President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran could not have picked a better time to be both defiant and adamant about his nuclear ambitions. Not only are there widespread disagreements in the international community about whether or not Iran is a danger and whether or not it should be stopped, the nations with the will and the means to stop Iran militarily are politicially unable to do so. An international high-stakes hot potato game has begun.
Iran has the fortune of sitting on a copious amount of oil. They export their precious commodity extensively, notably to China. This effectively buys Iran Chinese loyalty at the UN Security Council and makes stern measures from that body impossible. I’m sure China isn’t happy with the prospect of Iranian nukes, but they’re not the ones to do anything about it. Russia is equally unsuited to dealling with Iran as they have no intention of allowing even more ‘westerners’ to stampede across their back yard and moreover have an interest in keeping a balance of power in the region. The hot potato is passed to Europe.
At present, the European Union is still quite divided. France can court danger without fear, having learned from two World Wars that when the going gets tough, the US will save them anyway. French popular opinion is also overwhelmingly anti-American and sympathises with the Arab nations of the Middle East. Many other European nations join France in wishing to strengthen the European Union by opposing American hegemony. They also favour ignoring the problem entirely or taking Ahmadinejad’s words of peace on face value. The European nations that were part of the Coalition of the Willing, such as Spain, Poland, Italy, Denmark, the Netherlands and the UK face a strong anti-American sentiment at home. Many of those nations have troops in Iraq and/or Afghanistan and would never be able to ’sell’ any kind of military action again Iran in the nearby future. The EU throws a long potato to the United States.
The US features a president who is constantly being criticised over the ongoing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Iraq War especially is seen as a fiasco and is sometimes called ‘The New Vietnam’. The new Democratic overlords would never okay a military strike on Iran under the present circumstances and polls show that such a move would be widely unpopular. The American people don’t prrticularly feel for a repear of the Iraq War, especially against a nation with a far stronger military than Iraq had.
Realizing the dangers of a nuclear Iran but unable to act upon it, the US President George W. Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice remind the world on a daily basis that they “favor a diplomatic solution”. At the same time, Bush glances to the side and says that he “would understand” if Israel were to launch a military strike against Iran, making a last-ditch Hail Mary pass of the hot potato to Israel.
Normally, Israel would be happy to oblige. Let us not forget that Israel destroyed the Iraqi nuclear reactor Osiraq in 1981, delaying Iraqi nuclear research by over 20 years. As it stands, however, the position of Israeli Prime Minister Olmert is not much stronger than President Bush’s position: Olmert led Israel into war against Lebanon with less-than-ideal results, the Gaza withdrawal of 2005 only led to more rocket fire and the IDF soldiers that were kidnapped last summer still haven’t been returned. The Israeli people suffer from war fatigue and will in no way support a large-scale attack against Iran. Hence, the Israeli government has stated that they’re sitting this one out, and proceed to pass the hot potato back to the international community. And thus the game progresses.
This cycle needs to be broken if the danger of a nuclear Iran is to be averted. I’m not saying that a military strike is the only option. But a diplomatic effort can only succeed if it’s backed up with military backbone. Right now, though, Ahmadinejad knows that he doesn’t have to fear a strike and can thus continue with impunity. Nothing is to stop him from stalling the UN for as many years as Saddam did in Iraq. Just offering a carrot without threatening the stick isn’t going to work, in my opinion, but I’ll write more about the negotion options with Iran soon.
France, which now has AA-guns in Lebanon trained on Israeli planes, warned Israel against reconsidering a military strike, saying it would be a “total disaster” in terms of implications for the entire world. And while I agree that it would be unwise for Israel to take on Iran on its own at this time, forgive me for taking French military advice with a grain of salt
- Tags:ahmadinejad, bush, iran, iraq, israel, middle east, nuclear un
Popularity: 46% [?]
0 Responses to “Nuclear Iran - Passing the Hot Potato”