THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume IX, Issue # 185, October 4, 2007
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
RUSSIAN ROULETTE ON IRAN
By Dr. Michael Rubin
THE U.S.A., RUSSIA, CHINA, & IRAN: IRAN'S EFFORTS TO BECOME A NUCLEAR POWER & THE INTEREST OF THE U.S.A.
IN BLOCKING ACHIEVEMENT OF THAT OBJECTIVE -- HOW & WHY RUSSIA & CHINA ARE UNDERCUTTING THE U.S. ENDEAVOR
TO PREVENT IRAN FROM ACQUIRING & ENRICHING URANIUM -- UNILATERALISM VERSUS MULTILATERALISM IN AMERICAN
FOREIGN POLICY REGARDING IRAN -- REALISM VERSUS MULTILATERALISM IN U.S. FOREIGN & MILITARY POLICY -- THE
NEED FOR U.S. FOREIGN & NATIONAL SECURITY POLICY LEADERS TO BE REALISTIC & AVOID CONFUSING REALISM WITH
IDEALISM
FULL STORY:
Last week, the United States of America turned to the United Nations in an attempt to increase pressure on Iran. The
U.S.A. wanted to expand sanctions against the budding nuclear power.
Neither China nor Russia would go along. And, faced with the prospect of one or the other vetoing sanctions at the UN
Security Council, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice punted. She put off further action against Iran until at least
November, 2007.
It's hard to see how much will change in a month. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov is firm in his opposition to
sanctions. "Interference by way of new sanctions would mean undermining" the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) as it puts pressure on Iran, he said.
This is a charade. The statement came three days after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that, based on his
talks with IAEA Director Mohamed ElBaradei, he considered the nuclear file closed. Not only could Iran continue
enriching uranium, regardless of UN Security Council resolutions, the Iranian President said, but Tehran could also export
its enriched uranium and nuclear know-how to other Muslim countries.
Yet, the Bush administration continues to seek agreement with Russia, with R. Nicholas Burns, U.S. Undersecretary of
State for Political Affairs, talking about Washington's desire for "compromise" with Moscow. British Foreign Minister
David Milbrand is no better. He puts unity above all else: "The most important thing is the unanimity of the international
community."
The debate over Iran, then, reflects two much larger debates: Whether foreign policy should be unilateral or multilateral
and whether it should be based on "realism" or on principle.
Unilateralism, of course, has become a dirty word since the invasion of Iraq. But international venality -- expressed in
French and Russian business deals with Saddam Hussein -- had undercut sanctions against Iraq. That left U.S.
President George W. Bush with little choice other than to stick with a failing multilateralist policy or to act unilaterally.
Now we're seeing that, in the case of Iran, "realism" and multilateralism may be mutually exclusive in the effort to curtail
proliferation. Or, put another way, multilateralism empowers Moscow, and Moscow isn't inclined to make a multilateral
sanctions regime effective.
For Russian President Vladimir Putin, realism is a zero-sum game that maximizes Russian power at U.S. expense. The U.S.
can seek Russian cooperation, but, for Russian realists, inaction looks like the best option. A nuclear capable Iran is
inimical to Russian interests, but Mr. Putin may have seen in Mr. Bush's soul a commitment to deny Tehran nuclear
capability at any cost. So why not profit both financially and strategically?
Russia and China have made billions as enablers to Iran's military ambitions. Less than a month after the September 11,
2001, Islamist terror attacks, Moscow signed a $7 billion arms deal with Tehran. The Iranian government has paid
Russia's state-owned Atomstroiexport more than $1 billion to construct the Bushehr nuclear plant. A 2003 CIA issued
report credited Russian, Chinese, and North Korean experts for Iran's ballistic-missile advances.
Alexander Denisov, Deputy Director of the Russian Federal Service for Military and Technical Cooperation said bluntly
in 2005:
"First of all, we have to count in our national interests. In
Syria, we have a huge market, over 80% of Soviet-made arms.
The same is true about Iran."
Late last year, Russia's state-run Rosoboronexport shipped a $700 million air-defense and missile system to Iran. Last
month, the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization said his government had won a Russian commitment to complete
the Bushehr reactor prior to a visit by Mr. Putin to Tehran later this month.
While a nuclear Iran would threaten U.S. national security and shred the international non-proliferation regime, a U.S.
military strike on Iran would be costly. Iranians may find Mr. Ahmadinejad odious, but they may respond to a strike by
rallying around the flag. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard is also capable of striking anywhere from Baghdad to Buenos
Aires and is able to set Lebanon and even northern Israel aflame.
On September 29, 2007, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps claimed the ability to monitor all movement in the Strait
of Hormuz and Persian Gulf. The threat is clear: Any conflict with Iran could drive oil over $120 a barrel. This would
likely hurt the U.S. economy, but it would also accelerate Russia's return to a dominant position in the world.
Russian realists relish such a scenario. The Kremlin has converted its multibillion-dollar oil windfall into power and
influence. Mr. Putin has increased defense procurement by more than 50% over the past two years. Russia has
developed a new class of nuclear submarines and a new generation of nuclear missiles. Moscow leverages money into
military strength.
Already, Russia uses European aversion to conflict to its advantage. The same European leaders upon whose good
faith Secretary of State Rice pegs U.S. national security have been willing to demote the Czech Republic and Poland to
second-class status within NATO to assuage the Kremlin.
During the George H.W. Bush administration, Condoleezza Rice was the point woman for Soviet affairs on the National
Security Council. She distinguished herself for poor instincts, with her opposition to Ukrainian independence, among
other issues. What Ms. Rice believes conciliatory, Mr. Putin sees as weakness. She may confuse realism with idealism;
Mr. Putin, the former KGB apparatchik, will not.
Realism may prevail, but not Washington's realism. The defiant Mr. Ahmadinejad offers the White House a stark choice:
Live with a nuclear Iran, or take action to stop it. Winning Russian approval is a chimera, delaying an inevitable decision.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
Military Weaponry & International Security:
Weapons of Mass Destruction & Arms Control
Russia & Other Former Soviet Republics
China, the Far East, & U.S. Foreign Policy
The Middle East & the Problem of Iran
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 in the Real World
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 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.
The foregoing article by Dr. Rubin was originally published in the Wall Street Journal, October 3, 2007, and can be
found on the Internet website
maintained by the Middle East Forum, a 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.
Republished with Permission of the Middle East Forum
Reprinted from the Middle East Forum News
mefnews@meforum.org (MEF NEWS)
October 3, 2007
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume IX, 2007
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
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
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues
Conservative Government Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity