Pro-con: Is diplomacy best course with Iran?
It is dispiriting to watch my country being bum-rushed into starting a war by the same gaggle of hawks – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu included – who led us to invade Iraq.
What did that war give us? Well, it further empowered Iran as a regional power – and, oh, not incidentally, gave that country additional incentive to acquire a nuclear weapon. Nobody invades a nuclear-armed state, after all.
Folks, we have forever been on the cusp of bombing Iran. Here’s what I wrote on this topic back in 2010:
“An attack on Iran, whether by Israel or the United States, would have devastating consequences for the rest of us: Iran would almost certainly respond by unleashing its terrorist proxy groups to make war on Western targets, and it could easily make life miserable for shipping in the Straits of Hormuz – a critical passage for oil exports from the Middle East to the rest of the world. Many people would die, and a shaky world economy might be plunged into depression.”
The economy is better than it was, but otherwise that analysis holds up pretty well.
Netanyahu offers no alternative to diplomacy. He is wrong. President Obama is right. Let’s not appease the warmongers.
Joel Mathis, Philadelphia Magazine
Yes, it’s true: In key respects, the debate we’re having today about Iran’s nuclear program is essentially the same one we’ve had for the past five years. The United States says it does not want Iran to have nukes. The “international community” wishes to negotiate a resolution. Iran pounds the table.
What’s different now? Iran is five years further along in achieving its goals. Otherwise, not much. The proposal on the table asks Iran to “freeze” its nuclear program in exchange for easing international economic sanctions against the regime. Naturally, the Iranians rejected that plan.
Yet the Obama administration insists on pressing negotiations – as though it expects different results from repeating the same ineffective strategy.
And for 35 years, Iran has worked steadily to advance its interests by exporting terror, threatening its Sunni Arab neighbors and vowing to wipe Israel off the map.
We talk and talk and talk, but our actions betray fecklessness and weakness. If diplomacy conveys reality, then the reality is Iran will have the bomb and there is nothing we can do about it.
Ben Boychuk, Manhattan Institute’s City Journal
This story was originally published March 7, 2015 at 6:01 PM with the headline "Pro-con: Is diplomacy best course with Iran?."