Will the U.S. be bombing Iran anytime soon?
Via Kevin Drum, I see that Joseph Crincione is saying at Foreignpolicy.com that a military strike against Iran might be more likely than previously thought: I used to think that the Bush administration wasn?t seriously considering a military strike on Iran, because it would only accelerate Iran?s nuclear program. But what we’re seeing and hearing ...
Via Kevin Drum, I see that Joseph Crincione is saying at Foreignpolicy.com that a military strike against Iran might be more likely than previously thought: I used to think that the Bush administration wasn?t seriously considering a military strike on Iran, because it would only accelerate Iran?s nuclear program. But what we're seeing and hearing on Iran today seems awfully familiar. That may be because some U.S. officials have already decided they want to hit Iran hard. Kevin also links to this Daily Telegraph report by Sean Rayment asserting that the U.K. is gearing up as well: The Government is to hold secret talks with defence chiefs tomorrow to discuss possible military strikes against Iran. A high-level meeting will take place in the Ministry of Defence at which senior defence chiefs and government officials will consider the consequences of an attack on Iran. It is believed that an American-led attack, designed to destroy Iran's ability to develop a nuclear bomb, is "inevitable" if Teheran's leaders fail to comply with United Nations demands to freeze their uranium enrichment programme. Over at The Washington Note, Clemons wants a more powerful Israel Lobby makes a decent case that Israel's human intelligence on Iran is better than ours, so we might want to listen to them: In the past, I've been occasionally critical of Israeli influence over U.S. decisionmakers when I felt that American and Israeli national security interests were not as convergent in some respective case as some argued. However, in this instance on Iran, Israel's national security thinkers and diplomats are on the side of logic -- and it is in American national interests to hear the Israeli position and consider the roots of their surprising position. Is this the administration's end game? If so, is it an effective end game? I have my doubts... a bombing raid might throw a wrinkle or two into Iran's nuclear program, but it won't halt it, and it would give Ahmadinejad a rally-round-the-flag effect. I have my doubts about the other options on the table, however. Clemons suggests that Ahmadenijad's rule in Iran is more fragile than commonly believed.... but the "domestic unrest brewing in Iran" meme is about a decade old now, and I've seen nothing to suggest that the mullahs will be relinquishing power anytime soon. Barry Posen argues a la Walt/Mearsheimer that we can live with a nuclear Iran. Of course, realists also argued that nukes would stabilize the subcontinent.... just before the 1999 Indo-Pakistani war broke out. To me, all policy options still stink. Developing....
Via Kevin Drum, I see that Joseph Crincione is saying at Foreignpolicy.com that a military strike against Iran might be more likely than previously thought:
I used to think that the Bush administration wasn?t seriously considering a military strike on Iran, because it would only accelerate Iran?s nuclear program. But what we’re seeing and hearing on Iran today seems awfully familiar. That may be because some U.S. officials have already decided they want to hit Iran hard.
Kevin also links to this Daily Telegraph report by Sean Rayment asserting that the U.K. is gearing up as well:
The Government is to hold secret talks with defence chiefs tomorrow to discuss possible military strikes against Iran. A high-level meeting will take place in the Ministry of Defence at which senior defence chiefs and government officials will consider the consequences of an attack on Iran. It is believed that an American-led attack, designed to destroy Iran’s ability to develop a nuclear bomb, is “inevitable” if Teheran’s leaders fail to comply with United Nations demands to freeze their uranium enrichment programme.
Over at The Washington Note, Clemons wants a more powerful Israel Lobby makes a decent case that Israel’s human intelligence on Iran is better than ours, so we might want to listen to them:
In the past, I’ve been occasionally critical of Israeli influence over U.S. decisionmakers when I felt that American and Israeli national security interests were not as convergent in some respective case as some argued. However, in this instance on Iran, Israel’s national security thinkers and diplomats are on the side of logic — and it is in American national interests to hear the Israeli position and consider the roots of their surprising position.
Is this the administration’s end game? If so, is it an effective end game? I have my doubts… a bombing raid might throw a wrinkle or two into Iran’s nuclear program, but it won’t halt it, and it would give Ahmadinejad a rally-round-the-flag effect. I have my doubts about the other options on the table, however. Clemons suggests that Ahmadenijad’s rule in Iran is more fragile than commonly believed…. but the “domestic unrest brewing in Iran” meme is about a decade old now, and I’ve seen nothing to suggest that the mullahs will be relinquishing power anytime soon. Barry Posen argues a la Walt/Mearsheimer that we can live with a nuclear Iran. Of course, realists also argued that nukes would stabilize the subcontinent…. just before the 1999 Indo-Pakistani war broke out. To me, all policy options still stink. Developing….
Daniel W. Drezner is a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and co-host of the Space the Nation podcast. Twitter: @dandrezner
More from Foreign Policy
Can Russia Get Used to Being China’s Little Brother?
The power dynamic between Beijing and Moscow has switched dramatically.
Xi and Putin Have the Most Consequential Undeclared Alliance in the World
It’s become more important than Washington’s official alliances today.
It’s a New Great Game. Again.
Across Central Asia, Russia’s brand is tainted by Ukraine, China’s got challenges, and Washington senses another opening.
Iraqi Kurdistan’s House of Cards Is Collapsing
The region once seemed a bright spot in the disorder unleashed by U.S. regime change. Today, things look bleak.
Sign up for Morning Brief
Foreign Policy’s flagship daily newsletter with what’s coming up around the world today. Delivered weekdays.
By submitting your email, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use and to receive email correspondence from us. You may opt out at any time.
