Popping the Question with Iran
JFK School Kumbayah chorus leader weighs in on Iran. Samantha Power sees American arrogance, saber-rattling as a problem, especially since Iran’s nuclear ambitions have been revealed as another Bush lie. No mention of Iran arrogance, saber-rattling, etc., and this essay suffers from other flaws in facts, perspective. But Power may be onto something when she counsels engagement with Iran. TIME:
The war scare that wasn’t stands as a metaphor for the incoherence of our policy toward Iran: the Bush Administration attempts to gin up international outrage by making a claim of imminent danger, only to be met with international eye rolling when the claim is disproved. Sound familiar? The speedboat episode bore an uncanny resemblance to the Administration’s allegations about the advanced state of Iran’s weapons program–allegations refuted in December by the National Intelligence Estimate.
Samantha Power, meet Henry Kissinger.
In the eyes of even our closest allies, the Administration’s Iran policy amounts to a lurch from one imagined crisis to the next.
Samantha Power, meet Angela Merkel , Nicholas Sarkozy and Gordon Brown.
Power goes on to note that Iran is a wretched, oppressive regime, but suggests we’ve only made it worse by removing two other wretched oppressors, Saddam Hussein and the Taliban. We should talk with Iran. I suppose that means we should have limited ourselves to talking to Saddam Hussein and the Taliban. There are people who believe that, though by my reckoning that means they’d still be beheading women in Kabul’s soccer stadium, Osama bin Laden would be happily esconced in Afghanistan, enjoying Pakistan’s full favor instead of being stuck in its tribal closet, and Saddam, sanctions-free, would be well along in his rebuilt nuke program and, if his pre-invasion feelers are any indication, hosting AQ operations. So would a terrified Iran be with us, or in that case judging us as a worthless, spent power, angling to dominate the Middle East … much as it wagers we are a worthless, spent power today and is biding its time to dominate the Middle East? All interesting exercises in what-if, but we need to deal with reality.
Power posits a decline of US. influence in the region. Evidently she missed the unprecedented showing of Arab nations at Bush’s peace party at Annapolis, the Gulf states lining up versus Iran last week, Pakistan’s interest in an increased U.S. military training/advisor role, Iraq’s interest in a long-term strategic relationship.
Not noted by Sam, we are in fact talking with Iran. Iran loves to talk. But what are words without action? Samantha Power, meet Gen. Petraeus.
A new Iran policy should start with the premise that any country behind a problem can also be behind a solution. No aspect of the Iraq quagmire can be resolved without Iranian involvement. Washington has a better chance of modifying Iran’s influence in Iraq–and Afghanistan, the Palestinian territories and Lebanon–than of immediately halting it.
Entirely agreed. A little modification can go a long way. Modify Iranian influence in Iraq, modify Iranian influence in Lebanon, modifiy Iranian influence in Syria, modify Iranian influence in Gaza, modify Iranian influence in Afghanistan, modify Iranian influence in the Gulf, modify the Iranian nuclear program. Meanwhile, continue modifications to Iran’s economic relations with the world. Iran must be involved. We modify, Iran gets modified. Sounds like we’re all on the same page here after all.
Engaging Iran won’t guarantee improved U.S.-Iranian relations or a more stable gulf region. But not engaging means more of the same. The longer we wait to rethink our Iran policy, the greater the likelihood that the next crisis will erupt into a full-fledged confrontation.
Power is right. We’ve been dragging out this casual dating thing too long. Engagement is good. Engage with their IRG speedboats. Engage with their terrorist training camps. Engage with their nuclear program. The longer we wait to become engaged, the greater the likelihood the next crisis will erupt into a full-fledged conflagration!
Here’s Power last March on stopping genocide in Iraq.
Topics: Iran
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 9:50 am Comments (9) on Friday, January 18, 2008
9 Responses to “Popping the Question with Iran”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
January 18th, 2008 at 11:14 am
As defense analyst Colin Gray Writes in a recent book about the near-term possibilities of major conflict, “Another Bloody Century,”* when considering optimism and pessimism, “optimism is apt to kill with greater certainty.”
– “Fear of China” by Robert D. Kaplan in The Wall Street Journal, on page A14, on April 21, 2006.
* ISBN 0297846272
January 18th, 2008 at 12:38 pm
A short, violent engagement that leaves Iran’s infrastructure in smoking ruins works for me.
January 18th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
Engaging Iran won’t guarantee improved U.S.-Iranian relations or a more stable gulf region. But not engaging means more of the same.
Then we have nothing to lose. But I doubt my definition of “engaging” is the same as Ms. Powers’.
January 18th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Web Reconnaissance for 01/18/2008
A short recon of whats out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day…so check back often.
January 18th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
Something should be “popping” in Persia, but it ain’t “questions”.
January 18th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
If such “engagement” involves Iran lecturing to us about how great they are and how they’ll destroy us if we lay a finger on them, then it’s a fool’s journey and a waste of time. Same goes for the NGOs and other international busybodies – the US will be glad to listen to complaints and accusations so long as the US is able to defend itself and back up everything, and not be subject to long-winded lectures.
January 19th, 2008 at 2:01 am
Umm, can we slap her silly, or is she already silly enough?
March 7th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
[...] and meanspiritedness. Never mind that she was right. Couldn’t have happened to a bigger dingbat. Question is, are they going to run her out of Harvard now? Not for being a dingbat. [...]
March 9th, 2008 at 8:44 am
[...] one from a frothing wingnut warmonger. Mr. Obama, your former foreign policy advisor, a dingbat who called Hillary Clinton a ‘monster,’ said that you have no Iraq withdrawal plan and [...]