 2003 didn’t know, didn’t have the power. It was wishful thinking on the part of the United States. So, please, let’s focus on the end state. We have a great military, you know, I’m not that worried about what’s going to happen. Yes, it’s dangerous. Yes, our troops are at risk. Yes. But the principal thing that’s at risk is what is the purpose of this operation, and where are we going with it, and how will we get there strategically?”