Shivers
Advised upon Larjani resignation. Meir Javedanfar at Pajamas:
The resignation of Ali Larijani, the Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council who was also Iran’s top nuclear negotiator on Saturday, caught the international community by complete surprise.
His sudden resignation can be clearly traced to the major differences between him and Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, centering around how to move Iran’s nuclear program forward.
Ahmadinejad does not believe in compromises when it comes to the nuclear program …
Larijani on the other hand, urged caution.
…
The resignation of Ali Larijani, and his replacement with Saeed Jalili should for at least the short term send shivers down the spine of anyone who is looking for a negotiated settlement for the current Iranian nuclear crisis. Jalili, an Ahmadinejad ally and an inexperienced official whose highest experience comes from his post as deputy foreign minister for European and American affairs, will be nothing more than a yes man to the President. Even more worrying than that is the fact that his appointment has been approved by Ayatollah Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader, as is normally the case for such a high ranking post. On the surface at least, the appointment of Jalili, which comes two months after the appointment of Jafari as the new head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corp (IRGC) can be taken as a strong sign that Khamenei has quite possibly given up on finding accommodation with the West and is instead preparing his country for a military showdown.
Whole thing from Iran watcher Javedanfar.
I’d suggest this only sends shivers for those who think the negotiations with Iran were ever worth a damn, and that Iran under its present regime can be allowed to have a nuclear program or, for that matter, should to be allowed to meddle unchallenged and seek to dominate the region. By that measure, removal of a velvet glove is a positive development. Iran allowed to continue on its path is greater cause for a shudder.
Meanwhile, another Pajamas scribbler, and AEI scholar, Ledeen, at WSJ on victory over al-Qaeda in Iraq, and its emptiness given our dearth of a policy vs Iranian, Syrian meddling there:
We were the stronger horse, and the Iraqis recognized it.
No doubt Gen. David Petraeus and Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno know all this. It is, after all, their strategy that has produced the good news. Their reluctance to take credit for the defeat of al Qaeda and other terrorists in Iraq is due to the uncertain outcome of the big battle now being waged here at home. They, and our soldiers, fear that the political class in Washington may yet snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. They know that Iran and Syria still have a free shot at us across long borders, and Gen. Petraeus told Congress last month that it would not be possible to win in Iraq if our mission were restricted to that country.
Not a day goes by without one of our commanders shouting to the four winds that the Iranians are operating all over Iraq, and that virtually all the suicide terrorists are foreigners, sent in from Syria. We have done great damage to their forces on the battlefield, but they can always escalate, and we still have no policy to direct against the terror masters in Damascus and Tehran. That problem is not going to be resolved by sound counterinsurgency strategy alone, no matter how brilliantly executed.
Topics: Iran
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 8:55 am on Sunday, October 21, 2007
2 Responses to “Shivers”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
October 21st, 2007 at 1:50 pm
Amen, Brother Ledeen, amen. Even though the Dhims haven’t been able to do more than pass non-binding resolutions, the lack of support for going after Iran keeps us in real peril. They’re going to talk until we have no choice but to wage an all out war that will be worse that anything the antis have protested.
October 21st, 2007 at 11:18 pm
You are quite right Salty. In fact, what we are anticipating is likely to be the world’s first real nuclear war. The Pharaohs of Tehran are determined to get nukes for achieving their goals of genocide and regional conquest and intimidation of anyone who might get in the way. There is no diplomatic carrots or sticks that will cause them to see stopping their programs as more attractive than getting nukes. And when they have them they intend to toss them at Tel Aviv and, most likely, the USA and Britain (via coordinated, multiple, simultaneous nuclear terrorist attacks I think).
Our only hope at present is that Israel’s antimissile defenses work and that our intel can stop the terrorist attacks before thye are carried out. The latter depends mainly on the CIA, since the New York Times has been blowing our SIGINT programs’ security, so it’s a pretty frail reed on which to lean.
The alternative to sitting around sucking our thumbs and clutching our security blankets is preemptive war, most likely nuclear in order to be certain of destroying the Iranian nuke industry, whose sites are most likely massively hardened in expectation of just such an attack. I believe much of the hysteria and opposition about the Iraq Campaign was intended to prevent any such action. Most of the Dems, and a few of the weaker spined Packs, have turned into Copperheads.