Iran Is Making Fools of Everyone
Iran is making fools of everyone.
Even as it lies about its closeness to acquiring nuclear missiles, it continues to menace the political order throughout the Middle East, pressing on with rocketry and rearming Hamas and Hezbollah. And that mischief is nothing to what it will do if it is allowed to become a nuclear power.
Nuclear Iran will be a threat to US national security, worldwide energy security, the efficacy of multilateralism and the Non-Proliferation (NPT) Treaty. Having defied the world so brazenly, it might become overconfident enough to believe its conventional or proxy forces could operate without fear of serious reprisals from the US, Israel, or any other power. It will be emboldened to use terrorism to threaten or subvert others in the area -- especially those who might be inclined to pursue peace with Israel. Pro-Western Arab regimes such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the Gulf States sense the Iranian threat; and if Iran succeeds in going nuclear, they may decide to join Iran rather than fight it. And Iran, through its support for Hezbollah and Hamas and the Ba'ath Party in Iraq, has the capacity to put direct pressure on Lebanon, Syria, the Palestinians, and the Iraqis. Tens and perhaps hundreds of thousands would join radical Islamist groups in the belief that Islamism is on the march.
Fundamentally, a nuclear Iran represents a unique threat. The fear of mutually assured destruction has long restrained other nuclear powers. There is a real risk that Iran is not rational, that driven by its mad hatreds it will act in ways that are irrational, even self-destructive. Anti-Americanism is a cornerstone of the ideology of this Islamic State. The virulence of Iran's hostility is impervious to reason. "Death to America!" has provoked the Iranian street for over a quarter of a century and is the venom upon which an entire generation of Iranians has been raised. The dominant Ayatollah Khameini reiterates that Iran's differences with America are more fundamental than political differences.
Whatever may happen to the leadership over time, the inescapable fact is that America just cannot take the risk of nuclear missiles in the hands of a clerical regime that preaches genocide. It is pathetic the way appeasement continues to beguile.
Every US administration since 1979 -- yes, including the last one -- has reached out to the Iranians. To adopt, President Obama's inaugural metaphor, every open hand has met a clenched fist. Jimmy Carter could not obtain the release of American hostages illegally seized in Tehran. Reagan's National Security Adviser Robert McFarlane failed in a secret mission to release the American hostages held by Iran's Hezbollah agents in Beirut. Brent Scowcroft, Bush's National Security Adviser, made no progress. The Clinton administration's dozen gestures in 1999 were spurned. Clinton even lifted some sanctions in the interest of a "grand bargain," to be made public through an "accidental" meeting between Clinton and the Iranian president in the corridors of the UN, only to have it cancelled at the last minute.
It is the same dismal story with five years of efforts to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions. "We haven't really moved one inch toward addressing the issues," said Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency. The lie to the Iranian pretense that this oil-rich country needs nuclear power is manifest in every action: they have refused every compromise, including Russia's offer to provide enrichment nuclear material for use in civilian nuclear plants. They resist both pressure and temptation as they spurn American carrots and dismiss its sticks. Since President Obama's election, Iran has undertaken a series of actions that undercut any détente with the West, continuing their nuclear research and their development of rocketry that can deliver nuclear warheads, and stepping up their delivery of weapons to Hamas and Hezbollah.
It is not that the Iranians don't want to talk -- they do. That's all they want to do, playing for time. The only thing that has happened after five years of negotiations is that Iran is five years closer to achieving deliverable nuclear weapons. Quite simply, they seek the technical know-how that will give them the breakout capability to produce nuclear weapons in a short period. They are in the midst of producing stockpiles of low enriched uranium (LEU) from which they can produce enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear device in a matter of months - a breakout capability. They are adding centrifuges faster than the UN Security Council can step up the pressure and are learning about the intricate art of connecting a large number of centrifuges to a vast amount of pipe work, while maintaining everything in a vacuum. Getting centrifuges to run is not the challenge; getting them to run as a single entity is, and they are mastering it. Simultaneously, they are enhancing their ability to launch long range ballistic missiles, a potential delivery system of nuclear weapons. Alas, this is also a living testimony to the failure of the world community to curb the trade of missile technology that Iran lacks on its own. What madness it is to empower Iran to do what it most likes to do -- hold hostages, in this case the entire region.
The clock is ticking inexorably, a race against time that Iran is winning, getting nearer every day presenting the world with an Iranian bomb as a fait accompli.
What can be done? Alas, the UN has failed to persuade countries like Russia and China to cooperate in a rigorous sanctions' effort. Far from it, they are actually profiting from the sanctions' policy by doing deals in the energy field and selling Iran weapons. Russia, and to a lesser extent China, have made it clear they will block meaningful sanctions by the UN -- even though effective economic sanctions and measures to isolate the regime may make the difference between a diplomatic deal and a nuclear standoff. But, to date, neither economic distress nor additional sanctions have changed the Iranian calculation.
Fortunately, Iran has an economic Achilles' heel -- they are dependent on imported gasoline for 40% of their refined fuel. Furthermore, they require new investments in their energy industry to maintain current production. Reduced oil prices have put a great strain on their economy. Discontent is growing among its citizenry suffering from high inflation, unemployment, and poverty. Clearly, it makes sense to play on this fundamental weakness.
We must press harder to concert four measures:
1. an arms' embargo; 2, a ban on exports to Iran of gas and other refined products to cripple their transport; 3, a global boycott of the entire banking system of Iran, instead of helping them as European banks are; and 4, a prohibition on Western countries supplying spare parts to the oil industry.
The object, clearly, is not to punish the Iranian people but to force their leaders to act in the best interests of their people and of regional peace. It is the Iranian people who stand to gain the most from the cultural and economic liberations that would follow a sound agreement. And by that I mean a package deal that includes maximum safeguards and control of their nuclear program, and the complete cessation of enrichment activities inside Iran: there is no combination of international inspections or co-ownership of enrichment facilities that would provide sufficient assurances that Iran is not producing weapons' grade fissile material
Before President Obama engages in "aggressive personal diplomacy," as he put it, he would be well advised to allow Iran's economic crisis to take its toll, in the hopes that an economic tailspin will leave the leadership more vulnerable to economic sanctions than it has in the last thirty years and therefore more ready to come to terms.
But there is no certainty that economic sanctions will work in time, leaving us with two unacceptable options: living with a nuclear Iran or acting militarily to prevent it.
Their judgment is that the current administration is ready to let diplomacy run on and on and on... and will anyway be incapable anyway of making a military move while wrestling with the fall-out from financial collapse. For this reason, many in Iran believe the US may be reconciling itself to the idea of living with an Iranian nuclear missile even though it would allow an expressly genocidal regime to go nuclear.
Who would have imagined that President Obama may well determine his historical legacy and reputation on the basis of the way he deals with Iran?
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I'm waiting breathlessly (and turning blue in the face) for the companion piece:
"Israel Is Making Fools Of Everyone".
Virtually every argument given above applies to our "foremost ally in the Middle East".
The average Mexican makes four times as much money as the average Iranian. Their population is rising at an astronomical rate and they're going to run out of oil in the foreseeable future and then they're really going to be in the sh-t.
So what if we bomb their whole nuclear industry? What the hell can they do about it? Stop selling oil to Europe and Asia? If they do that, they won't have anything to eat. So oil will go up in price for a little while and then it will drop.
The alternative is seeing the entire Middle East get into a serious nuclear arms race and then it's a pretty good bet, knowing how politically foolish and naive those people are over there, that there will be a nuclear war - probably between Muslims, having nothing to do with the Israelis. But that whole part of the world will still end up getting turned into radioactive glass and then we'll all start getting cancer, or go through a nuclear winter.
So we should just do it. It's good for us, it's good for all the countries in the region - and it's good for the Iranian people, though I doubt they'll see the wisdom in it now. Just do it.
look up the soviet invented 270 MPH underwater missile the Iranians have. It can take out carriers.
To American in Chicago:
List of some of those who have been assassinated abroad by the Islamic republic:
http://www.iricrimes.org/alblist.asp
http://www.iricrimes.org/lr_int.asp?pgn=mykonos
A few simple Shots:
http://www.movie.article19film.com/
Serial murders of 1988:
http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/mena/iran1205/3.htmCarter's Habitat of inhumanity:
http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialconten...
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE13/010/2006
http://www.iranian.com/main/news/2009/03/27/call-independent-probe-imprisoned-blogger-s-death-week-ago
Mideast.org
http://www.mideasti.org/files/Iran_Final.pdf
God Wears Boots:
"The Power Structure of the Islamic Republic of Iran: transition from populism to clientelism, and militarization of the government" published in Third World Quarterly (December 2005). Full text PDF
http://www.iranian.com/Alamdari/2006/March/Iran/Images/MilitalizationIRI.pdf
khavaron:
http://iranian.com/main/blog/paymaneh-amiri/khavaran-silencing-dead
Magister? Or are you his alter-ego? Same m.o.: always at the top of the Iranian threads spewing one hateful diatribe after another against Islam. This is just too obvious.
Like all ad hominem attacks, (argumentum ad hominem means “argument against the person”) it is an act of intellectual surrender. The person who employs an ad hominem attack is admitting they cannot win the debate on merit, and hope to chuck the entire thing out the window by attacking the messenger. This is a logical fallacy of the first order, because the messenger is not the message.
Skialethia: Are you Palestinian?
I have said nothing against Islam ever. Political-militant Islam a la Khomeini, however, is very disturbing to me.
Skialethia as you have rightfully noticed it has become clear this Anti-Tazi wants to be at top of the thread . He knows people are not going to read 10 pages of comments. Obviously he is trying to make sure his messages are read and don't fall to the next page where they are lost in oblivion. Not that they won't be whether at top or at the end.
He thinks people on this web-site are stupid and that he is really educating them; or should I say feeding them his bias and hateful views.
Is IRI the new smoking gun, WMD etc being promoted by MegaPhone and Hasbara brigade...as before your posts never heard about IRI in any news media outlet...Is this a coincidence that such a thing was missed out by the neocons all over..or is this something which is being pushed to 'balance out the views'
Don't you think that you are making it too easier for people to notice what your motives are...
Ok what is the point of all this repeating of yourself drumming up "reasons" to hate Iran in response to a blog article suggesting Iran cannot be trusted with nuclear power? Your posts repeat a bunch of links to "Iran is bad" websites. The same could be done with Israel, as anyone familiar with the history of the Mossad's murders worldwide or the Zionist crimes in the middle east could list. Should there be a list posted of victims of Israeli aggression like the USS Liberty, Rachel Corrie, and numerous MIddle Eastern men? I like Israel's people; some of the greatest, most courageous progressive and anti-Zionists are American Jews, and there are fine Israelis who stand against the Zionist aggressions as well, but there are some bad people in Israel's leadership as well. Therefore Israel's history on the subject of murder and aggression has been far from saintly. And almost any major nation is guilty of crimes.
The subject of whether Iran should have a nuclear power plant or not has to be considered fairly, not with a bunch of childish hate spew links.
Why do we think we and European nations can have nuclear power and we deny that right to others? What are we going to do to help them have power if we deny them nuclear power? Or should we ban nuclear power internationally and include ourselves in that ban to be fair instead of controlling hypocrites?
ZM: Are you advocating war on Iran?
Bahman just wants to get through his day. He doesn't wish for much more than love, joy, health and well being for himself his family and friends. Bahman knows some about his nation's history and he has seen violent episodes in his life. He knows how his father suffered under the Shah's SAVAK and he knows the US government provided the Shah material support and made the coup that brought him to power possible. He can remember the destructive War with Saddam and he knows that the US armed both sides.
Despite all that, any animosity he feels toward me as an American is not held more deeply than my animosity towards the Chicago White Sox. He finds it impossible to feel any personal stake in his government arming against, or rhetorically threatening my nation. He is so weary of war, of useless violence that no journalist or cleric can enflame his patriotism or fears.
Does Bahman know whether or not his government is building weapons of mass destruction? I don't know. I know my government is. Does Bahman know if his government is supporting terrorists? I know my government has. I bet Bahman and I agree that our governments can better serve our nations by investing in our communities the wealth and effort we now put into destroying and threatening eachother.
Maybe Bahman and I are simple and naive. If so, it is a simplicity and naivety, that I wish President Ahmanijedad and President Obama, shared with us.
LOL, There are thousands of Bahman's story with one difference. Their families were tortured, murdered, maimed under the Islamic Republic by VEVAK and MOIS.
Names and stories of Islamic Republic's victims:
http://www.iranrights.org/
I hate to break it to you my friend. The Islamic Republic has killed more Iranians in one month than the Shah did in his entire reign.
And who do you think brought the mullahs to power???
Carter et al:
2. Report: U.S. Missteps Led To Shah's Overthrow NPR
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story...
3. The installation of Ayatollah by the West:
http://www.williambowles.info/guests/2005/iran_cla...
"A Question of Numbers": (lies about the shah)
http://www.emadbaghi.com/en/archives/000592.php
What really happened to the Shah of Iran and the role of BBC in manufacturing the coup of 1979:
"A century of http://www.amazon.com/.com/Century-War-Anglo-American-Politics-World/dp/074532309X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1232661747&sr=1-1
Read related Excerpts from the book,
http://www.payvand.com/news/06/mar/1090.html
2. Report: U.S. Missteps Led To Shah's Overthrow NPR
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story...
Crimes of Islamic republic
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3185936479022616955
http://islamicrepublicholycrimes.blogspot.com/
Zahra Kazemi murdered by the regime:
http://www.zibakazemi.org/
Yeah, Mort, you really got me shaking in my boots over here.
The first question that comes to mind when reading your piece is, "Just how much of Mort Zuckerman's giant stock portfolio is invested with defense contractors?"
Here, you insist that the Iranian government is racing to complete a nuclear warhead and put it on a ballistic missile. Mort, I have read a wealth of analysis that contradicts that assertion, and from writers that recent history gives me much more reason to trust than you.
I just can't take this article seriously. So at the same time America is in Iraq and Afghanistan, we need to be worried about Iran causing regime changes? And their civilian pursuits for fuel are clearly a charade - even thought 40% of their energy is oil imports? Nope, I just can't but that.
America has more nukes than anyone (assuming most of Russia's don't work anymore or never did) and they overthrow more governments than anyone else in the world. Countries like NK, Pakistan and even Israel were all just following the lead of the U.S. in how to be a hegemony.
Plus, the divide between the Iranian people and the ruling class, like in all parts of the world, is massive. Over 2/3rds of the country are under 30 and certainly feel a little uncomfortable with what pa and grandpa are doing. And the idea that Iran is steeped in anti-American sentiment is absurd - Tehran had some of the largest ceremonies in the world to commemorate the terror of 9/11.
Not too impressed.
Well all I have to say is that thank God the Bush era is over and we have a new president who seems to have a different foreign policy agenda. What we don't need is more wars, more hatred, more money spent to boost our military industrial complex.
I hope this will truly be an era of change where we make a determined effort in changing our gun boat diplomacy and instead use our brains, intelligence, bridge the gap of mis-understandings and reconcile our differences between nations based on common interests, respect and justice on an equal footing for all. We can no longer play the all time bully and push our way around. We can no longer have double standards, the world has changed and we must change with it. This serves the best interest of our country, our people and all nations.
Amen to that! Hopefully, more people will stop being ruled by fear and blinded by prejudice.
Plane and simple, I no longer support Israel and would like to see us have a more balanced position on the middle east.
ZM: did you know that Queen Esther and Mordaci are is buried in Iran. Here is a picture:
http://www.farsinet.com/hamadan/index.html
I hope you get to read the links I have provided in my comments. Next time, you'll be more prepared to debunk your interlocuators. Have a good night. Happy Easter and Happy Pass over everyone. I've got to go....
Now that you wall-papered this tread...why quit now?
Why do we support India and Israel having nuclear weapons and ask North Korea and Iran to halt nuclear weaponry production? Are we all Israelis and Indians now?
I don't think this position makes us credible or fair-minded.
Because those countries are not engaged in "regime changes" in the Middle East as Islamic Republic is in Bahrain, SA, Jordan, Kwait, Egypt, Yemen, etc. THe Islamic Republic constitution requires exporting of the revolution to other Islamic countries in order to Unify the Ummah under one unified Islamic Government. Have you read "Isalmic Government" by Ayatollah Khomeini??
You've got to be kidding?
I am sorry but you are passing disinformation and misinformation to the readers of this column. What you are saying is totally baseless and false. What you are doing is nothing more than what we have had for the past 8 years; we were fed lies after lies to create fear and hatred in the minds of the people of this country.
Your hatred of Iran and its regime is your personal issue but truth does not belong to you.
Many of us are being accused of being pro Iraanian because we defend their right to nuclear energy.
Lets get something straight.
Iran has signed the NPT and has a right to pursue peaceful nuclear energy. ( I am opposed to almost everything nuclear )
There is no evidence that Iran has ever pursued nuclear weapons. ( that's why the word evidence is never used )
Iran is not the "shining city on the hill" but their foreign policy when compared to Israel and the US looks pretty good.
"Anti-Americanism is a cornerstone of the ideology of this Islamic State. "
Ummm...because we overthrew their government in the 1970s and installed a ruthless dictator, the Shah. If we really want to make our country safer, maybe we should stop having coups.
It was the mullah or the clerical elites such as Ayatollah Kashani, Khomeini's mentor who collaborated with the Shah in overthrowing the Mossadegh government who had violeted the Constitution of 1906 by dissolving the Parliment that had elected him.
To this date, the mullahs don't like to talk about Mossadegh and all books incriminating them have been purged. Even a street named after Mossadegh was changed to something like Islamic Republic's street.
And I hate to break it to you, the mullahs in Iran have outperformed the Shah ten thousands fold in brutality of all kinds They have far exceeded anyone's expectation. Have you heard of Evin's prison? Have you heard of torture method of Taboot? Khomieni and his Islamists thugs killed in one month more than the Shah had killed over a 25 years period.
The question of numbers:
http://www.emadbaghi.com/en/archives/000592.php
At least the Shah never stoned anhone to death or goged anyone eyes, or raped virgin girls before their executions:
Batebi: 60 minutes:
http://www.iranian.com/main/2009/apr/batebi-60-minutes
Dude, most of the people here are commenting that we are done fighting wars for Israel's interest, so if you and similar folks are that pumped go raise an army and fight it out, leave US out of it...
Mort, AIPAC and similar likes keep projecting Iran as imminent threat to US security, it isn't....why don't they just say we are doing this for Israel and cut the theatrics of US and Anti-Americanism...you see honesty triumphs...but theatrics enjoy splendor for sometime but ultimately people get bored and it fails...
As for you as posted earlier. your profile with 100% anti-Iran comments is not very helpful in 'balancing our opinions'...sorry...
Thank You! I am so tired of the double standards regarding the middle east.
Treasury Designates Iranian Proliferation Network and Identifies New Aliases
http://www.iranian-americans.com/2009/04/973.html
http://www.iranian-americans.com/
anti-tazi - a question
Do you consider Hezbollah and Hamas to be terrorists or resistance organizations ?
Yes, I do. Most Iranians who are not subsidized by the Islamic Republic hate both Hamas and Hizballah because the Islamic Repbulic spends their Oil revenues on funding their Arab street mercenaries instead of creating jobs and infrastructure for those 40% of Iranians who live below poverty line. Iranians are sick and tired of their gov't caring more about Lebanese and Palestinians than Iranians. They are called Welfare queens and kings in Iran. I persoanlly don't care about Hamas but Hizballoh and Lebanese Hizbollahis have wreacked havoc in Iran. Many secret prisons and torture chambers are run in Iran by these Hizbollahis of Lebanese origin.
That's why they also wear masks when they toruture dissidents.
I hope this post doesn't find itself deleted since it has info. that are incongruent with the realists plan for Iran. If you know what I mean....
after North Korea shot off their test missile earlier in the week, the first response that I heard from the M S M was from the Republican rightwing. The response was we should bomb North Korea. For a party who claims to be pro life why do they want to keep killing. Innocent people are simply identified as collateral damage. NO, they are human beings.
The RightWingers are only interested in controlling a woman's right to choose what to do with her own body...once they have succeeded in forcing a woman to bear an unwanted child,they completely lose interest in the child's future, and complain loudly if they have to contribute to its support.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
