Iran Analysis: More War, No Facts, Blah Blah (Chapter 23)

It's one thing for pontificator Charles Krauthammer to post an "analysis", void of logic and knowledge of Iran, to cheer-lead for threats of military action --- as we have noted often, he has long pushed for war with Tehran.

It's another for "moderate" Washington insiders Steven Simon and Ray Takeyh (with whom I have worked) to turn speculation into the situation on the ground, making military action the centre of attention in their commentary in today's Washington Post: "If Iran came close to getting a nuclear weapon, would Obama use force?"

Iran Media Follow-Up: War, War, War. Blah, Blah, Blah. No Facts. More War. Blah.

The article starts with Politics Fantasyland:

Imagine a moment when President Obama has only two alternatives: prepare to live with a nuclear-armed Iran or embark on the perilous path of military action to stop it.

Imagine that diplomacy has run its course, after prolonged and inconclusive negotiations; that surging international oil prices have undercut the power of economic sanctions against Tehran; and that reliable intelligence says the Islamic republic's weapons program is very close to reaching its goal.

Facing such conditions, would Obama use force against Iran?

Then, once again, we get the war-war meanderings of former Bush Administration official Michael Hayden as Very Significant --- they aren't --- before jacking up Obama's formulaic statement
in an interview with Israeli television (note the audience), "I assure you that I have not taken options off the table."

In limited mitigation, Takeyh and Simon then note the constraints on a possible US push for military action --- the United Nations, European opinion, the need for domestic consensus.

But only limited mitigation: in the end, the two authors come off as Chicken Little soothsayers: "The world imagined here may not constitute destiny --- but it will be hard to escape."

If Takeyh and Simon really wanted to make a contribution, rather than feeding water-cooler chatter (and the bias towards conflict), they might have queried their opening assumption that Iran is close to significant military nuclear capability (it isn't) or even if the regime intends to pursue that capability (unclear, though my personal reading is not at the present).

Takeyh and Simon might have even taken a moment to note the current diplomatic situation in which, far from moving towards a military showdown, both Tehran and Washington are approaching renewed talks over Iran's uranium enrichment.

But that would ruin the drama of the speculation, wouldn't it?

Apologies for appearing harsh on the two authors rather than, say, venting concern and frustration towards a Krauthammer. However, Takeyh and Simon, unless Krauthammer, have experience working inside an Administration. And I also think, unlike Krauthammer, that they are not trying to wish a war into existence.

So, please no more bombs-and-missiles fantasy. If we have to pose as a tough guy, let's try Jack Webb from TV's Dragnet: "Just the facts, Ma'am. Just the facts."

Comments

[Catherine]

In his Op-Ed of 28 July, Rami Khouri of The Daily Star briefly summarises what we're learning from the UK's ongoing Iraq Inquiry:

- the total absence of any credible information linking the Iraqi Baathist regime to the terror attacks of 9/11;
- the Anglo-American-led invasion of Iraq radicalized some young British citizens who saw the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq as “attack in Islam.”;
- the intelligence on Iraq had been incomplete.

And concludes that the US, the UK and their NATO allies actually haven't learned from their Iraq war mistakes where their policies towards Iran are concerned. One sentence basically says it all: "Much of the case against Iran’s alleged desire to obtain nuclear weapons is based on fragmentary and inconclusive bits of information and a great deal of speculation and ideological distemper, coupled with the hysteria common in Washington when pro-Israel lobby groups use their influence with American member of Congress who are at once mostly ignorant of Middle Eastern realities and deeply vulnerable to electoral blackmail." More: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=5&article_id=117528" rel="nofollow">http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition...

[Catherine]

The Drumbeats of War with Iran are getting Louder
by MUHAMMAD SAHIMI
Dire signs in ramping up of rhetoric, military preparations
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tehranbureau/2010/07/the-drumbeats-of-war-with-iran-are-getting-louder.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tehranb...