World can still change Iran without bombing it
Iran is rational despite menacing image and should be approached with diplomatic dialogue.
By Zvi Bar'el Tags: Barack Obama Iran nuclear Israel newsSyria has received a big compliment from the head of Military Intelligence, Amos Yadlin. "Syria is a secular country, and unlike Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas, it does not reject the prospect of reaching a peace agreement with Israel," he said. Which means that because Syria is a secular state, it cannot have a deep emotional attachment to religious Shi'ite Iran.
Something is slightly confused here. Fundamentalist and Shi'ite Iran does not in any way oppose Israeli-Syrian dialogue, as long as Syria gets the Golan back, of course. Shi'ite Iran engages in full and lucrative peaceful relationships with Sunni countries like Pakistan, the Hindu nation of India and Christian nations like Germany and France. Until two years ago, it had a failed affair with Egypt, the great transgressor that sinned in striking a peace deal with Israel.
Iran is a rational country; it operates according to the interests that usually guide countries. Iran's nuclear program has become a menacing demon not merely because of the program, but because of the nature of the regime and its bellicose statements. After all, Iran was the focus of an "axis of evil" even before the world began to fret about its nuclear capacity.
The Islamic revolution that rocked the world, the capture of U.S. hostages, the nurturing of organizations like Hezbollah and later Hamas, and violent rhetoric by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who himself has generated an impressive opposition movement, are the factors that created Iran's menacing image. The result is that every Iranian technological advancement, be it a new missile, submarine or even a high-tech car, invokes fear immediately. Accordingly, the knee-jerk reaction in the West and especially in Israel is to talk about the Holocaust or bombing Iran. This in turn distorts public discourse.
Can we bomb? Where should we bomb? Was there or wasn't there a chance to wipe out the uranium enrichment labs? Can Israel bomb on its own? Should it do so? How would this affect relations with the United States? Everything revolves around the bomb.
The discussion around the world about what happened in Iran only six months ago has been put in a dark corner. The election, the blow to the Iranian leadership, Mir Hossein Mousavi's Green Movement, the widening fault line between the public and its leadership, the continued demonstrations in the streets despite political arrests, torture and rape - all this is perceived as trivial now. The potential for change that could produce a new Iranian foreign policy is no longer a strategic consideration. The U.S. administration no longer even mentions how peace between Israel and the Palestinians could help form a united Arab front against Iran.
Granted, this concept did not hold water from the onset because Iran pursued its own interests. But it did characterize a change in the American approach, and this change rests on solid foundations: Diplomacy, not a military strike, could change Iran's motivation. And motivation is the heart of the Iranian problem because the Iranian threat is based on capability and motivation. Many countries have the capability to threaten Israel or Western countries, but without motivation, this capability means nothing.
So far, threats, sanctions and tempting economic offers have been used to try to neutralize or at least delay the Iranian capability. Iran is not willing to accept the principle that it is forbidden something that Pakistan, India and Israel (according to foreign publications) are allowed.
The effort required to change Iran's motivation has not yet begun. Sweeping sanctions on gasoline imports into Iran could quiet down for a while those who seek to acquire the bomb, but they will not effect change in Iran. They will only help cement the solidarity between the opposition and the regime.
If we assume that Iran is a rational state, then dialogue between the Islamic Republic and the United States - not only on nuclear issues - is the proper leverage to be used. Recognizing it as a regional power, not just a "Shi'ite Iranian threat," could change its policy. But those who think Iran is crazy better skip the rhetoric, bomb already and be done with it.
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
No one is permitted to make nuclear weapons. Not being an NPT member does not mean certain attack. Look at Israel, North Korea, India, and Pakistan; no one attacks their nuke sites.
the test firing of missiles to help Iranian experts in missile and nuclear research technology. Iran paid North Korea handsomely for this knowledge. German intelligence sources report that Iranian scientists have successfully simulated the detonation of a nuclear warhead in laboratory conditions, possibly sidestepping an underground nuclear test like the one that brought the world down on North Korea's head earlier this year. Iranian and intelligence sources report that this development is alarming because detonation is one of the most difficult technological challenges in the development of a nuclear weapon. Mastering it carries Iran past one of the last major obstacle confronting its program for the manufacture of a nuclear warhead. The IAEA came out against & just recently censored Iran for hiding uranium and nuclear facilities. They came down so hard on Tehran that the Iranians threatened to leave the NPT. The IAEA said that Iran should be punished by the other nations of the treaty for non-compliance!! If they just want electricity, why are they simulating nuclear detonations? One more point: before you post again, have some semblance of knowledge about the article! Your probably the only person in the world who still believes Iran just wants electricity.
Mr. Bar'el, must be another citizen of LA-LA LAND. Changing Iran by diplomatic means has proved fruitless over many years. Apparently Iran's hearing aid does not work or the volume has been turned down. Sanctions and threats have fallen on deaf ears. How does one communicate with someone who is high on drugs? Where did the world get, when it negotiated with Nazi Germany?
Iran and Israel know each other too well and this posturing is to hide the fact that both want hegemony in the Middle East. I think that is Israels main worry. In fact, a secular Iran may be worse for Israel than an Iran run by clowns like Ahmadinejad. A secular Iran would be in a position to protect American interests in Iraq and Afganistan. What would Israel have to offer America? It is rational for Israel to want to do everything to prevent Iran from becoming a US ally. If you ask me, Israel needs a new long term survival doctrine: instead of allying itself with the Christian right in the US (who want to facilitate the coming of Jesus and don't particularly care about the security of the Jewish people after that) and befriending Turks (with their unapologetic history of genocide), Israel should become a vassal of Iran, like it was in biblical times. It worked then; it can work now. Help Iranians to get rid of this despotic regime of roughnecks and thugs and we will remember that.
To SUBAM ....your question is rhetorical, no? What is with Israeli warmonging? THE NUTCASE CURRENTLY IN POWER (?) HAS REPEATEDLY THREATENED TO WIPE ISRAEL OFF THE FACE OF THE EARTH. GET IT NOW?
I don't think it's the murdering of the opposition that particularly bothers Israel. It's not the hanging of young children from their cranes or the Nazi rhetoric when refering to Israel as, "bacteria and vermin". It's not the Holocaust cartoon competions or the conferences or the denial that the Holocaust ever existed. Nor is it the repression of Womens' Rights. No. It's the Proxy armies of Hamas and Hezbollah. Today finds Iran vexing its muscle against Iraq. I know to many it's OK for Muslems to murder each other as long as it's not the People of the book or the Unbelievers doing it. Now they will have Nuclear weapons. Not only should the World be worrying but you should be digging in your cellar right now, because this isn't going to get better for anyone.
Zvi contends that the world can still change Iran without bombing it. Blink and you might miss Zvi's answer to the headline. It's a one worder found in the last paragraph. Yes it's the old lefty panacea for all problems too difficult for the left to solve.... "dialogue". Just mention that word and you absolve yourself of all responsibility. Remember... Obama used to talk about "dialogue"... but even he isn't doing that any more.
Iran is neither rational nor crazy. Iran (Hamas, Hezbollah, Taliban, al Qaida, etc.)executes faithfully what the "Seal of the Prophets" has preached. But, of course, Zvi Bare'l Chamberlain ignores totally what Muhammad has preached...
IAEA visits Iran every two weeks. This is how we know so much about the Iranian nuclear project. How will we know about it after bombing. Remember that they have 85000tons of 5% uranium they got from Russia for Busher. How come nobody talks about that. It will all be theirs to play with after IAEA is kicked out, if anybody dares bomb them.
What you really need to do in Iran is get rid of the theocratic, fanatical leadership that holds that country hostage.. With that bunch gone, Iran will take care of itself.
It's only Israel and it's media that considers Iran as a major threat to world peace, the rest of the world doesn't give a damn. Iran only want's to generate electricity using nuclear energy, not destroy the planet. And when it's a signatory of the NPT, compliant with the IAEA, then what's with the constant Israeli warmongering against Iran?
What's your point, Mr. Bar'el? Is or isn't Iran a "ratioinal" country? You start with Amos Yadlin's quote on Syrian non-religious character, to leave that thought in the air. Then you go on to consider Iran "rational", and talk about its motiviation, which is undoubtedly irrational. You end promoting wide dialogue by the USA, while Iran arms, funds and trains all the terrorist sects of the Middle East, and not just those against Israelis, but those meddling in Iraq's, Lebonon's, Saudi Arabia's and Yemen's and Palestine's stability too. I can't fathom what the blib is your point.
The problem of negociating with Iran or other totally susceptible countries is that any imposing any dealine is considered as a way of threatening the country, while obviously Iran has an interest in buying time. Dealines cannot be just rhetorics, something you set in the conversation just to take it back when it's considered as a threat, or when it actually puts a term to the conversation. Unless you really want or accept a nuclear Iran, you need to set deadlines, and this is considered as a defacing, threatening move by irates olding fundamentalists in Iran (among which the infamous Khamenei, who will not be replaced by neither political side when he dies)