by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright July 2, 2008
All Rights Reserved.

ogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan, President George W. Bush continued more gunboat diplomacy with Iran. Iran's refusal to suspend its uranium enrichment program prompted the U.N. Security Council and European Union to apply sanctions to the Persian nation. Iran's fiery President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad proudly touts uranium enrichment as proof of technological advancement. His government can't deliver enough gasoline or food but enriching uranium has become Iran's source of national pride. Western nations, including Israel, expressed grave concerns about Iran's uranium enrichment. Most nuclear experts believe Iran fully intends to build its first A-bomb, a troubling thought to Israelis in light of past Iranian threats. Like with India and Pakistan, it may be too late to stop Iran from generating the fissile material needed for a nuclear weapon.

      Iran's Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki expressed doubt that either Israel of the White House would attack Iran's enrichment sites. Calling such thoughts “craziness,” Mottaki warned of fierce reprisals should the U.S. or Israel make good on their threats. Bush left all options on the table, warning Iran of more sanctions for enriching uranium. “I have made it very clear to all parties that the first option ought to be to solve this problem diplomatically,” Bush said, hinting that other actions, including military force. “And the best way to solve it diplomatically is for the United States to work with other nations to send a focused message—an that is, you will be isolated, and you will have economic hardship if you continue to enrich,” expecting tougher sanctions. With Afghanistan deteriorating and Bush offering up another 30,000 U.S. troops, the White House has too much on its plate.

      Israel ratcheted up tension on June 20 completing military games, flying jets from Israel to Cyprus. Oil spiked to $140 a barrel with some analysts believing a military strike was possible sometime after the U.S. election. While Bush gets abysmal approval ratings in the U.S., Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert faces his own political crisis. Neither leader commands the consensus needed to execute what could be the most dangerous action in recent U.S. or Israeli history. Israel had difficulty stopping Iranian-backed Hezbollah's unending missile attacks on its northern border in July 2006, prompting a full-scale invasion of Lebanon by the Israeli army. One month into a bloody incursion, Israel couldn't root out Hezbollah, prompting the collapse of Olmert's popularity. Hit with corruption allegations, Olmert's government hangs by a thread and has no support to attack Iran.

      Mottaki doesn't believe either the U.S. or Israel will attack anytime soon. He sees both countries too saddled with domestic and foreign policy problems to risk more hardship. “We do not see foresee such a possibility at the moment. The Israeli government is facing a political breakdown within itself and within the region, so we do not foresee such a possibility for that regime to resort to such craziness,” said Mottaki, doubting Israel has the stomach to attack. “The United States, too, is no in a position where it can engage in, take another risk in the region,” getting a good read of U.S. plans. Between now and the inauguration Jan. 20, 2008, President Bush lacks the consensus in Congress or public opinion to do anything other than manage his current domestic and foreign policy mess. With the U.S. economy in recession, Bush can't afford another miscalculation.

      Working with the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany, the White House must allow multilateral action to solve the Iranian problem. So far, Ahmadinejad has shown no willingness to suspend its uranium enrichment program. Iran feels it's well within its rights under the Nuclear Non-Profliferation Treaty to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes. He sees the West as bullying Iran into giving up the Persian nation's inalienable right to fissile material. “In Iran, we must defend our national security, our country and our revolutionary system and we will continue to do so,” said Mottaki, offering no hint that Iran was taking U.N. or EU proposals seriously. While Mottaki said his country was considering U.N. special envoy Javier Solana's new proposal, Ahmadinejad has given no indication that Iran plans to give up enriching uranium.

      U.S. and Israeli officials must stop bluffing about attacking Iran and allow multilateral talks to find a solution. Iran has offered no indication it intends to stop enriching uranium. Whether the U.S. or Israel likes it or not, it's probably too late to stop Iran's nuclear ambitions. Bombing Iran would invite almost certain retaliation, destabilizing the Middle East and causing catastrophic price and supply problems. More saber-rattling and gunboat diplomacy won't sway Iran into giving up its uranium enrichment program. It didn't work with India and Pakistan and won't work with Iran. Former Centcom commander John P. Abizaid said June 17, 2007 “the U.S. could live with a nuclear-armed Iran.” Like other nuclear-armed countries, deterrence would keep Iran in check While no one wants Iran to get the bomb, the U.S. and Israel—as well as the U.N. and EU—won't attack anytime soon.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.