U.S. faces possibility of nuclear Iran
February 14, 2005
While in Europe, I found myself in the unpleasant position of having to defend the president… While in Europe, I found myself in the unpleasant position of having to defend the president on a couple of occasions. I wasn’t happy to do it, but he was being accused of orchestrating the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, and that was a bit much — yes, even for me.
If a few conspiracy theorists offend you with their absurdity, would you believe that 33 percent of Fox News viewers believe that we have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?
Of course, I needn’t tell you that we haven’t, but don’t be surprised. As Paul Wolfowitz said way back in July of 2003, the issue of WMDs was only a “bureaucratic [one] … that everyone could agree on.”
But the issue of rogue states obtaining nuclear weapons is back in headlines with North Korea’s announcement that it possesses them, and Iran’s insistence on their development, despite diplomatic efforts from the Western world. While there is some evidence that North Korea is willing to talk on its terms, the same does not appear to be true for Iran.
The question is: What can we do? The regrettable answer: not much.
Though President George W. Bush gained political capital in the election, he remains politically bankrupt on the global stage as a result of the war in and occupation of Iraq. Consequently, military action is clearly out of the question. The soft diplomatic approach Europe has insisted on has proven unproductive, and economic sanctions — though an option — are a tough sell politically. Even if imposed, the likely result is an ineffective embargo because of Iran’s oil wealth, and even worse, a nationalistic reaction that would reinforce the current regime.
Iran is aware of these realities.
As a result, Iran and North Korea are acting in their national interests by pursuing the development of nuclear weapons. Both fear future military action by the United States, and after seeing the third point on the stated Axis of Evil undergo regime change without firm justification, each feels understandably threatened.
If Bush reasoned that the war on Iraq would discourage his enemies from obtaining WMDs for fear of intervention, he is even more foolish than is commonly thought. Instead of scaring them away, he has scared them into accelerating their nuclear programs as a deterrent to military action. After all, there is no guarantee against foreign invasion or an equalizer to the opposition’s overwhelming military advantage quite like the possession of nuclear weapons.
With each step toward attaining WMDs, Iran and North Korea increase their leverage on the United States. Politically crippled by the war in Iraq, we are rendered bystanders, left to talk and threaten without any appealing policy choices with which to address the situation.
Analysts deem North Korea willing to negotiate in exchange for a non-aggression pact, among other things, but what about Iran?
Regime change alone wouldn’t solve the problem, even if it were a realistic possibility. As an Iranian woman told The New York Times back in May, “We’re going to have them. Maybe we do already. It’s our right. We’re Iranians, so what do you expect? Just as you want America to be strong, we want Iran to be strong.”
She’s right. Also last week, but commanding little attention, government officials declared that a new generation of nuclear weaponry was underway in design, intended to replace our aging stash.
It’s different because they’re the bad guys, I know.
Iran, North Korea and the United States are all pursuing national interests. These have come into conflict with one another: the former are taking advantage of the currently favorable situation to advance their own.
And so, without viable policy options and with the scales of leverage tipped against us, the “but you’re the bad guys” plea stands all by its lonesome, and I imagine it is not particularly convincing to Iranians. Accordingly, we may soon be confronted with the reality of a permanently nuclear Iran — and possibly North Korea, too.
E-mail Pedja at [email protected].