Replies

Thanks Salem! It's a little dry, and maybe a little obvious, but it's nice to see someone actually looking at this dispassionately.

Israel seems to be losing confidence in the commitment of the Obama Administration to protect its interests with respect to Iran. As tensions with the U.S. increase on this and other issues Israel is arguably pushed in a direction that could lead to an attack against Iran sooner rather than later. Immediately after an Israeli attack, the United States would begin significant defensive deployments to the region. Policy alternatives and calculations would favour U.S. involvement and the Administration in Washington is assumed to finish what the Israelis started, eliminating Iran's nuclear facilities. As the conflict moves forward, the United States would want to end it as quickly as possible. However, assessments of Iranian action along with a visible opposition inside Iran, would likely lead the Administration to expand the conflict, making regime elimination the new objective. Gardiner concludes that Iran is the only country with the capacity to prevent the seemingly inevitable movement towards what would be a disaster for itself, for the region, for Europeans, and for the United States.

Iran's capacity to prevent this doesn't exist per se -- without outside help, the Iranian people have proven to be unable to extricate themselves. They need a manifesto, NOW -- some polite suggestions as minimum requirements:

that the mullahcracy is illegitimate
that the mullahcracy is a form of foreign rule
that the only way a return to the mullahcracy can be avoided in the future is the elimination and permanent ban of Islam from Iranian society