Guest Post by Michael J.W. Stickings
It shouldn’t come as much of a surprise that Iran continues to defy anyone and everyone with respect to its nuclear program. Only within the last month, Iran has announced, with much nationalist fanfare, that it has succeeded in enriching its own uranium (if only to 3.5 percent, well below the 80 percent necessary to build a bomb, but still) and that it may just share its nuclear technology with other would-be nuclear states (like the Sudan).
The rhetoric has been ratcheted up on all sides, but most noticeably by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has referred to Israel, the most obvious target of a nuclear Iran (in speech, if not necessarily in deed), as “a rotten, dried tree that will be eliminated by one storm”.
Well, Iran’s defiance is currently being directed at the U.N.:
In a sharply worded report, the International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed Friday that Iran is accelerating its uranium enrichment efforts and hiding crucial information about its nuclear program. The report opens the way for the U.N. Security Council to debate potential actions against Iran.
The Vienna-based U.N. nuclear monitoring agency said serious gaps in the information provided by Iran made it impossible “to provide assurance about the absence of undeclared nuclear materials and activities” or to assess the role of the Iranian military in the nuclear work.
In response to the report, President Bush said that “the world is united,” which it isn’t (not that reality need infringe upon presidential fantasy, of course). Bush claims optimistically (or deceptively, depending on your level of justifiable cynicism) that “the diplomatic options are just beginning,” but it’s not quite clear what that means.
On the U.N. Security Council, the U.S., Britain, and France may support sanctions of some kind against Iran, but, at present, Russia and China don’t. (Russia may come around, but China likely won’t.) As much as the U.S. needs to seek a diplomatic solution to this escalating crisis, or at least a non-miliary one, it would help if the major players were at least in some sort of agreement. They’re not. Which means that Iran will continue to build its nuclear program in defiance of a disunited opposition that may not be able to come up with a non-military solution until it’s too late.
And when it’s too late, we’ll be stuck with two equally undesirable options. Either we accept Iran as a new member of the nuclear community (one with the capacity to build bombs as well as to light buildings) or we engage in some sort of military action the consequences of which could be utterly devastating and well beyond our control.
It’s time to talk to Iran, but, of course, it’s also time for the U.S. to provide leadership within the international community so as to contain this crisis before it boils over.
Do any of you have confidence that President Bush is up to the task?