Harvard arms control specialist Matthew Bunn was interviewed on NPR this morning about Iran's aggressive nuclear weapons development program.
Bunn is undoubtedly a genuine expert in this field, but in the interview he declines to acknowledge the obvious nature of Iran's intent to develop and/or acquire nuclear weapons, no ifs, ands or buts. Bunn also asserts that Iran's despotic leadership cannot now easily back down on weapons development because a lack of 1:1 engagement with Iran by the Bush administration has caused Iranian politicians to see the issue as one of national pride -- a pointless conclusion. The mullahs will do what they want.
Bunn pegs his hopes on the U.S. joining the EU-led negotiations. But the editors of the Wall Street Journal, after a review of Iran's duplicitous track record, understand the real story here.
All of this should make it obvious that Iran fully intends to develop the nuclear bomb into which it has sunk some $16 billion over the years. It also seems obvious that Iran is using its so-called dialogue with the Europeans to win the time and diplomatic wriggle room to do so. So why are the Europeans going along with this charade? Maybe they really believe that Iranian good faith can be purchased by what they have to offer in terms of carrots and sticks. But we doubt it. Europeans are not as self-deceived as all that.A more plausible explanation is that the Europeans are complicit with Iran in this diplomatic charade. That's not to say Berlin, London or even Paris welcome the idea of a nuclear Iran. But they see it as a soon-to-be fact of international life that will have to be managed, just as other unsavory nuclear powers such as the Soviet Union and China were managed.
By contrast, what the Europeans really seem to dread are the potential consequences of a more determined American effort to halt Tehran, especially if that effort includes a pre-emptive military strike against Iranian nuclear installations.
This, then, is what the latest Iranian-European deal is about. It is not mainly intended to stop Iran from getting a bomb. Mainly, it is intended to stop the U.S. from stopping Iran.
We are not suggesting that the only feasible alternative to Europe's current effort is military action. But as Mr. Bush considers his options, it's important that everyone acknowledges just what the Europeans are offering. It is not diplomacy with the country of Iran. It is pre-emptive capitulation in the war on terror.
It doesn't seem likely that our President will go down that fruitless path. Everyone just keep in mind why.
Posted by Alan at November 22, 2004 11:58 AM