Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Psyching Up

America and Britain really do seem to be gearing up psychologically for a military conflict with Iran. Gerald Baker writes:


No country in a region that is so riven by religious and ethnic hatreds will feel safe from the new regional superpower. No country in the region will be confident that the US and its allies will be able or willing to protect them from a nuclear strike by Iran. Nor will any regional power fear that the US and its allies will act to prevent them from emulating Iran. Say hello to a nuclear Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia.

Iran, of course, secure now behind its nuclear wall, will surely step up its campaign of terror around the world. It will become even more of a magnet and haven for terrorists. The terror training grounds of Afghanistan were always vulnerable if the West had the resolve. Protected by a nuclear-missile-owning state, Iranian camps will become impregnable.

And the kind of society we live in and cherish in the West, a long way from Tehran or Damascus, will change beyond recognition. We balk now at intrusive government measures to tap our phones or stop us saying incendiary things in mosques. Imagine how much more our freedoms will be curtailed if our governments fear we are just one telephone call or e-mail, one plane journey or truckload away from another Hiroshima.

Something short of military action may yet prevail on Iran. Perhaps sanctions will turn their leadership from its doomsday ambitions. Perhaps Russia can somehow be persuaded to give them an incentive to think again. But we can’t count on this optimistic scenario now. And so we must ready ourselves for what may be the unthinkable necessity.

Because in the end, preparation for war, by which I mean not military feasibility planning, or political and diplomatic manoeuvres but a psychological readiness, a personal willingness on all our parts to bear the terrible burdens that it will surely impose, may be our last real chance to ensure that we can avoid one.

These are all important points.

As I've written, our civil liberties actually rely on going on the offensive to win over there. Even with only conventional means, if we sat on the defensive we'd see our liberties eroded as laws were tightened to cope with the latest vulnerability highlighted. Since enemies will always find new vulnerabilities, there will be no end to this cycle. Imagine the security we'd need if our enemies can hit us with nukes? And in the end we'd get hit anyway. No liberty and no safety. How's that for a future?

And even if we are lucky and our enemies can be deterred from using nukes, the shield of nukes will allow our enemies to send run-of-the-mill terrorists against us with impunity. This is the strongest argument against the caution that attacking Iran will cause Iran to increase terrorism inside Iraq. We will get the increase regardless of what we do. So we might as well try to end it or make sure it can't be nuclear terrorism.

And what allies will cooperate with us--as they do now--to fight terrorists when the terror-sponsoring regimes have nukes to hold over their heads?

Baker is right as far as he goes that if you desire peace prepare for war. Against rational enemies, this might work. But the Iranians are nuts from our point of view. They won't believe any preparations are signals that we weak Westerners will fight them in the end. And even if they did think we will fight, they will believe their god is on their side and so won't care.

There is no way Iran will back down short of war. That is a hope beyond reality. But at least by looking at Iran's evil intent without flinching and looking away, we will be psychologically prepared to fight the mullahs to keep them from going nuclear.

The President's State of the Union address makes it seem that he is prepared to fight:

The same is true of Iran, a nation now held hostage by a small clerical elite that is isolating and repressing its people. The regime in that country sponsors terrorists in the Palestinian territories and in Lebanon — and that must come to an end. The Iranian government is defying the world with its nuclear ambitions — and the nations of the world must not permit the Iranian regime to gain nuclear weapons. America will continue to rally the world to confront these threats. And tonight, let me speak directly to the citizens of Iran: America respects you, and we respect your country. We respect your right to choose your own future and win your own freedom. And our Nation hopes one day to be the closest of friends with a free and democratic Iran.

Oh, and Iran seems to be getting ready too. They don't look like they will be cowed by mere diplomats:

At a London meeting that lasted into the early hours of Tuesday, envoys of Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States decided they would recommend Thursday that the International Atomic Energy Agency should report Iran to the Security Council. They also decided the Security Council should wait until the IAEA issues a report on Iran in March before tackling the issue.

Iran's top nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, reproached Europe for the London decision and repeated that Tehran will resume suspended nuclear activities and bar surprise U.N. inspections of facilities if it is referred to the Security Council.

"In case of referral ..., we have to stop all nuclear work that has been voluntarily suspended and stop implementation of the Additional Protocol," Larijani told reporters.

Uranium enrichment is the chief activity that Iran has suspended, but Larijani stopped short of specifying a resumption of enrichment.

I've thought action would come soon before, but that was based on more subtle signs and assumptions. Things just feel like they are moving to war now.

God help us all.

UPDATE: Sides are lining up.