Five Options for Dealing with Iran

It appears to be just a matter of time before Iran possesses an operational nuclear weapons capability. While the United Nations Security Council recently passed its fourth round of sanctions against Iran, if history is any guide, it is unlikely that this sanctions package will be any more effective than the previous three. Each of these sanctions packages have failed to achieve their stated objective of stopping Iran’s production of nuclear fuel. The options for stopping Iran are dwindling–as is time. There are, in fact, no attractive options for U.S. policymakers. These include: (1) accept a nuclear-armed Iran, (2) continue with sanctions, (3) support an Israeli military strike against Iran’s nuclear weapons complex, (4) launch a U.S.-led military strike against Iran’s nuclear weapons complex, and (5) facilitate regime change. As I said, not one of these options is attractive. In every case, the risks outweigh the benefits. Liberals believe that, in the end, diplomacy will work. Some conservatives believe that only military force will stop Iran, and while they are probably correct, the costs and risks associated with military action are extraordinarily high.

Allegedly peaceful diplomacy will solve the problems with Iran. However, resurrecting Cold War policies for terrorists and rogue states ignores their author’s, George Kennan’s, prerequisites. For him the Marist/Leninist worldview mirrored traditional Russian ruling class neurotic insecurities about retaining power despite archaic, fragile political systems. Kennan believed the Soviets would not pursue the “hazardous, systematic plans of a Hitlerite Germany”, but always seek to undermine Western nations through various strategies short of war. Soviet leadership would not risk national resources and their dominance against adversaries possessing sufficient power, and demonstrating a clear readiness to use it.

Such parallels do not exist for the war on terror in general, or for the current Iranian regime. The massive deaths sought through jihad provide these Islamic fundamentalists both the means and objectives to usher in the Twelfth Imam, while destroying Israel. Their acceptance of violent death dominates allegiances to family, tribe, or country. They see no imperative for retaining a viable economic remnant. Therefore, the deterrent quality of force (mutually assured destruction) becomes useless.

The sanctions are pathetic. After voting in favor, Russia announced there was no problem supplying Iran with an air defense missile system, and additional nuclear power plants.

Victory, and even survival, instead requires vigorous, costly engagement along a full spectrum of diplomacy, including application of espionage and military force. But engagement requires continuous attacks against Iranian leadership, not population. A few willing adversaries must force meaningful forfeitures from this regime, before Israel must again enforce the nuclear non-proliferation protocols.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.