If we're serious about liberating Iran — and that's a big "if" because regime change is not official Bush policy — we'll need to rethink the current sanctions regime, which hasn't done anything to dislodge the mullahocracy. The Committee on the Present Danger, a hawkish advocacy group, suggests keeping some sanctions while reestablishing diplomatic ties and lowering barriers for cultural exchanges. The resulting access could be used to help the forces of freedom in Iran.
I think establishing democracy through peaceful involvement in Iran is a lovely thought. There are three problems with this strategy:
1. The Iranians are within months possibly of getting nuclear weapons.
2. Aiding democracy in Iran could take years longer than it would take Iran to go nuclear.
3. We kind of count on the mullahs to refrain from sending in the tanks against reformers.
I think that we have no chance in the world of implementing this strategy. We do need to overthrow the mullahs to prevent a psycho regime from owning nukes but we just don't have the time to implement this no-mess solution. We would need to risk a nuclear-armed mullah regime for years while hoping that the regime would not use their nukes while democracy advocates undermined and in time overthrew the regime. And as I noted, we count on the mullahs not massacring the first really large demonstration to snuff out the resistance with harsh repression and murder.
An Iranian Orange Revolution is a nice thought, but I just don't think that we can expect that much good fortune in solving our Iran problem.
As I've said before, I assume we are working with people inside Iran to overthrow the regime and to use our power to support them when they move. Iran is on the Axis of Evil list for a reason and they've done nothing to get off the list.
Are we really ready to tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran? I shudder to think that is so.
