Wednesday, April 05, 2006

We shouldn't bomb Iran.

I was originally hopeful that with Russia and China's backing, the situation would be resolved diplomatically. Now it appears that those two are backing out of their initial support (big surprise) for tough UN action. We are left with the unfortunate prospect of having to either bomb Iran's nuclear facilities, or deal with a nuclear armed Iran.

As much as I don't want to see Iran have nukes, bombing Iran to prevent them from furthering their nuclear program is a really bad idea. Here are a few reasons why:

1) The situation is much different from when Israel bombed Saddam's Osirak reactor in the 80s. That was a single easy target in a relatively small country. Iran's nuclear facilities on the other hand are numerous, well protected, and hidden throughout the country. There is no guarentee that a bombing campaign will work.

2) Iran can retaliate to a bombing campaign. They can make hell for our troops in Iraq, and undermine (whats left of) the Iraqi democratic movement. They could also disrupt oil supply to the world by blocking exports from the Persian Gulf, which would cause an economic crisis.

3) Iraqi Shiites have been our allies up to this point, for the most part. Bombing Shiite Iran will end those days. We'll probably face internal uprisings, certainly from the likes of al-Sadr. Its even possible that the Shiite government might stop working with us. Basically, bombing Iran will mean the end to our nation building efforts in Iraq. If we're going to bomb Iran, we might as well pack up and go home. Although that is unfortunately starting to sound like a good idea anyways.

4) Nationalist sentiment will rally the Iranian people around their leaders. The only eventual solution to the Iranian problem is a change of government, which has to come from within. As long as we are threatening the country, the people are going to rally behind the government.

Here is my solution to the problem. We need a new doctrine which states that the MAD (mutual assured destruction) principle applies to WMD based terrorism. The MAD principle is what prevented a war between the Soviet Union and the US, even when someone as fanatical as Stalin was in charge. It is an extremely powerful conflict prevention tool, but there has been concern that it won't work if there is an indirect attack (through a terrorist intermediary).

Screw that. A terrorist nuclear attack on the West or Israel should be treated as if the attack had come on a missile directly from Iran. Tell the Iranian people, that if they trust their leaders with nukes, thats their business. Just make sure they know that if a bomb 'accidentally' ends up in an Israeli or Western city, MAD still applies, and Iran will cease to exist. Then see if they cheer loudly the next time Ahmedinejad talks about eradicating Israel.

Our invasion of Iraq has not only weakened the US, but has greatly strengthened Iran. The strategic stupidity of the invasion of Iraq is simply mind boggling. What was our government thinking? We supported Iraq in the 80s, not because we liked Saddam Hussein, but because Iran was a greater threat. The secular Sunni Arab Saddam was a counterweight to religious Shiite fundamentalism in the region. Now we have removed that counterweight, and democracy has brought to power Shiite religious fundamentalists in Iraq. Unfathomable.

No comments: