Does the World Have the Will to Fight Iran?
By Alan Stewart Carl | Related entries in Foreign Policy, WarWhen I say “fight,� I don’t mean militarily, although it could come to that. What I mean is, do we have the will to stand up to Iran, to keep standing up to Iran when appeasement and acquiescence would be so much easier?
A nuclear Iran is a horrifying thought, but it could be our future reality. Russia and China do business with Iran and will be slow to allow the UN to intervene meaningfully. America is entangled in Iraq and Afghanistan, our populace is increasingly weary of conflict and our President has squandered much of the popular support he needs to lead effectively. And Europe? A nuclear Iran would have warheads that could threaten European cities, so the EU’s stake is high.
But with their soft voice and small militaries, do they have the leverage necessary to confront Iran? Already, the EU’s diplomatic tactics have failed and, even with the UN involved, neither Europe nor America seem to have the stomach for tough sanctions.
That leaves Israel, the nation with everything at stake. Undoubtedly, Israel would not hesitate to bomb Iranian facilities. But unless the will of the Western World is behind them, Israel could end up endangering itself even more by taking such unilateral action. Without the support of other Western nations, Israel cannot maintain her security.
Diplomacy could prevail. Sanctions could work. A war is not inevitable. But unless the rest of the world commits itself fully to denying Iran nuclear weapons, the theocratic regime of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will doubtlessly continue working towards acquiring such weapons.
We must find the will to stop them, even if it does come to war. But we might not have the resolve.
The last two paragraphs of Victor Davis Hanson’s essay in today’s Chicago Tribune sums up the tragic scenario which could unfold if we let it.
Money, oil and threats have brought the Iranian theocrats to the very threshold of a nuclear arsenal. Their uncanny diagnosis of Western malaise has now convinced them that they can carefully fabricate a Holocaust-free reality in which Muslims are the victims and Jews the aggressors deserving of punishment. And thus Ahmadinejad’s righteously aggrieved (and nuclear) Iran can, after “hundreds of years of war,” finally set things right in the Middle East.
And then a world that wishes to continue to make money and drive cars in peace won’t much care how this divinely appointed holy man finally finishes a bothersome “war of destiny.”
A world without Israel? That would be an unforgivable sin.
This entry was posted on Friday, January 20th, 2006 and is filed under Foreign Policy, War. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
January 20th, 2006 at 2:38 pm
Israel is here to stay .. why cant everyone live with that
January 20th, 2006 at 2:54 pm
Stop this mass hysteria! Calm down and don’t get swept away by unfounded fears. Put things in prespective. If not it becomes a self fulfillng prophecy. We are the much more powerful one, we can deal with Iran in a rational way. But first we have to be rational and not hysteric. And we need to come down from our high horses.
January 20th, 2006 at 3:39 pm
Goodman,
I don’t think it’s hysterical to realize the severity of the situation. The choice is really a nuclear Iran or a non-nuclear Iran. The former is clearly preferable and it is not irrational to say we should stand firm. To be clear, I am not advocating military action, only pointing out it could get to that point. It’s a good thing to talk about worst-case-scenarios now, when Iran is still at least a year or more away from a bomb. We certainly don’t want to wait until a real crisis erupts before we question whether or not we have the will to handle it. It’s these kinds of discusions now that help prevent hysteria in the future.
January 20th, 2006 at 4:55 pm
Thanks for your response Alan. I suppose you’re right and I don’t see the severity of the situation of a nuclear Iran. Yes I much prefer a non-nuclear bomb equipped Iran or for that matter Pakistan, India and other countries in their proper turn. How are we dealing with them and our own nuclear policies? Pakistan has had the largest group of hard core non-friendly- to- west Muslims and a Military bred dictator in power who could lose his grip suddenly just like Shah did in Iran. And the population is much poorer than Iran….. But I do see here a situation of the mass hysteria of the moment, like it was with Iraq before. So what happened with North Korean dire crises and their bombs? As I said we are the biggest military and economical power in the world and if we are wise we should be able to work this out without resorting to that power. We should not have even spoken of sanctions, war or any other forms of punishment without having clearly proven that Iran is making a bomb. Just being afraid that they might be is not enough.
Assuming Iran makes the bomb- only assuming- the biggest danger I see to us and the west is that we will have to negotiate with them in the same terms as we do with India or Pakistan or China (our one time mortal enemy and the great communist threat was it?) And if their economy and the competition permit them to increase we’ll have to pay their price for their oil or not to buy it at all. This would be very unpleasant.
The bottom line is that we could no longer dictate our terms just based on our superior military although we will still have our economical, technological and social advantage in our dealings with them. But that takes diplomatic skills and sophistication that have been in short supply lately. We no longer carry a big stick and walk softly which takes a certain wisdom and intelligence, we go around and beat the bushes and over stretch our muscles.
And all that is assuming there will a bomb.
It is clear to me that the motives to scare us beyond reason are not what they seem to be and so I keep calm and think and study our past conflicts for myself so that I can put thing in their proper perspective.
January 20th, 2006 at 5:59 pm
Goodman,
It is certainly unfortunate that Pakistan has the bomb. And more so that North Korea does (although that’s still not entirely proven). What makes Iran even worse is their political establishment and geographic location. They could seriously distablize the Israeli/Palestenian situation with just one threat. And they could blackmail European countries. And they could pass the technology and/or equipment onto other so-called rogue nations and groups.
It is true that a nuclear Iran might not cause as many dire problems as many predict. But do we want to get into that situation? Once they’re armed, our ability to even negotiate with them goes away–and we can forget about even the most targeted of strikes. Wouldn’t it be better to close this door now instead of just hoping they don’t get the bomb or, if they do, hoping that they use it responsibly?
January 20th, 2006 at 7:39 pm
Yes it would definitely better to close this door now. But at what price? That’s the question. I am all for settling this problem now and for holding them to what they say which is that they don’t want a bomb but nuclear energy. My point is that we are not going about this in a rational way and are talking in a manner that is out of proportion to the real problem and will cause even a greater harm and danger to the world and our safety. And that’s what I call hysteria.
Right now we are not negotiating now anyway, just threatening. Later we will have to negotiate and that was my other point.
I enjoyed our discussion.
January 20th, 2006 at 10:55 pm
Israel is a One Nuclear Bomb country…
What I mean is … it would only take one nuke to take out the whole country of Israel as we know it. Israel will never– ever let Iran get close to having a working… deliverable Nuclear Weapon… ever!!! No matter what the rest of the world thinks……
Great post Alan…
AubreyJ………
January 21st, 2006 at 3:43 am
I am not sure east Asia is less strategically important than the mideast. A crisis cascading in either could stop the world.
North Korea has formidable smuggling capaciities and could get a bomb on container shipping.
Billions to star wars don’t stop this.
Israel can only do limited damage to the Iranian program. The desire for it as savior is silly.
An extensive US military effort, not much invasion, but bombing could possibly force changes, but troops in Iraq are vulnerable to Iranian allied militias.
A response to Iran require preparation for massive conservation and sacrifice. The militant right believes you battle crisis by tax cuts and consumption. They will not like “Jimmy Carterism.”
We went to war against the axis of evil and 2 of it’s members have positioned themselves in ways uncomfortable to us. The usual response of the militant right is to ignore this since it would reflect badly on the administration.
So one has every reason to be pessimistic.
January 21st, 2006 at 12:47 pm
I could be wrong… but I think you might be underestimating Israel’s abilities, Alan… Yet with that said, Israel doesn’t have to completely take out Iran’s Nuclear Programs… Putting Iran’s programs back for some years would most likely do the trick…
With Iran’s population at around 40% or so… being 14 years of age or younger… and most not liking those who run their government… I would say the problem in Iran will take care of itself… We just need more time and backing for these future Iranians to take charge of their country and future…
Israel will protect herself from all threats… and for Israel… Iran with a Nuclear Weapon is not only a threat… but a major treat to her very survival. That kind of threat will never be allowed…
AubreyJ………
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:10 pm
neither Europe nor America seem to have the stomach for tough sanctions.
One of the very BIG difficulties here is the effect that sanctions or military action would have on the world oil market.
With all of the rhetoric going on at present, that market is getting increasingly jittery - consequence is increasing oil prices at $69 and counting. How will GWB and co rationalise that - “…well we gotta take out I-ran so that they cant think about having a nuke weapon but in the meantime oil is going to cost 50% more…” Remember that the US has already purchased its winter heating stock for 05/06 so the real impact in the US will not be until the July - Sept quarter.
allen -“We went to war against the axis of evil and 2 of it’s members have positioned themselves in ways uncomfortable to us. “
But surely that is what war is all about. No one saw that happening?
ASC - “It is true that a nuclear Iran might not cause as many dire problems as many predict. But do we want to get into that situation? Once they’re armed, our ability to even negotiate with them goes away–and we can forget about even the most targeted of strikes. “
I think this gets very close to the heart of the matter.
It is not a case of the danger that Iran poses if it were nuclear armed, so much as the fact that having those arms would make Iran another nation that the US would have to treat as an equal rather than as the beach weakling that can be bullied into buying the icecreams and coke.
March 12th, 2006 at 11:03 pm
We are not Iran’s enemy, Israel is. Why is Israel Iran’s enemy? Maybe we should find out and spell it out in the media, so our public knows the real reasons behind possible hostile actions towards Iran.
March 13th, 2006 at 12:22 am
All this talk of what Israel or the US will or will not allow. Without nuclear or military weapons they couldn’t talk with such bravado. Without such weapons, Israel couldn’t occuppy the Palestinians, the US couldn’t occupy Iraq. And neither could threaten Iran. Iran has the right for peaceful and military nuclear weapons, just like Israel and the US. The real problem here is the conflicts between Israel and all its muslim neighbors. Negotiations occur when there is a balance of power. When one side has overwhelming power, you get what we have now, military action or the threat of military action. The best way to avoid being threatened by the US and Israel is to have nuclear weapons. Terrorism is a weapon of the weak. Balance of power is the only answer. Remember the cold war. Either we resolve the differences between Israel and its neighbors and balance the power in the region, or we will see more terrorism and possibly more 9/11 events.