I received a great deal of feedback (positive or otherwise) on my Understanding US Policy Options On Iran, including an apparent mention in the Washington Monthly of all places (I'm not complaining, it's just that that's the last place I expected my concerns to be noted) with a lot of people asking me what I think about the US decision to offer Iran membership in the WTO as well as airline parts in return for ditching their nuclear program.
Well, ask and you shall receive ...
As I noted at the time:
Do we get any actual tangible guarantees to that effect [that Iran is willing to discontinue its nuclear program], or do we just get a signed document and trust in the good will of Khamenei and the ayatollahs? If so, is such an agreement worth the paper that it's printed on?
... Okay, so basically the Euros made a series of requests for us to help them out and Bush seems to be weighing his options as far as what we can do to assist them on the off-chance that the Europeans can persuade Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions ...
... I'm not opposed to this whole idea that there has to be some give and take in the negotiating process with Europe, that's how politics works after all. What I'm a lot more fuzzy on is just what Europe is willing to give up in order to ensure that Iran doesn't becoming a nuclear power ...
... If that's the case, then my guess is that the administration is considering joining the European approach with the opinion that it is likely to fail. This also seems to imply that the Euros are willing to bend if the issue comes to the UNSC if the US bends on the issue of joining the talks - they may be hoping that Russia or China vetoes any UNSC sanctions, as Bergner noted - making this more on less a quid pro quo ...
The Euro approach is good as a stalling tactic while we figure out our strategy, not as a serious solution in of itself.
These opinions remain pretty much unchanged and you'll forgive my skepticism at taking the mullahs' claims of desiring peaceful coexistence with the West seriously when they're putting the British boats they captured last year on display for the faithful. The whole negotiating process between the has a certain Groundhog Day quality to it that Michael Ledeen first noted back in November:
The European "solution" to the threat of Iranian atomic bombs bids fair to join the "peace process" as the most boffo running gag in the history of show biz. Every few months, the elegantly dressed diplomatic wizards from London, Paris, and Berlin race across a continent or two to meet with Iranians dressed in turbans and gowns, and after some hours of alleged hard work, they emerge with a new agreement, just like their more numerous counterparts engaged in the peace negotiations. The main difference is that the peace-process deals seemed to last for several months, while the schemes hammered out with the mullahs rarely last more than a week or two. Otherwise, it's the same sort of vaudeville routine: a few laughs, with promises of more to come.
Indeed. And one of the reasons that I think we're willing to engage in this dubious song-and-dance is that we're still waiting on the results of the preemptive review concerning US intelligence on Iran due at the end of the month that seems geared in large part to avoid the intelligence problems that occurred with respect to Iraq.
In addition, the articles that have come out since the US shifted its stance with respect to Iran answered one of the more important concerns I had with the shift, namely what Europe is willing to give up. According to press reports, the Euros are willing to refer Iran to the UNSC for sanctions in the event that diplomacy fails, suggesting that they might be willing to part with their economic ties to the mullahs in the name of nuclear non-proliferation. I'm still not entirely convinced that there isn't a fix in here (China or Russia could veto the sanctions, for example), but it's always nice to hear that the course to which we have pledged ourselves isn't entirely a one-way street when it comes to the need for concessions. Next step: defining with the Euros the specific circumstances that constitute the failure of diplomacy with respect to Iran.
And for those interested in tracking the day-to-day developments with respect to Iran, I highly recommend Regime Change Iran's daily news briefs.
I tend to think it's better to try diplomacy before sending 1500 people off to die in a foreign country.
We did. It failed. We made good on the "or else" explicit in that diplomacy.
Now Saddam and his sons are dead, other countries in the region no longer worry about Iraq as a threat, dictators make statements about not wanting to be treated like Saddam, and the recent Iraqi experience with democracy is influencing other Arabs (like Lebanon, Egypt, et. al.) to demand freedoms of their own.
If you can't see past the talking half of diplomacy, your moniker "Historian of Decline" becomes utterly apropos.
Then i guess the likes of the 40% Losses we suffered on Iwo Jima would have sent Mr leftist-Slavus into contortional fits.
I still find it amazing that our losses are so low.
There is just no good solution for Iran, and the only thing worse than the choices of action is inaction.
One can hope the Iranians themselves will throw off the Mullas, but i wonder if it will happen soon enough.
Be better get cracking on those bunker busting nukes.
"According to press reports, the Euros are willing to refer Iran to the UNSC for sanctions in the event that diplomacy fails"
Great. Except that diplomacy never fails, it simply enter a new phase with every setback. Dont doubt the Euros will be just as happy trying to convince the Iranians to give up their nuclear arsenal as they are trying to prevent its construction.
The trick is to cut through the bullshit and get to the fundamentals, otherwise you get snowed. The Mullahs will never give up their nukes for any conceivable combination of carrots, simply because there is nothing that can be offered more useful to them than the nukes. Indeed, they are probably convinced all the incentives will easily be theirs anyway once they have their weapons. They are probably correct. As far as the Euros go, they will never consent to force being used, period, and will never really press for true sanctions. So we should stop thinking in those terms except as the smokescreen that it is to buy us some time.
Suppose that there is a flying pig moment, and the UNSC slaps sanctions on Iran. Then the big question would be "SO WHAT?" I thought that the point was to stop Iran from gaining nuclear weapons, and I don't see how sanctions would do that. So why are the diplomats so fixated on that solution?
Dan,
One option I didn't see in your original post and have seen nowhere else is this:
Given that missle strikes on the nuclear program are unlikely to be successful, what about missle strikes on the government or security apparatus instead. It can't be that hard to find out when a large number of the mullahs would be gathered in one of their enclaves.
Lest this be seen as overly blood thirsty, let me remind you that one of the goals of the "Shock and Awe" attack was to pull of a decapitation strike on Saddam & Sons Ltd. This was mentioned at the time, if only in passing.
It's a smart idea for the US to bide its time with foolhardy Euro initiatives while waiting for the Iranians to make a mistake. By pretending to be on-board with the Europeans, the Americans have at least glossed over the rift between them and Europe. Now if the Iranians remain intransigent, at least the US has the smokescreen of saying "we tried, didn't we fellas?" In time the belligerent and arrogant stance and proclamations of the bearded ones may annoy even the Europeans, at least enough to have them wink their eyes at American/Israeli military intervention.
Bide our time, all it will take is some sort of "incident" and the Americans will have all the reasons they need to invade. There's still a year or five before Iran has nukes.
#6
Not a solution because not only the Mullah's want to have a nuclear industry but the rest of the Iranian population want it to. You may be able to kill the mullah's but what do you do about noble price winners?
ps. Nuclear industy is a euphorisme for the possibility to make nukes as it is why half of Europe has a nuclear industry.
HoD:
Probably, which is why (as Joe notes) we did before we went into Iraq. Moreover, nobody is currently advocating an invasion of Iran.
Raymond:
I agree, but we need to know what the time table is for the mullahs' nuclear program, which is why we need to know where our intelligence is on the subject. This review gives us the necessary stalling time to do just that.
Mark Buehner:
That's the whole process for the sake of process mentality that I and others have critiqued before. This is one of the reasons why I view our willingness to indulge the Euros on this particular flight of fancy as being more or less a stalling tactic while we formulate our own strategy.
Completely agreed, which is why I don't have much faith in this whole democratic initiative to begin with. Iran has already rejected the US's "carrots," near as I can tell, but what the heck, that's probably our fault for some reason ...
Jacksonian Retribution:
European economic sanctions on Iran would have a horrible effect on the country's economy. I have my doubts that they'll actually go through with it, but the whole Iranian strategy for the last several years has been to present a more moderate front to the West in hopes of gaining better economic ties. They've got a lot of Euros pretty excited about the whole idea and it remains to be seen whether or not the mullahs are going to throw nearly a decade's worth of effort down the toilet so they can become a nuclear power.
Oscar:
The problem is that the immediate target that comes to mind is Qom, which I think we can agree that bombing would be unwise for a whole host of reasons. There is also a very real fear that many Iranians who would otherwise support the US would rally around their nation if they saw the airstrikes as the harbringers of a US invasion.
Moreover, Iran is an oligarchy rather than a dictatorship like Iraq was, which somewhat decreases the effectiveness of a decaptitation strike. No one individual is essential to the survival of the regime, which is why even if Rafsanjani or Khamenei were killed it wouldn't necessarily mean the end of the Islamic Republic. Think General Suleimani or the Abadgaran movement that would like succeed them would be a kinder, gentler group of fanatics?
Philip Cassini:
I agree with your former but not your latter point. There are other ways to deal with Iran than invasion - what is happening in Lebanon right now is living proof of that.
a:
Who do you think is more likely to use the nukes, the mullahs or their detractors?
As I've said before, there's a very good reason why we don't live in fear of Germany, Japan, or Australia going nuclear ...
Dan,
Thanks for the mention of Dr. Zin and Regime Change Iran.
Tell me Not! The Mad Mullahs of Iran are actively filtering Dr. Zin's IP/domain addresses. I guess they know the jig's up, if the real news gets to tthe Iranian people.
We can't have that! The Iranian people need access to objective news of the day. More on this later.
The lame MSM sure isn't covering the stories of the Iranian people.
Dr. Zin can use all our help in mirroring his daily news summaries on Iran on other blog sites.
Keep checking Dr. Zin's site for info how the Blogos can help the Iranian people to effect their own regime change!
GAME ON - Let's Rock!
The think the ability to interdict Irans ability to produce nukes via missile strikes is being undersold. We dont need to utterly destroy the program. Nuclear weapons production is a tricky, intricate business with many moving parts. Knocking a few of them off their axles and hopefully killing a few skill techs along the way would slow the program for some arbitrary amount of time, and we could do this regularly as long as we chose.
The only question is whether we are willing and able to deal with whatever Iranian payback they would have in store. If we are properly prepared, this too works to our advantage as it gives us the excuse to hunt and kill Iranian and allied military/terrorist assets.
We need to give the Iranians a more dire choice. Retaliating to our attacks will risk an end to the tools of the Mullahs rule, the Iranian air force, navy, missile, and intelligence assets, all destroyed at stand off ranges and likely with minimal losses to ourselves. Any further escalation would threaten their oil infastructure. I call that the 'Iron Eagle Dilemna'.
Roger L. Simon has an interesting post on this subject, but check out the comments of TMJUtah in particular. I liked this follow-up, and his reasoned and reasonable reply to a horrified liberal as well.
Dan,
It will come down to an American military conquest of Iran to effect a regime change.
The preliminaries you are seeing are Bush trying to provide political cover for Tony Blair.
I view it as far to high a price to pay given the reality of an Iranian nuke in as little as four to six months.
#9
It doesn't matter who is more likely to use the bomb. (democracies are in my opinion more likely than semi rational dictatorships)
But the mullah's can't back down publicly on the nuclear industry because that is about their only popular policy and making a bomb when you have a nuclear industry is simple. So a nuclear industry means trouble with the US and no nuclear industry means trouble with the people. And the people are more dangerous after Iraq.
Also nobody should be living in fear when the Iranians get nukes. They are not that dangerous.
#11
diplomacy would probably be more succesfull in slowing the program than a bombing run
#13
Serious military operations (not a bombing run) may lead to a regime change that would fight the conquest and be highly anti-mullah. Do you consider what the price of war against such are regime would be?
What if the bush wave sweep Iran too Mister Postmodern creature "a"
Wow
The Iranian People's SHOCK & AWE in Tehran!
Current reports reveal that The Iranian people are conducting their own SHOCK AND AWE campaign against the Mullahs throughout Iran - and have taken the opportunity of Chahar Shanbe Soori to take their country back. If they can continue the fight for at least 48 hours they have a good shot!
-via report from an Iranian
Spread the word and the photos!
"Clashes with the Islamic Regimes thugs are taking place across Iran on this day which celebrates an ancient Persian celebration of Chaharshanbe Soori. The people of Iran, despite the Islamic Regimes efforts to eradicate Iranian celebrations, have taken to the streets in the masses to take part in this great celebration.
In Tehran a large crowd is moving towards "Rajaei Shahr Prison".
Callers describe some areas as "war zones"!
The power of some fireworks have crushed the windows of shops and government buildings in the vicinity.
Fires are lit in the streets.
MORE PHOTOS
Cars are being put on fire
The financial institutions of the Islamic Republic are being attacked and put on fire
Pictures of the Islamic Republic's leaders are being burnt
Slogans against the Islamic Republic and its leaders are being shouted by the people
People are burning tires in the streets and the Islamic Regimes thugs have attacked people, other disciplinary forces such as the "Pasdaran" have stood by on the sidelines as the people of Iran celebrate this POLITICAL CELEBRATION!
Gunshots are being heard in major Iranian cities
Another police car in Tehran has been lit on fire
Hundreds of people have been arrested but hundreds of thousands of Iranians have demonstrated tonight that they are willing to stand up to oppression by all means and they shall continue their demonstrations, against the anti-Iranian Islamic Regime, throughout cities across Iran!
In Esfehan people are calling for people to converge at the Hotels in which the OPEC representatives are staying at (Hotel Abbas is one of them...)
Demonstrations are taking place in all provinces across Iran from Kurdestan, Azerbajian, Khuzestan, Mazandaran.....
My point is that liberal Iran wont be pro American and still will want the posibility to make nukes.
[...]
Source
How much you want to bet the morally obtuse leftist MSM (redundantcy alert) are hoping for millions of deaths to deny Bush another victory.
They will perhaps ignore this rather massive (biggest so far) happening across Iran, a news blackout, the students was all around the hotell where the Opec conference was as well as all over the cities all over the country. and yet the news report this morning was in Walter Durranty mode.
Gotta just love that leftist morality, as seen again in the media.
Who cares about the prospects of another 70 million people ? after all if it dont hurt Bush or make the USA look bad, its not usefull to them.
Behold the left.
A. your full of it, as usual
I suppose the above letter is CIA eh ?
And its not isolated, its the universally reported (outside of leftist moonbattery) concensus of the freedom movement there.
Perhaps a good effect of iran young being out of the reach of the blood stained stalinst left in achedamia, you have not been able to brainwash them and they are rejecting the mullahs
Thats ok, stay in your silly dream world while world events keep throwing you off ballance, shifting under your feet and dispersing your leftist sandworks.
Its good to see the NION moonbats eat crow, yup, not in their name, not without their constant opposition and ankle biting, and we and history, will remember.
"My point is that liberal Iran wont be pro American and still will want the posibility to make nukes."
The Iranian citizenry is the most pro-American in the region (which isnt saying a whole lot admittedly), and will be even moreso thousands and thousands of refugees living in America return.
Secondly, democratic nations are amendable to incentives and penalties that tyrants are not. Economic sanctions only impact the people. Dictators dont lose their jobs or go hungry.
You could interpet that as. France sucks, hail Bush, and help us any way you can please.
a..... getting a clue yet ?
Source
That they are the pro american at the moment doesn't mean anything. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. But the old friend is often the new enemy when the old enemy is beaten. Iran with nukes would also not need to fear any of its neighbours so why would they be allies with US?
I dunno a, maybe oil development deals, greater access to American markets, technology, unfreezing of assets from '79, not worrying about Iraq redux? Just a thought.
79 assets are not that big and the unfreezing of them are a given when the mullah's loose power. Same is true of technology. Oil development deals are of the kind that the president of the US will visite tiny third world states to get the it. American market very far from Iran so not that important outside of oil. And no Iraq redux with Iranian "nuclear industry"
"Iran with nukes would also not need to fear any of its neighbours so why would they be allies with US?"
Because we share values like liberty and freedom?
I give up, i just cant relate to a guy squirting his urine bile and other body products all over the hopes fears and dangers of brave people risking so much
People died last night, some face a fate worse than death, to the point that death will be welcome when it finally comes.
What are they angry at ?
Post subject: HELP PREVENT the stoning of a 13 yr old Iranian schoolgirl.
Lots for them to be angry about ...
Nope, im sorry, i just cant relate to those wishing for bad, hoping for failure, wishing that the hopes and lives of people be snuffed out, all for a cheap political point against Bush
I now understand where the left got the personel for the SS the NKVD and KGB, Maos Red Guard, those that worked the killing fields in the land of the Red Kihmers, and John Kerry, who called the director of the Veitnamese %5 death quota of mass murder the "George Washington" of Asia.
And I just cant relate to them ...
>Do you consider what the price of war against
>such are regime would be?
You haven't considered the price of not fighting that war.
I prefer my conflicts to remain WMD free.
#24
and you proof it every day
#26
I to like it when they can't fight back
_Top ranking ayatollahs are involved in not only drug trades, but sex trades, as well as trades of Human Organs. Children and teenage girls are the hottest commodity after Oil. The number of children and young girls and boys missing is on the rise every day. Number of overdose on drugs is just as high. In such chaotic atmosphere of crime & drug overdose, caused by Mafia style dictatorship, the rape victims from lower income families must be put to death by stoning! _
I'm not saying that it isn't true but this sounds like pure propaganda. Never use propaganda that sounds like pure propaganda because people wont be persuaded by it and it will make them doubt you words.