Appeasing Iran
Way back on May 31, 2006, Condoleezza Rice drew a red line in front of Tehran’s nuclear enrichment program. “The Iranian government’s choices are clear,” she said. “The negative choice is for the regime to maintain its current course. . . . If the regime does so, it will incur only great costs.” She also offered an olive branch: “As soon as Iran fully and verifiably suspends its enrichment and reprocessing activities, the United States will come to the table with our EU-3 colleagues and meet with Iran’s representatives.”
Two years later, Iranian officials have installed more than 3,000 centrifuges in a facility designed to hold 50,000, tested missiles which could reach Israel and the same day, Iranian Web sites carried President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s pledge to launch a satellite, something that would demonstrate a mastery of ICBM technology. Nevertheless, just 10 days later, Undersecretary of State William Burns joined envoys from France, Britain, Russia, China and Germany in talks with Iran’s nuclear negotiator, about incentives to give to Tehran.
The package already on offer is rich. The Bush administration has promised to support Iranian construction of a light-water reactor and provide it with nuclear fuel. In addition, the U.S. will help overhaul of Iran’s energy infrastructure and cooperate in high-technology industries. At any point, Tehran can simply walk away, keeping its rewards.
European diplomats welcome the U.S. reversal. “The presence of an American is good news,” French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said. “France has always said that not only sanctions need to be imposed, dialogue is necessary.” Iran is less kind. “America has no choice but to leave the Middle East beaten and humiliated,” says Mohammad Jafar Assadi, chief of the IRGC ground forces.
Diplomacy is not wrong, but President Bush’s reversal is diplomatic malpractice on a Carter-esque level that is breathing new life into a failing regime.
The Iranian government has spent billions of dollars — money that might have been better spent on refineries and gas turbine power plants — on a nuclear program that has failed to produce a single kilowatt of electricity.
Now, as the regime rations fuel and the city institutes roving blackouts, Iranians realize the price of the Islamic Republic’s adventurism.
Even with record oil prices, mismanagement has driven the Iranian economy into the ground. On July 14, the Ministry of Housing reported an “historical” 125% rise in housing prices and Tabnak, a news Web site admitted foodstuff inflation had reached 50% annually and a National Iranian Oil Company executive acknowledged that, without significant investment in infrastructure, Iranian oil production would decline each year by 300,000 barrels a day.
It’s not just oil. According to the Iranian press, carpet exports have dropped 10% and pollution has decimated the caviar-producing sturgeon in the Caspian Sea. State-owned factories owe workers weeks of back wages. Bus driver Mansour Ossanlou, Iran’s Lech Walesa, remains in prison after forming the republic’s first independent trade union. In the past month alone, Iranian workers have struck for unpaid wages at the Khodro automotive plant (which assembles Peugeots), the Alburz Tire Company, and the Haft Tapeh Sugar Cane factory.
This is North Korea all over again. Hell bent on making nuclear weapons while their population starves. North Korea was at least partially successful, as evidenced by their one atomic test, and they did it solely to bully South Korea. The Iranians want to bully the surrounding Islamic nations, but they won’t test the bomb on their own soil. They’ll test it on Israeli soil as they don’t want to bully Israel, they want to destroy Israel. So what is Bush doing? Appeasing Iran at the least opportune time. By talking to them now after 7 1/2 years of swearing that there would be no negotiations until Iran stopped enriching uranium, by now offering incentives instead of sanctions and threats, which were just as useless as the incentives will prove to be, Bush has given Ahmadinejad what may be the single greatest victory of the latters otherwise totally failed presidency.
I can only think that this move is inspired by politics, to take the lead away from Hussein Obama’s pledge to talk to Iran without preconditions. Likewise Bush’s recent vague timeline agreement with Iraqs Maliki for troop withdrawal, which is a reversal of his previous adamant No-Timeline position. I think I can trust history on this, that nothing will come of any agreements, by Bush OR Obama, with Iraq or Iran. There is no dealing with Arab Muslims and only a fool of a non-Muslim would try.
As a footnote, I’d add that Iran’s refusal to accept such a generous proposal, and they will refuse, could be used as a basis for an attack on them before the end of Bush’s term. That said, I expect Iran to drag out the useless negotiations for as long as possible, as they have always done before, while they continue their bomb-making progress.