RESPONDING to Max Hastings whose article entitled, “Negotiating with Iran is maddening, but bombing would be a catastrophe” appeared on the website of the Guardian Newspaper, dated 4th August 2008.
Mr. Hastings writes:
… The Iranian government may be reckless – even fanatical – but it is not mad. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khomeini, have assuredly made these calculations for themselves. The US is seeking to behave with the outward assurance of a superpower, while crippled by its difficulties in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Writing in response:
Iran has tested the patience and political will not only of the United States, but of Britain and of the EU who also have a forked-spook in resolving the difficulties associated with Iran.
US intelligence, increasingly, highlights the anomaly between what Iran says it is doing as against what it actually could do in the future. Iran teeters, now, on the brink between having a full nuclear capability in matching its neighbours with a nuclear arsenal: the amount of fissile material and centrifuges the Iranian regime has stockpiled in recent years does suggest something far more sinister than merely driving nuclear for domestic energy purposes. Ring-fenced, as a singular argument, acquiring such materials for the purposes of providing an alterative energy reserve simply doesn’t add-up considering that Iran has an abundant and copious supply of oil in meeting with its future expectations over at least the next 20-years.
The West is correct in being concerned and vigilant over Iranian activities. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, on five separate occasions, now, has professed his desire in seeing, “Israel wiped-off the map”, hardly the type of language that seeks to reconcile peacefully with its sworn enemy.
Iran faces a real dilemma because with a heavy contingent of US soldiers on the ground and with the US Air-Force controlling much of the skies over Iraq and Afghanistan, any future Israeli air strike against Iranian targets would require the direct assistance of the United States military. Even to the extent of the Americans providing air-to-air refueling capability for Israeli aircraft crossing various tertiary borders during its missions. Authorisation of any Israeli air strike against Iran will always require the consent of the US.
The recent Israeli bombing of the Natanz weapons making factory in Iran also suggests – from examination of the debris – that Iran has not been sincere in its dealings with the West. US analysis and evidence, from those airstrikes, strongly reinforces its arguments that Iran is intent on building a nuclear bomb, a facility, once fully activated, and in the hands of an unstable regime like Iran, would clearly pose risks to an already volatile Middle East as well as to the wider world. The presence of the US military in the region, with a distinct possibility that the US might revert to the use of military force should not be ruled out.
In addition, if Mr. Ahmadinejad was seeking a peaceful outcome, he should be co-operating with the United States as North Korea is now doing, a clear example of what could happen if Iran was more conciliatory. North Korea now has the privilege of increased subsidies, additional help in promoting the country’s welfare, export restrictions lifted and a willingness for the US to integrate North Korea into the international arena. Iran, too, has been promised much, including direct assistance with its future energy needs as well as similar provisions now being made available to North Korea. As a first step, though, the IAEA and its inspectors require direct access to sensitive sites and by being allowed to interview Iranian scientists independently and without duress. The Iranian regime constantly blocks such requests.
© Mark Dowe 2008: all rights protected
Reference(s):
… “US military posturing towards Tehran lacks credibility and, in any case, such action would fail in all its purposes”
… “Since Iran has refused to freeze its nuclear programme, the US should push for both sanctions and broader diplomacy”
Filed under: European Union, United Nations, World Affairs, terrorism | Tagged: diplomacy, IAEA, Iran, iran's nuclear intentions, iranian stockpiles, Israel, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, natanz, north korea
