Clifford May |
No one likes to be the
skunk at the picnic but sometimes there's no alternative: You just have
to spray. That's how I felt after reading a recent opinion piece by
Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, a generally smart and
sophisticated member of the foreign policy elite. Consider this excerpt:
"President [Barack]
Obama is approaching one of those moments when a big turn in foreign
policy is possible. … There's no doubt that this is a time of
opportunity."
The evidence for this
optimism? Obama has "talked directly" with Iranian President Hasan
Rouhani "about quickly negotiating a deal to limit the Iranian nuclear
program." Well, yes, but in that brief telephonic conversation, the new
Iranian president offered not a single concession. Maybe he will but
until and unless he does, how it is possible to conclude that everything
is hunky-dory and, what's more, about to get better?
Ignatius adds: "Obama
and Secretary of State John Kerry must communicate that the United
States is reaching an inflection point: In the world that's ahead, Iran
must temper its revolutionary dreams of 1979, just as Saudi Arabia must
stop hyperventilating about the 'Shiite crescent.'"
Imagine you're Rouhani
or his boss, Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Surely you'd wonder:
This "inflection point" that Obama is to communicate -- what makes
Ignatius think it is coming, and how will the U.S. be different after it
has been reached? And in the "world that's ahead," why must we Iranians
temper our revolutionary dreams? Why should we veer from the road paved
by the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, leader of our Islamic revolution
and founder of our Islamic republic?
As for the Saudis, they
are unlikely to be convinced that their concerns verge on the
hysterical. They see abundant evidence that Iran (Persian- and
Shia-ruled) is determined to become the nuclear-armed hegemon of the
Middle East, to the detriment -- and possibly the destruction -- of its
neighbors (most of them Arab- and Sunni-ruled -- and, of course, one
that is Jewish).
The Ignatius column
concludes: "What's around the corner is a new regional framework that
accommodates the security needs of Iranians, Saudis, Israelis, Russians
and Americans. This is a great strategic opportunity, but it will
require constant, skillful diplomatic guidance."
Seeing around corners
requires an ability that few journalists -- or political scientists or
intelligence analysts -- have successfully demonstrated in the past. And
while it would be a "great strategic opportunity" if Iran and Russia
were willing to settle for the accommodation of their "security needs,"
is it not apparent that they have set their sights considerably higher?
A fundamental principle
of foreign policy is that if you will an end, you must will the means
to that end. To achieve a "big turn in foreign policy" requires more
than wishful thinking, it requires a strategy. In this case, it might
begin with the recognition that, throughout recorded history, there have
been nations committed to acquiring power over others. Iran today is
self-evidently such a nation. Is there a way to persuade Iran's rulers
to constrain their ambitions?
Those who study Iran
disagree on many points, but there is broad consensus on this:
Consistent with Khomeini's teaching and practice, the regime has no
higher priority than its own survival -- because without revolutionary
leaders no "revolutionary dreams" can be realized.
Rouhani has been
projecting an aura of confidence. But his stated goal of reaching a
negotiated settlement quickly -- an adverb not emphasized in the past --
suggests that he may see Iran's current economic situation as urgent.
Herein lies the logic
behind the sanctions effort led by such Congressmen as Representatives
Ed Royce and Eliot Engel, and Senators Mark Kirk and Robert Menendez:
Bring Iran to the brink of economic collapse and it is at least possible
that the supreme leader will decide that strategic retreat is the
least-bad option.
A new study released by
the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (the think-tank I head) and
Roubini Global Economics (renowned number crunchers) concludes that
"Iran's foreign currency reserves, which are critical to the Iranian
government's ability to withstand sanctions pressure, are being depleted
and, in large part, impeded."
The report goes on to
detail specific measures that could be taken to ratchet up the pressure
-- to give American diplomats additional leverage so they can tell
Rouhani: "We are offering you a way out of the economic quicksand now
pulling you under. More than that: We'll help you revitalize your
economy. But here's the minimum you must do in exchange: Stop violating
Security Council resolutions and start abiding by the obligations you
undertook when you signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Shut
down the centrifuges, eliminate your nuclear stockpiles, dismantle all
your illicit nuclear weapons facilities. And cooperate with our efforts
to verify that you have met these requirements."
The Islamic Republic of
Iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism, a mass murderer of
Americans in Afghanistan, Iraq and Lebanon, an egregious human rights
abuser at home, the enabler of ongoing butchery in Syria, and an inciter
of genocide against Israel. A single phone call from Rouhani to Obama
changes none of that.
Allowing the regime in
Tehran to obtain a nuclear weapons capability would indeed bring us to
an inflection point. From that moment on, the probability of nuclear
exchanges would increase dramatically. No security threat is more
critical than this. The use of military force should be the last resort
but, as history instructs, the more credible the threat of force, the
less likely that its exercise will be necessary.
I take no pleasure in raining on what Ignatius and others see as a parade. But when that parade includes missiles inscribed with "Death to America!," it's hard to comprehend what all the cheering is about.
Clifford D. May is president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a policy institute focusing on national security.
|
An attempt is made to share the truth regarding issues concerning Israel and her right to exist as a Jewish nation. This blog has expanded to present information about radical Islam and its potential impact upon Israel and the West. Yes, I do mix in a bit of opinion from time to time.
Friday, October 11, 2013
Wishful thinking is not a strategy
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment