The Middle East time-bomb – Iran and the US
The timer is already ticking. The West has vowed that Iran cannot possess a nuclear weapon. The Arab world does not agree according to recent polls there. They see a nuclear Iran as a balance to a nuclear Israel. The clock is counting down to how this conundrum will be resolved.
The West has tried sanctions. This hasn’t changed Iran’s nuclear weapon aspirations. If anything it has increased regional polemic. It depends on world view. Iran argues that Israel has nuclear capacity. It sees that Pakistan – a much more unstable country and one with an aggressive military history – has nuclear weapons. Iran does not understand why it is being, from its perspective, singled out for such inequitable treatment. Iran scholars talk to the fact that Iran has not attacked a regional neighbor in over 200 years. They argue that for a regional balance to be maintained they need to act as a counter to Israel – sort of cold war balance except in a desert climate.
There has been a lot of talk of late about accelerating diplomatic efforts. Even the Bush administration – the regime of military intervention opposed to the Churchillian policy of ‘jaw not war’- has started to take baby steps towards diplomatic conversation with Iran. Diplomacy has some chance of resolving some political differences but can it convince Iran to suddenly disband its nuclear programs? Unfortunately, many believe not.
The tension and distrust between Iran and the US runs deep. Today, the Iranian Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei, in a speech cited the depth of the dispute with the US. He said, “…the hatred of the Iranian nation {towards America} is deep-seated. The reason is the various conspiracies by the U.S. government against the Iranian people and government in the past 50 years…this dispute [with America] goes further than differences of opinion over a few political issues” This sort of public rhetoric does nothing to support the likely success of any diplomatic measures. If nothing else, Iran sees the US having a long history of unwanted interventionism. Iran, for example, blames the CIA for covertly helping topple the elected government of Mohammed Mosaddeq in the 1950s and blames the United States for openly supporting the late Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi against the 1979 Islamic revolution.
The timing is not in the favor of the West. The incoming US President probably can’t wait until January to decide a path. Any negotiations will probably have to begin in the transitional period late this year. Why so much urgency? This is the core issue. The US can ill afford to start another war front – with an economy mired in debt and a military stretched thin on so many fronts. However, it cannot wait until Iran achieves a nuclear armory. Confronting a nation with nuclear weapons is a very different war to the conventional fronts it now faces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Time is running out for options, and it is running out fast. Some authorities say Iran could have nuclear weaponry by late 2009, others say 2011 or later. Nobody is quite sure and the West, and particularly the US given its relationship with Israel, cannot gamble on a delayed date.
Could Israel attack Iran as a proxy given the US limitations? Again, no-one is sure. Some authorities say they could – others that they lack the necessary strike capacity to make a meaningful impact. So the conundrum remains. How to address Iran and when? It is unlikely that Iran will make the first move. There is no advantage for it doing so. So Iran does have the luxury of time time to see whether threats, blandishments, diplomacy, or bribes come its way in enough strength for it to change its path. In the meantime, it will continue on its current course. There is a time bomb ticking in the Middle East, and once again, it is a new US President that will need to figure out the best way to defuse it.
