Preempt Iran's Nukes
By Michael D. Evans
Published: July 30, 2007
After meeting with the Iranian ambassador to Iraq in Baghdad last week, US Ambassador Ryan Crocker declared that a US-Iranian security committee had been formed to discuss Sunni terrorism.
The Iranians should have a lot to offer the committee, since they are big supporters of Sunni and other terrorism. As it continues to make steady progress with its program to develop nuclear weapons, Iran is taking steps to deter a preemptive strike by the United States, Israel, or both.
One step is to keep Syria in the position of a wholly owned subsidiary; another is to keep Saudi Arabia from becoming a player in America's newest Middle East peace initiative.
In the first case, Iran is simply buying off the Syrians. The day after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's recent visit to Damascus, the London-based Saudi newspaper Asharq al-Awsat reported that he had promised his Syrian counterpart Bashar Assad $1 billion worth of the latest Russian weapons -- if Damascus agreed to halt peace feelers with Israel.
In the second, the Iranians seem to have frightened off Saudi Arabia from pushing the Arab League peace plan it initiated. The Saudis are petrified at the threat of a reign of terror in the kingdom – whether launched by Iran or its al-Qaida proxy – if they advocate peace with Israel.
While distracting United States diplomats with their newfound concern for Sunni terrorism, Iran has been busy beefing up the missile threat against Israel. In addition to replacing all of Hizbullah's losses from last summer's war with convoys of arms from Syria – which are somehow invisible to the UN troops deployed to keep them out – Iran is making sure Hamas is well supplied with rockets in Gaza.
Teheran assumes that the combined missile threat against Israel from its proxies in Lebanon, Syria, Gaza, and Iran itself would deter Israel from carrying out a preemptive strike against its nuclear facilities.
If that is Iran's strategy, it is faulty on two counts. First, thousands of Hizbullah's rockets did not deter Israel from retaliating against the kidnapping and murder of a few soldiers last year. Second, Ahmadinejad's repeated threats to "wipe Israel off the map" with nuclear missiles is just the kind of menace Israelis take seriously – as they did Saddam Hussein's nuclear reactor in 1981.
The 2002 Bush Doctrine's first-strike policy against terrorists and rogue nations was reaffirmed last year in a 49-page report. Put simply, US policy is to wage preemptive war if America or its allies are threatened by terrorists or states wielding weapons of mass destruction. It is a harsh policy to deal with the forces of fanaticism, which by definition are beyond deterrence, containment, or reason.
There has been some insignificant progress regarding Iran's nuclear program over the past year. The UN Security Council passed two more sanction resolutions and some US pension funds are beginning to divest from Iran. But the most meaningful development was made by the new British prime minister, Gordon Brown, who announced last week that he will maintain the policy of his predecessor, Tony Blair, and not rule out the option of a preemptive strike to keep Iran from producing nuclear weapons.
"We may face no greater challenge from a single country than from Iran," the Bush Doctrine report said, accusing its extremist, Islamist regime of threatening Israel, sponsoring terrorism, thwarting the growth of democracy in Iraq – and secretly pursuing efforts to develop nuclear weapons.
President George W. Bush has vowed he will not leave office without making sure Iran cannot become a nuclear power. Chances are, this means the US is going to attack Iran before January 2009. Bush knows that Iran poses an existential threat to Israel, but also threatens the American people with who knows how many more 9/11s. He is no less determined to win the global war on terrorism than to win the war in Iraq, and certain that history will vindicate him.
Published: July 30, 2007
After meeting with the Iranian ambassador to Iraq in Baghdad last week, US Ambassador Ryan Crocker declared that a US-Iranian security committee had been formed to discuss Sunni terrorism.
The Iranians should have a lot to offer the committee, since they are big supporters of Sunni and other terrorism. As it continues to make steady progress with its program to develop nuclear weapons, Iran is taking steps to deter a preemptive strike by the United States, Israel, or both.
One step is to keep Syria in the position of a wholly owned subsidiary; another is to keep Saudi Arabia from becoming a player in America's newest Middle East peace initiative.
In the first case, Iran is simply buying off the Syrians. The day after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's recent visit to Damascus, the London-based Saudi newspaper Asharq al-Awsat reported that he had promised his Syrian counterpart Bashar Assad $1 billion worth of the latest Russian weapons -- if Damascus agreed to halt peace feelers with Israel.
In the second, the Iranians seem to have frightened off Saudi Arabia from pushing the Arab League peace plan it initiated. The Saudis are petrified at the threat of a reign of terror in the kingdom – whether launched by Iran or its al-Qaida proxy – if they advocate peace with Israel.
While distracting United States diplomats with their newfound concern for Sunni terrorism, Iran has been busy beefing up the missile threat against Israel. In addition to replacing all of Hizbullah's losses from last summer's war with convoys of arms from Syria – which are somehow invisible to the UN troops deployed to keep them out – Iran is making sure Hamas is well supplied with rockets in Gaza.
Teheran assumes that the combined missile threat against Israel from its proxies in Lebanon, Syria, Gaza, and Iran itself would deter Israel from carrying out a preemptive strike against its nuclear facilities.
If that is Iran's strategy, it is faulty on two counts. First, thousands of Hizbullah's rockets did not deter Israel from retaliating against the kidnapping and murder of a few soldiers last year. Second, Ahmadinejad's repeated threats to "wipe Israel off the map" with nuclear missiles is just the kind of menace Israelis take seriously – as they did Saddam Hussein's nuclear reactor in 1981.
The 2002 Bush Doctrine's first-strike policy against terrorists and rogue nations was reaffirmed last year in a 49-page report. Put simply, US policy is to wage preemptive war if America or its allies are threatened by terrorists or states wielding weapons of mass destruction. It is a harsh policy to deal with the forces of fanaticism, which by definition are beyond deterrence, containment, or reason.
There has been some insignificant progress regarding Iran's nuclear program over the past year. The UN Security Council passed two more sanction resolutions and some US pension funds are beginning to divest from Iran. But the most meaningful development was made by the new British prime minister, Gordon Brown, who announced last week that he will maintain the policy of his predecessor, Tony Blair, and not rule out the option of a preemptive strike to keep Iran from producing nuclear weapons.
"We may face no greater challenge from a single country than from Iran," the Bush Doctrine report said, accusing its extremist, Islamist regime of threatening Israel, sponsoring terrorism, thwarting the growth of democracy in Iraq – and secretly pursuing efforts to develop nuclear weapons.
President George W. Bush has vowed he will not leave office without making sure Iran cannot become a nuclear power. Chances are, this means the US is going to attack Iran before January 2009. Bush knows that Iran poses an existential threat to Israel, but also threatens the American people with who knows how many more 9/11s. He is no less determined to win the global war on terrorism than to win the war in Iraq, and certain that history will vindicate him.
<< Home