M.A.D does NOT WORK with countries who WANT TO DIE for a IMAGINARY friend in the FRICKIN SKY!!!!!
Iran – Failed Diplomacy & The Global Threat Beyond Nuclear
by DR. ROBIN MCFEE April 8, 2013
Recent events in North Korea should serve as notice what the world faces if more countries and state sponsored terrorist organizations obtain improvised thermonuclear devices, radiological bombs or outright nuclear weapons.
"The day after Iran announces they have a nuclear weapon, Saudi Arabia will have one." The sentiment of and paraphrased comment from Saudi King and his leaders. Turk al Faisal who was head of Saudi Intelligence and ambassador to Washington is quoted saying "the Gulf States must acquire nuclear power if the efforts fail to persuade Iran to give up its nuclear program."
Translation...Saudi Arabia will obtain a nuke.
It is no secret that the United Arab Emirates, Turkey and Saudi Arabia have more than a passing interest in nuclear weapons. Israel isn't the only country in the region concerned about Iran.
As of now radioactive and nuclear materials are scattered across the planet - from medical grade and industrial radiation sources that can be easily stolen to create "dirty bombs" to nuclear scientists for hire, and high explosives, specialized materials (beryllium for example) and "hot rocks go boom" including "lost" suitcase thermonuclear weapons from the old Soviet Union, that to suggest this threat is managed is ludicrous. China, Russia, the US, England, France, India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel have a variety of nuclear weapons - from relatively lightweight (under 500 kg) tactical devices, to heavy, long range warheads. Iran is likely there. Israel is the only nation to stop two countries from getting a nuclear program - the IAF took out the Iraq and Syrian programs. And what has the IAEA done? NOT much! What has the West done? Not much. Except say that Iran is years away from achieving a weapon or a warhead or a missile capable of carrying one. Nonsense! These so called experts said that in 2009, and since then Iran launched a satellite, obtained more advanced technologies, on and on and on. Oh and the barrier of lightweight warheads (under 1000 kg) is not a barrier. It was achieved years ago by several nations including China.
In the face of North Korea saber rattling, threatening to shoot nukes in our direction and attack South Korea (to which Obama must be celebrating as it takes focus away from his dismal Middle East and economic policies, and allows him the pretense of acting like commander in chief by sending a few toys to Korea) it is easy to suggest "see this is Iran in a few years!" I'd suggest it is capable of doing it now. I will avoid saying "I told you so." But I did
Iran gains much by the policy of yes I do, no I don't. They allude just enough to keep us honest and their allies intrigued, but deny enough to appease and encourage the Neville Chamberlain clan of diplomats. Diplomacy rarely works in the Middle East if the threat of violence, penalty, retribution, are not in the mix. Given our recent behaviors - modern parents to a bullying child (don't do that, please don't do that, pretty please don't do that) without significant consequences, what results would we expect?
We play nice to Egypts mobs, and they kill Christians, aid Hamas and denounce Israel. We play nice to Libya's mobs...supposedly pro democracy freedom fighters - and they kill our Ambassador. How's that foreign policy working for you President Obama? Failed foreign policy, an unwillingness to assert instead of appease go hand in hand with nuclear containment. Our allies don't respect us, our adversaries don't fear us.
What we must also recognize is the failed policies in nuclear containment. While Nancy Pelosi and other like minded Democrats in Congress were denouncing President Bush and others for going to more ecologically friendly and high efficiency warheads, under the yammering it would provoke an arms race, those same ineffectual folks on the Hill failed to address the real provocations - North Korea, Iran, Libya and Syria in an arms race of cataclysmic proportions over the last decade. Thanks to some pretty clever back room deals, Libya handed their program over. Israel blew up Syria's program. That left NK and Iran.
Iran is more sophisticated than North Korea or the other nuclear wannabees, although not above threatening the West, as it has over the years, and I would argue, it could be Iran NOW, not in a few years. We'll get to that in a moment.
The West, especially the US blew it with North Korea, not taking out their more centralized nuclear reactor and development program when it was easily targeted, and holding China on the sidelines by using economics as a bargaining chip. As an aside this is still a viable bargaining strategy and something we can still do with China, although the clock is ticking. China, like Iran and Russia, use proxies to undermine US influence, and see how far Washington can be pushed. No one in the Beltway seems to know how to push back. North Korea is yet another example of failed US global policy and an unwillingness or inability to act like a super power and protect US and global interests. We have a responsibility to ourselves and the world to limit threats that can imperil a planet. The UN cannot do it. The three super powers are left to do it. Except all 3 have now become more of the problem, and less of the solution. Gosh I miss the Cold War!
We would be wise to not lose sight of Iran during this time of Korean angst, and recognize there are some differences between Pyongyang, and Tehran. Iran is not run by a second generation nut case and butcher. It is run by religious clerics and a president who understands the West better than we do. Iran is well respected and liked by a variety of nations including Venezuela, not just ally countries; North Korea has few friends; mostly other rogue regimes like Iran and its long time benefactors China and Russia.
China - ally of North Korea and Iran
It never ceases to amaze me how many bad bargains for short term gain or political expedience our nation has made to China at a time when we could have tamed the Dragon with smart moves, but instead have allowed Beijing to tame us economically, electronically, and increasingly in global influence. Money always talks louder than just about anything else, and as one of the world's largest consumers, China is in a powerful position to influence using consumer clout and production capabilities. Whether selling air defense systems to Iran, or making energy deals with Iran, the partnership is undeniable. And while this is a discussion on Iran, it would be dangerous for our leaders to continue ignoring the China effect in global politics. It is worth recognizing that every single chess move we make against Iran is undone largely by China, occasionally by Russia or even Europe. Sanctions? What a joke. You can't dock someone's allowance and expect contrition when they have a friend slip them a $20. Even if energy and weapons starved entities stayed on the sidelines, and didn't do back door deals with Iran or other rogues when we employ sanctions, that only serves the dictators who can then point to the US as the cause of the peoples' suffering, stirring up the masses and garnering greater support. The politics of hatred and jealousy are powerful tools - in the Middle East at the hand of dictators who make the masses think their lot in life is the result of America, Christians, Israel, the West, and not because of their own failings, and in the US. Obama won in large measure on class warfare, the politics of jealousy and using bribery (entitlements) to buy votes. Hmm, maybe that explains why Obama seems so aligned with anti-West movements in the Middle East?
The foreign policy of pretty please
From day one when he snubbed Israel and chose Egypt as his first stop on the world apology tour, Obama has set sail early on a course of appeasement - a foreign policy of "pretty please" and "let's be friends" instead of acting as the head of a super power - a term that implies great influence and responsibility. He has failed on every level of foreign policy, which has left us with a nuclear Iran, an unstable Middle East that with such a power vacuum has allowed radical Islamic forces to take over, and our allies, some unsavory to be sure, to be killed or unseated. If one didn't know better (do we?) one would think the Obama strategy is to weaken America, undermine our allies and diminish our influence, because his policies in the Gulf - a vital region to our national security and daily needs as an industrial nation are doing just that!
The strength of George W Bush foreign and homeland policy included putting a very large army in Iran. As one Israeli source recently said, when the US had a large military presence in the region, Iran slowed down their work on nuclear weapons because they did not want to provoke an engagement.
Exit the US from Iraq, thank you Obama, and Iran gets busy busy busy on their nuclear program. Since the Obama victory in 2008, the world is more dangerous, not less. What I wrote about Iran in 2009 is true and is becoming a reality. Now that our military is out of Iraq, we reduced of our naval presence at a time when Iran and China are developing theirs, and an imminent withdrawal from Afghanistan, the only "good guys" with a significant amount of boots on the ground in the region with any clout, and deterrent capability, as well as the will to use it, is Israel.
This uncertainty about the US makes our remaining allies insecure. Any wonder they are looking for new weapons and another big brother?
IRAN
Iran is the big winner whenever there is unrest in the Middle East. Peace is bad for business. There is no profit in peace, as anyone in the business of preparedness or arms trade will tell you. Trust me, I know! So Iran foments unrest and profits by it. There is no question that Iran and Saudi Arabia are in a tug of war for influence. With Egypt a bloody mess, it can only remain historically a central nation in Arab affairs. But the real power brokers are now Iran, with one major holy city, and claim that Shia is the true Islam, and Saudi Arabia with two major holy cities, and Sunni. So the Sunni led states - Bahrain, UAE for example, and the Shia proxies as well as majority populations in Bahrain for example, faced off - and it was called the Arab Spring. To be sure nothing over there is homogenous or that completely straight forward. It is also a battle of radical fundamentalism against Western progressivism.
Over the years I've written about the Iranian threat - whether from Israel, Southern Lebanon, the West Bank, in the midst of the Arab Spring, covering the situation in Bahrain and other experiences and interactions with a variety of players on both sides of the divide. Three things have I been consistent, and unrefuted -
1. Iran has aspirations towards being a regional even a global power, and towards that end, has created energy and political alliances from Russian and China to Venezuela and beyond
2. Iran is a nuclear entity - some assembly required.
3. Iran is the single-most influential state sponsor of global terrorism, (unless you wish to include Saudi Arabian financing of pro Islam influences worldwide, and their contribution to 9/11, but we will address that at another time), creating a multi-continent network of criminal allies. Iran sponsors Hezbollah, arms Hamas, has developed terror training camps in South America and is doing so in North America through alliances with arms, drugs and human trafficking cartels, the underground of prisoners and radical Islamic mosques.
What few but the Israelis and those of us who are not drinking the Kool Aid® recognize is that Items 2 and 3 are inextricably linked, and are the vehicles by which Iran is achieving item 1. Everyone wants a powerful big brother. Nuclear capability makes you a very strong big brother.
Since 1979 under the failed policies of Jimmy Carter, the US embarked upon a struggle with radical Islam. Largely ignoring Tehran, Washington hoped the problem would go away or evolve. Since the 1970's Iran has failed to capture our attention, imagination or efforts. And we are paying the price for it. Iran has forced us to pay attention; not because of oil or gas, or culture or history, or science or the fact that historically our people have gotten along well, or that one of the largest enclaves of Jews remains in Iran, or large enclave of Persians is in Los Angeles, or that in some ways the country is, even under religious rule, not a complete disaster, but because they are nuclear.
While the official party line remains Iran is not there yet, common sense, if not a knowledge of nuclear terrorism screams "good Lord, the village idiot doesn't take 20 years to develop a nuclear program in the 20th/21st centuries!" Especially when Russia, China, North Korea, and Pakistan are helping you develop a program. Syria made great strides in much shorter time - to the point where Israel had to blow it up! So it boggles the mind that our ‘leaders' are still talking about Iran as if the West has a lot of time. We do not!
Iran is nuclear - some assembly required. If anyone doubts the resolve towards, and advancements achieved in the pursuit of Iran's nuclear capability, then you are living in Fantasyland. To suggest that Iran does not have enough enriched Uranium, and likely Plutonium to make at least an improvised nuclear device (IND) , is not only unrealistic, it is dangerous.
The Israeli policy of ambiguity
Recently I discussed Iran with various sources close to Israeli and other military players in the game - and discussed a variety of issues related to Nuclear Iran.
All agreed Israel plays very well the policy of ambiguity (we think they have nukes but no one ever confirms, brags or admits it, which allows everyone the security of ignoring it, knowing full well they exist), allows a certain level of comfort and room for diplomacy, as well as the power of the veiled threat! It is "suggested" that during the first Gulf War, if Iraq used nerve agent against Israel, the Jewish state would respond with tactical nukes. The SCUDS did not arrive with SARIN dripping out of them. Nukes, especially if you think they will be used, are an effective deterrent. Of course for that policy to work, folks have to wink along with you. Egypt, Jordan even Lebanon and Turkey recognized Israel is surrounded, outnumbered, and has made it clear they understand the ‘theoretical nukes of Israel' are for defensive purposes only. Can we share the same confidence if Iran claimed their program was for the same purpose?
Iran may be following the same strategy, and we allow it the same policy of ambiguity, in the hope of quietly pulling a Libya, and trying to use money, friendship, Publisher's Clearinghouse, and other sweeteners to lure the Clerics and Ahmadinejad away from their nuclear program.
But let's be sanguine about this, Iran WANTS to be a nuclear power - whether from some Messianic belief Allah willed the Islamic Republic have the ultimate weapon, or because it makes them a global player. Unlike Libya, also run by a nut, only slightly less than the crazy in Pyongyang, but a self protective one, which made it easier to let the French grab their nuclear toys, under US guidance, Iran is not run by a nut - cleric fanatics yes, crazies, no.
So the sobering truths facing us include:
1. Iran WANTS to be a power broker, and nuclear weapons, along with energy resources are a fast track to achieving their goals
2. Sanctions have not nor will they work. If they did, how could Iran afford their nuclear program, their advanced missile defense system, their satellite/space program?
3. Iran has a widely dispersed, complex and advanced nuclear program that includes both uranium and plutonium. This makes it very difficult to do an Iraq or Syria type airstrike to eradicate the threat. It also nearly guarantees that Iran has a nuclear weapon, some assembly required.
4. Iran is global - with affiliations stretching from the Persian Gulf to North and South America
5. Iran is arming itself with sophisticated offensive weapons - and positioning itself to close the Straits of Hormuz and choke off much of the West's fuel supply.
6. When Obama pulled our military from Iraq, he removed the single largest deterrent against Iran
7. China and Russia are still assisting Iran, in spite of some pullback by Moscow on the upgraded S300 air defense system (a deal likely brokered by Israel)
8. Iran has multiple layers of air defense systems, making it very likely any air assault, even from the vaunted IAF will likely result in significant losses.
9. Iran is building an under-the-mountain nuclear technology housing that would likely resist even the most advanced non-nuclear high explosive ordinance in the US or Israel arsenal
10. Iran continues to forge commercial alliances to develop and commercialize their energy resources
11. The West is fatigued by radical Islam protestors, the Euro-crisis, high energy costs, global economic challenges, and the attractive nature of China and India emerging as the worlds' largest consumer blocks. The US seems to be yesterday's news, and we did it to ourselves! Like England in the 1930's and 1940's, the US and Israel seem isolated in many ways to face evils that others merely wish away. And unfortunately we are not led by someone who believes in American exceptionalism.
What can we do about Iran?
If only Obama treated our adversaries the same way he fights the GOP, we might have a decent foreign policy! Given the Obama legacy seems more concerned about destroying the Republicans than building the Republic, we are in for a rough ride.
It is not too late but it will require complex, geoglobal thinking, and a willingness to strongarm our allies and our adversaries...you know, act like a superpower! What a concept.
1. China
The US remains perilously close to a hostage of China. Change the equation. We still have more of what they need as a large consumer but the clock is ticking. Our trade policies continue to favor Beijing. If we have the courage to make changes in the process we may just revitalize our economy.
Threaten to change import strategy and tariffs, trade agreements, and alter the balance of power from favoring China to favoring US business. Insist they stop devaluing their currency artificially by withholding those commodities, markets and technologies China wants. It is a game of brinksmanship, and they may call our bluff. But China MUST stop enabling Iran. It is unrealistic to expect they will withdraw all support from North Korea; they are neighbors. But China needs energy resources from Iran. We need to replace or stop those supplies. It may mean we ‘drill baby drill' and play some games - including some unsavory options...use your imagination. The stakes are very high - as long as money, technology and weapons go into Iran from China, Tehran moves forward with nuclear weapons, Hezbollah remains armed, Hamas moves ahead, the world gets more unsafe. Of course the US saying "no" to China is now a pipedream given we can't even stop or punish their cyber threat from stealing a terabyte of information from high security government facility.
2. India - Russia - Europe
India will need Iran as a supplier. Russia can only supply so many places w/out competition before the consumers seek other sources. Russia is also making energy deals with Iran. Russia is the only energy superpower in the world at the moment, especially with a reluctant leader in our White House who is undermining our ability to expand US energy resources (Arctic, Mid West, Southern Gulf and other resources go under explored). Our policy with India and Russia needs to include viable and beneficial alternatives to their supplying Iran. Unfortunately for the US, Russia uses Iran cleverly as a proxy to undermine our influence, so don't expect much, unless we really sweeten the deal. But we need to push back on Russia. Moscow has no problem crying foul when we want to insert missile defense systems in Eastern Europe, and we comply. It is time for a quid pro quo. We can still operate from strength if we have the will. Obama, unfortunately is more than happy to concede. A courageous leader would lay out a specific global strategy - "operation pariah" - as long as Iran seeks to complete their nuclear program, no nation that is civilized will buy from or sell to Iran. They are a leper nation. The US and our allies would then step up and supply our friends what Iran was selling to them. Using the Internet and other communications methods, we would convey to the Iranian people our objective to remove nuclear weapons from Iran, and when that occurred, normal relations might recommence.
Of course none of this will happen. Nations act in their own self interest, and no one is convinced they will be the first to suffer from Iran. They are playing a waiting game. And most are more than happy to allow Israel to be the target. The rationale for much of the West's inaction is simple...Iran is targeting Israel or the US...not us! Oh well. And then there is the reality - if Iran does something bad, Israel or the US will step in. Probably true. So with no skin in the game, the West sits on the sidelines.
3. Israel
Israel has LOTS of skin in the game. Nearly 65 years of terror attacks from neighbors, continuous anti-Semitism worldwide, and an America increasingly distancing itself from Tel Aviv, Obama's recent visit to Jerusalem notwithstanding. Israel faces on a daily basis the threats from Iran - and we need to pay close attention, there will be a test...
Iran is the biggest threat, and she sponsors Hamas and Hezbollah. Hezbollah has essentially defeated Israeli responses and in so doing demonstrated Israel is no longer the invincible nation that repelled so many countries back in the 1960's and 1970's. The veil has been parted. Power perceived is power achieved. And when the perception is one of vulnerability, watch out!
As an aside, one could assert that the paper tiger behavior we demonstrated when Iranians took over our embassy in 1979 has set the stage for attacks against us. Bush reset the perception, but Obama is sending us back to the Carter era. When a superpower is perceived as weak, threats increase against its interests. History proves this time and again.
Israel enjoyed a tremendous technology advantage over its adversaries since 1948. The Uzi was a battlefield tour de force, helping to negate the numerical advantage of Arabs against Jews. Drones, the Merkava advanced tank, and other innovations have kept the advantage until recently. In 2006 the 34 day war was a dramatic wake up call to Israel. Her tanks were all of a sudden vulnerable, her strategies defeated, the losses high, the wins non existent. This is not to suggest Israel is a toothless tiger. But the advantage she enjoyed is dwindling, as her enemies undergo their own military and weapons build up.
Hezbollah - Iran in Lebanon and Syria for all intents and purposes. So much for sanctions working! Iran has aided Hezbollah significantly. Antitank weapons, sophisticated tracking and monitoring, command and control systems, underground tunnels, bunkers, safe houses, and large weapons caches make Hezbollah a strong adversary. According to Yaakov Katz in his book Israel vs Iran in 2006 in Southern Lebanon Hezbollah had 15,000 rockets, simple design, lacking guidance systems, of which they fired 4,000 against Israel; those rockets had a 25 mile range. They could not hit Tel Aviv or Jerusalem or Dimona. In 2013 Hezbollah has an estimated 50,000 rockets and missiles including the Fajir which has an advanced guidance system, and can strike deep into Israel. This changes how Israel can defend itself. Imagine if Hezbollah got radioactive material or nuclear weapons?
Hamas - armed with advanced weapons, and funded by Iran - with ever increasingly sophisticated rockets and missiles, the days of simple Qassams out of the back of a car into Sderot (10,000 have been fired from Gaza into Jewish neighborhoods/civilian regions since the "Peace Treaty with Gaza" was signed) will give way to more deadly attacks. Just a few days ago more rockets were fired into Israel. This is not a theoretical risk from Iran. Imagine if Hamas gets its hands on a radiological or nuclear device?
Moslem Brotherhood - Egypt thanks to the Arab Spring, and assistance of the US is no longer a protective force for Israel or our interests in the region. Already the Sinai is increasingly dangerous and Gaza getting more support through that area. With Iran having a navy, fledgling though it is, and Egypt aiding Hamas, Israel faces an ever increasingly supplied adversary.
Al Qaeda - so far they have not been a major presence in the Israeli conflict, except for targeting Western business that service Jewish travelers, but how long they stay on the sidelines in the region remains an unknown. They seek advanced weapons, continue to disrupt and destroy throughout other regions. Al Qaeda is far from extinct, the death of UBL notwithstanding.
Because the threats are not merely theoretical to Israel, she has developed a broad array of strategies to address the Iranian threat. They do not begin with removing settlements from the West Bank. They also do not solely rely upon the US, in spite of Obama recently saying "we have your back" to Israel. Removing our forces from the region, disrespecting Netanyahu repeatedly, scolding Israel to "make peace" with Palestine as if the folks in Gaza or the West Bank had no responsibility to do so, and exhorting Tel Aviv to stand down any efforts to attack Iran - not confidence building actions from our POTUS. IF we had their back, we would stand shoulder to shoulder with Israel, bring in more military resources to the Gulf - from the coast off Haifa to Bahrain. Wishful thinking until 2016. Clearly Israel is in a precarious position. The world thinks they are our proxy; they are not. The world no longer empathizes with the suffering of the Jews. The world fears the radicals. And Iran is almost past the point of stopping without war. To suggest we could have and should have done things differently is to suggest we go back in time to create a perfect past.
Let Israel be Israel?
Maybe we should just let loose the dogs of war and Israel have at it. Perhaps Iran can only be contained, not stopped. Perhaps we have now lost two nuclear battles - allowing North Korea and Iran to become nuclear, and must resolve to not let it happen again. It is tempting to think Saudi or Turkey are our friends, so let them have it as a balance of power in the region. There is no doubt when Saudi Arabia is convinced Iran has a nuke, Riyadh will pull out all stops to obtain one. And knowing what I know about their military investments in the most state of the art technologies, and one of the worlds' leading buyers of detector technologies - their committement is real. The leading Sunni power will NOT allow the leading Shia power to be stronger or challenge the balance of power.
Allowing Iran to be fully functional is the start of a new nuclear arms race...maybe. There are those who think Saudi will just buy one of the few available for the highest bidder as deterrent, or Turkey will develop one anyway as a point of national pride, military security.
The bottom line - Our policies to date have failed, for many of the reasons outlined above, and because the UN and the IAEA are ineffective, complicit, underfunded, and toothless.
Economic strategies may work, but they have to be done in a coordinated way, one that isolates Iran, and involve the very nations that have had the most vested interest and efforts in supporting Iran....our friends who face cold winters (Europe) and major adversaries and competitors...China, Venezuela and Russia.
Military strategies have worked in the past. Our presence in Iraq, the Iraq-Iran war, all slowed down Iran, although the war may have catalyzed efforts for a nuclear advantage. Israel, the only military that has destroyed two nuclear programs faces a different era, and a more formidable foe at a time when anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian sentiment is high, when geoglobally there is a sleeping giant of multiple radical Islamists ready to riot in the streets from the US and Europe to the Pacific, and a US president who is not a Zionist.
Regime change - which one? Ahmadinejad or the clerics? They are not exactly one in the same, albeit intertwined. In Tony Horwitz insightful book on the Middle East Baghdad without a Map, he wrote about the public response when the Ayatollah died - millions...MILLIONS showed up to pay their respects. The Western press had never seen anything like it. In interviews with the public it became clear to him that religion mattered to Iranians, and the fundamentalism wasn't a fad. We would do well to remember that theocracy in the Middle East is not a 4 letter word. We cannot march in there with promises of democracy, iPhones and the latest fashions, and expect being embraced as the second coming. Besides, it is unclear if POTUS, who stood on the sidelines for the one revolution that might have helped the West between 2009 and 2011, would reengage or even verbally support such a regime change. There are those who think regime change is a valid strategy. Perhaps. But how much time do we have?
Iran poses a global threat - from supporting terrorists, to emerging as a powerful energy player to having a nuclear capability. There are folks in Iran pro West. We abandoned them. We continue to ignore them now.
Iran - Plutonium or Uranium? Does it matter? I wrote that in 2009, and the questions as well as the concerns have not changed.
The biggest threat of all - the use of nuclear and radiological materials as terrorist weapons. The notion that Iran will lob Shahab, Seljir or their newer missiles sporting nuclear warheads towards Poland, Israel or anywhere else is eclipsed by the very real possibility they will allow their many proxies in the Gulf, in the United States and Europe to have radiological materials or portable nuclear devices and that those state sponsored terrorists will bring one into Israel or elsewhere. Even the threat of such an exigency is a major game changer. Consider how influential the threat of angry radical Moslems in major cities across Europe or the US and the concessions they gain because of it? Add to that the concern Al Qaeda or Hezbollah or Hamas would get their hands on nuclear materials and technological assistance...all under the protection of "plausible deniability" which is what Iran would have, until you typed the material and identified the source. But so what?! By then a big boom went off.
Personally I believe Iran will use proxies and utilize the strategy ‘death by a thousand cuts' to harm Israel and wear down Lebanon, Israel and allow Palestinians to gain momentum, and will use the threat of nuclear to gain global recognition and concessions. It has been a strategy well played.
Back in 2009 I wrote about the many capabilities Iran had towards obtaining weapons grade Uranium and Plutonium - from heavy water and breeder reactors, to laser and advanced generation centrifuges. And while the world, especially 1600 yammer on about sanctions, and diplomacy - all activities that buy time for Iran, we get closer to seeing the nuclear club grow. Diplomacy in this situation is wishful thinking. You cannot successfully negotiate when each side holds objectives anathema to the other. Especially when one side seems anemic, weak, and the other side aggressive, strident. Only when each side has a powerful bargaining position or chip, can diplomacy work. Duh! Events from last week reveal the predictability of what European diplomats experienced. Iran continues to win.
It would be foolish to think our leaders and diplomats don't have a strategy, or are not working behind the scenes to influence Iran. Unfortunately, their marching orders come from a narrative that has little chance for success. And, dare I suggest, that may be the point of the exercise? I sometimes wonder if Obama is allowing diplomacy to continue in the hope Iran gets so far out in front that it makes the military option unsavory, untenable, seeming too "Bush-like" and therefore taken off the table. another crisis averted by the left and POTUS. More like another crisis ignored. The sad reality is that doing nothing, or the illusion of peaceful resolutions are just that..doing nothing and illusions, especially in the Middle East.
Israel and the US differ on where the line in the sand should be placed. The US says it won't let Iran have a nuclear weapon. How they define nuclear weapon or the means to prevent it remain perilously vague. The Israelis on the other hand state they will not allow Iran to have enough material to make a nuclear weapon. That can be quantified in kilograms. But setting a limit on quantities and knowing what they are or where they are, let alone how to remove them, is another issue.
The broader issue remains - shutting down the Iranian influence as state sponsor of terrorism, and future threat to the West.
No Western political regime could or should take the risk these materials will fall into Jihadist hands, let alone criminal cartels. Not with an emerging caliphate, and cells/5th column in the West, a porous Southern border with the failed state of Mexico, or Israel surrounded again by hostiles. But we are so terrified about being called racist, anti-immigrant, Islamophobic, or just plain unsporting that we keep appeasing, and ignoring these interconnected threats. Will the US have Israel's back? Will we recognize that a threat against one Western nation is a threat against all of us? That geography, oceans and mountains no longer protect us? Or will we continue to appease in the hope that the shark is full from eating those we sacrifice, before it gets to us?
Iran - Failed Diplomacy & The Global Threat Beyond Nuclear - is it too late? Is it much ado about nothing? What will the next generation write about how we protected the world? The clock is ticking.....
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment