OBAMA OR MCCAIN, IRAN STANCE WON'T CHANGE
By Dr. Michael Rubin
In their first debate, both candidates said their administrations would negotiate with the Islamic Republic, albeit not at the presidential level. Whether Obama or McCain authorises his Secretary of State or some lesser official is irrelevant, however, as it takes two to tango. Too often, U.S. politicians and commentators navel-gaze: they assume decisions in Washington, D.C., shape world events and that a change in policy will be enough to alter the international milieu. Reality, though, is opposite. Washington more often reacts to international events, rather than leads them. Not so Tehran. While American leaders play chequers, their Iranian counterparts play chess, planning strategy several moves in advance.
Divergent U.S. and Iranian attitudes towards diplomacy show this clearly. Former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami wowed the West when, at his 1997 inauguration, he called for a dialogue of civilisations. U.S. and European officials took the bait. Between 2000 and 2005, for example, European Union trade with Iran almost tripled, as European leaders pursued a policy of critical engagement. Simultaneously, Tehran reaped billions of dollars from the rise in oil prices. Rather than turn moderate, however, the Iranian government took its hard currency windfall and invested almost 70 per cent of it in military equipment and its covert nuclear program.
This nuclear deception was not a result of Iranian hardliners working behind the backs of their reform-minded counterparts: the ruse was intentional. On June 14 this year, Abdollah Ramezanzadeh, Khatami's former spokesman, explained:
He criticised President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's provocations and suggested Khatami's strategy to lull the West with soft words better achieved Iran's nuclear aims.
"We had one overt policy, which was one of negotiation and confidence building, and a covert policy, which was continuation of the activities," Ramezanzadeh explained.
Dialogue may sound good in theory, but the diplomacy taught in Western academies and that taught in Iranian seminaries bear no resemblance to each other. While diplomats in the U.S.A., Europe, and Australia seek compromise, Iranian diplomats learn taqiyya, religiously-sanctioned lying.
Iranian deception worked, at least until 2002, when, confronted with damning satellite images, Iranian diplomats finally acknowledged that the Islamic Republic had built a covert nuclear enrichment plant. While some Western academics rationalise Iranian behaviour and say the Iranian nuclear program is motivated only by the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, in fact, Iran's nuclear program predates either conflict.
Whoever next occupies the Oval Office will face overwhelming evidence of Iranian deceit. Unlike Bill Clinton and George W. Bush in the run-up to the Iraq war, the new President need not rely on the veracity of CIA reports; the most damning evidence comes from International Atomic Energy Agency inspections which, among other things, have found plutonium residue and uranium metal contamination on Iranian equipment. Neither has any role in energy production, but both are crucial to bomb-making. More damning, Iranian scientists have acknowledged work on polonium-210, which is used in nuclear bomb triggers.
Nor will the next President have the luxury of time. With 6000 centrifuges -- Iran has already installed 4000 -- the Islamic Republic can produce enough highly enriched uranium to supply a bomb in less than a month; that is, within a period between IAEA inspections. Although many intelligence estimates suggest Iran is years away from a nuclear bomb, these assume all weapons design work is domestic. But, as Syria's mysterious plutonium plant (destroyed by the Israeli Air Force in September, 2007) demonstrates, all timelines are off when North Korea, Russia, or any other state provides assistance.
Only the most naive Democrat or isolationist Republican can ignore Iranian statements promising not only the acquisition of nuclear weapons, but their use. On December 14, 2001, for example, Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, perhaps Iran's second most powerful man and one often labelled a pragmatist by Western journalists, suggested that it may not be far-fetched to envision use of nuclear weapons against Israel.
Amid chants of "death to Israel", he declared:
Rafsanjani's statements soon became the rule rather than the exception. On February 14, 2005, Ayatollah Mohammad Baqer Kharrazi, Secretary-General of Iranian Hezbollah, declared:
And on May 29, 2005, Hojatolislam Gholam Reza Hasani, the Supreme Leader's personal representative to the province of West Azerbaijan, declared possession of nuclear weapons to be one of Iran's top goals. "An atom bomb ... must be produced," he said. "That is because the Koran has told Muslims to 'get strong and amass all the forces at your disposal.'" The following February, Mohsen Gharavian, a Qom theologian close to Ayatollah Mohammad Taqi Mesbah-Yazdi, one of the Islamic Republic's staunchest ideologues, said it was natural for Iran to possess nuclear weapons.
Whether Obama or McCain next occupies the Oval Office may be irrelevant, as far as Washington's policy towards Iran is concerned, for the Iranian regime will soon disabuse the next President of any utopian belief in the power of diplomacy he may have. On July 18 this year, the same day that President Bush reversed course and sent Undersecretary of State William Burns to Geneva to discuss a broad incentive package to be granted Tehran, should it agree to abide by its UN commitments, Mohammad Jafar Assadi, Commander of the Revolutionary Guards' ground forces, declared that the concession proved that "America has no other choice but to leave the Middle East region beaten and humiliated".
With diplomacy doomed to fail, Obama or McCain will ratchet up sanctions within months of taking office. While unconditional Russian support for Iran undercuts the utility of the UN action, the new President, European leaders, and, hopefully, the Australian Prime Minister will pursue unilateral sanctions. For instance, the entire Iranian banking system could be designated as engaged in deceptive financial practices, a move that, in effect, would remove the Islamic Republic from the world's financial system. Meanwhile, efforts to contain Iran will increase, with weapons sales to regional states, increased naval deployments, and, as a last resort, military strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.
Ironically, an Obama win may well accelerate conflict as Tehran tests the young Senator, much as the Soviet Union's test of the young John F. Kennedy set off a cascade of events that almost led to nuclear war. Here, the world may find its notion of the Democrats' pacifism wrong. Much of the Democrats' anti-war rhetoric has more to do with politics and anti-Bush sentiment than it does with ideological opposition to the use of force.
Obama's supporters argue that a McCain win would mean four more years of Bush policies.
What they omit is that, their utopian embrace of diplomacy disabused, an Obama win could mean eight more years of the same.
American Foreign Policy -- The Middle East
Islamism & Jihadism -- The Threat of Radical Islam
Page Three Page Two Page One
International Politics & World Disorder:
War, Peace, & Geopolitics in the Real World:
Foreign Affairs & U.S. National Security
Page Two Page One
Islamist Terrorist Attacks on the U.S.A.
Osama bin Laden & the Islamist Declaration of War
Against the U.S.A. & Western Civilization
Islamist International Terrorism &
U.S. Intelligence Agencies
U.S. National Security Strategy
Dr. Michael Rubin, a Ph.D. in History (Yale University) and a specialist in Middle Eastern politics, Islamic culture and Islamist ideology, is Editor of the Middle East Quarterly, a senior lecturer at the Naval Postgraduate School, and a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research. Dr Rubin is author of Into the Shadows: Radical Vigilantes in Khatami's Iran (Washington Institute for Near East Policy, 2001) and is co-author, with Dr. Patrick Clawson, of Eternal Iran: Continuity and Chaos (Palgrave Macmillan, 2005). Dr. Rubin served as political advisor to the Coalition Provisional Authority in Baghdad (2003-2004); staff advisor on Iran and Iraq in the Office of the U.S. Secretary of Defense (2002-2004); visiting lecturer in the Departments of History and International Relations at Hebrew University of Jerusalem (2001-2002); visiting lecturer at the Universities of Sulaymani, Salahuddin, and Duhok in Iraqi Kurdistan (2000-2001); Soref Fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (1999-2000); and visiting lecturer in the Department of History at Yale University (1999-2000). He has been a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, the Leonard Davis Institute at Hebrew University, and the Carnegie Council on Ethics and International Affairs.
Dr. Rubin was principal drafter of the September 22, 2008, report of the Bipartisan Policy Center's taskforce on U.S. policy towards Iranian nuclear development.
The foregoing article by Dr. Rubin was originally published in The Australian, October 3, 2008, and can be found on the Internet website maintained by the Middle East Forum, a foreign policy think tank which seeks to define and promote American interests in the Middle East, defining U.S. interests to include fighting radical Islam, working for Palestinian Arab acceptance of the State of Israel, improving the management of U.S. efforts to promote constitutional democracy in the Middle East, reducing America's energy dependence on the Middle East, more robustly asserting U.S. interests vis-à-vis Saudi Arabia, and countering the Iranian threat. (Article URL: http://www.meforum.org/article/1991)
Africa: Black Africa *
Africa: North Africa *
American Government 1
LINKS TO PARTICULAR ISSUES & SUBJECT MATTER CATEGORIES
TREATED IN THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, U.S.A.:
American Government 2 * American Government 3 * American Government 4
American Government 5 * American Politics * Anglosphere * Arabs
Arms Control & WMD * Aztlan Separatists * Big Government
Black Africa * Bureaucracy * Canada * China * Civil Liberties * Communism
Congress, U.S. * Conservative Groups * Conservative vs. Liberal
Constitutional Law * Counterterrorism * Criminal Justice * Disloyalty * Economy
Education * Elections, U.S. * Eminent Domain * Energy & Environment
English-Speaking World * Ethnicity & Race * Europe * Europe: Jews
Family Values * Far East * Fiscal Policy, U.S. * Foreign Aid, U.S. * Foreign Policy, U.S.
France * Hispanic Separatism * Hispanic Treason * Human Health * Immigration
Infrastructure, U.S. * Intelligence, U.S. * Iran * Iraq * Islamic North Africa
Islamic Threat * Islamism * Israeli vs. Arabs * Jews & Anti-Semitism
Jihad & Jihadism * Jihad Manifesto I * Jihad Manifesto II * Judges, U.S. Federal
Judicial Appointments * Judiciary, American * Latin America * Latino Separatism
Latino Treason * Lebanon * Leftists/Liberals * Legal Issues
Local Government, U.S. * Marriage & Family * Media Political Bias
Middle East: Arabs * Middle East: Iran * Middle East: Iraq * Middle East: Israel
Middle East: Lebanon * Middle East: Syria * Middle East: Tunisia
Middle East: Turkey * Militant Islam * Military Defense * Military Justice
Military Weaponry * Modern Welfare State * Morality & Decency
National Identity * National Security * Natural Resources * News Media Bias
North Africa * Patriot Act, USA * Patriotism * Political Culture * Political Ideologies
Political Parties * Political Philosophy * Politics, American * Presidency, U.S.
Private Property * Property Rights * Public Assistance * Radical Islam
Religion & America * Rogue States & WMD * Russia * Science & Ethics
Sedition & Treason * Senate, U.S. * Social Welfare Policy * South Africa
State Government, U.S. * Subsaharan Africa * Subversion * Syria * Terrorism 1
Terrorism 2 * Treason & Sedition * Tunisia * Turkey * Ukraine
UnAmerican Activity * UN & Its Agencies * USA Patriot Act * U.S. Foreign Aid
U.S. Infrastructure * U.S. Intelligence * U.S. Senate * War & Peace
Welfare Policy * WMD & Arms Control
Africa: Black Africa *
Africa: North Africa *
American Government 1
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor