To John on the challenge of Iran

Submitted by Justin H. (United States), Jan 20, 2006 at 17:55

Sorry I did not bring this part of my response up in the section I gave on "Operation Iraqi Freedom". I wanted to break it down into shorter, more digestible pieces.

This, now, deals with Iran. Dealing with an Islamic Republic that is seeking to build nuclear weapons is going to be even more challenging than trying to rebuild a country as hopeless as Iraq (if a country is not a nation it will never become one). Perhaps one good thing to come out of Operation Iraqi Freedom was the death of Libya's nuclear program, although it is a pyyrhic victory at best considering everything else. Now onto Iran: Believe me, NO ONE wants Iran to have the bomb, and it should not be because of the threat to America (there is none as of this writing), but rather that to Israel, which lies in range of its Shahab-3 long range missiles. It is my belief that the program is a deterrent, but one that could easily become a first option depending on whatever happens to the aging Supreme Leader (and we can certainly be thankful that President Ahmadi-Nejad DOES NOT have that much power..I'd be scared to have him as a head of state). I would be more concerned with his ideological mentor, Ayatollah Mohammad Taqi Mesbah-e Yazdi, who makes the current hard-line Supreme Leader (Khamenei) look like a moderate. I do not think Khamenei is dumb enough to send a nuke to Israel...on Mesbah e-Yazdi I am not so sure...My main fear is that an Iranian suitcase nuke may someday end up on the black market (and in the hands of some 18-year-old Hamas member in, say, Tel Aviv).

What makes the issue of a nuclear Iran such a challenge is that no matter what option we take, there is going to be a risk involved. For one, our troops are too thinly spread. For another, the ramifications are going to be serious. In the end, I do not believe that invasion nor airstrikes are the answer (and in truth, I do not have the answer either...then again, neither do our policy-makers). Both, according to experts such as Kenneth M. Pollock (a Middle East foreign policy expert who, in fact, favored "Operation Iraqi Freedom" would fail to destroy the nuclear program). Furthermore, America would stand to lose something that, in this day and age, is truly special. In the Middle East, since Operation Iraqi Freedom, our approval rating in most Middle Eastern countries have dropped to abysmal levels (in Egypt, for instance, it is about 5%-at most; in Jordan, even lower). Conspiracy theories and warped views of what America is all about dominate...

In Iran, however, our approval rating is remarkably high..one survey revealed an approval rating of about 74%...what if we were to lose the favor of the only pro-Western population (aside from the Israeli people and Iraqi Kurds) in the Middle East. I do not think that many of us realize just how much Iranian youth love America (which makes me interested in meeting some young Iranians, by the way)..yet, they would loathe us if we were to invade their country. In fact, I am led to wonder if we can solve the problem by backing a massive Iranian resistance, either violent or non-violent (as we supported anti-Communist forces in several countries during the 1980s). The problem these days, as New York Times reporter Thomas L. Friedman wrote, is that the world seems to be held hostage by oil producers such as Iran, which is why it will be difficult to mobilize China and Russia.

As much as we underestimate the affinity that Iranian youth have with the American people, we also underestimate the trouble that Iran itself can cause. If it were attacked, it would respond in several ways. It is likely that Iraq's Shiite majority would turn against us. Remember, John (or Mr. Giannasca, if you perfer) that Pasdaran (Iranian Revolutionary Guard) units have already infiltrated Iraq, and are backing the Mahdi Army of radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr (I am interested in what you feel about the possibility of an Islamic theocracy in Iraq, by the way, and even if I do not agree with your views I respect them, as I respect those of Dr. Pipes)...now imagine if we had to deal with both a Sunni AND Shiite insurgency...Also, Israel would face the katyusha rockets of Lebanon's pro-Iranian Hezbollah, which is considered among the world's most dangerous terrorist organizations...Thus, in dealing with Iran, whatever the solution is, we cannot be gung-ho. We must approach the problem of Iran surgically, and by means of wisdom, rather than testosterone or ideology, and I do not trust Rumsfled or Cheney to do the job, for their motives are purely ideological. It is perhaps the most complex country in the entire world. Period.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".