Bayou Calvinist

A Somewhat Eclectic Discussion by a Law Student Concerning All of Today's Major Topics, as well as, a Few Not So Major Topics

Tuesday, January 10, 2006

Iran gone MAD

James S. Robbins pens an outstanding piece concerning the problem with allowing Iran to go nuclear. It appears now that the U.S. decision to allow Europe to try their plan of bribing (I mean "negotiating") Iran away from nukes is likely to fail. And as Robins tells it some on both sides of the pond (U.S. State Department especially) are now fondly misremembering the recent past (more particularly their love affair with the strategic stalemate between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R.). So these State Department apparatchiks argue if it was good enough for the Cold War surely it is good enough for the U.S. in the war on terror.

As Robbins correctly argues there are a myriad of mistakes to be found in their logic. Biggest among these is the Cold War wasn't so peachy, especially for those liberals (read classic liberals) who found themselves on the other side of the Iron Curtain (Hungary, Czechoslovakia, etc...). And despite their best attempts at information recall, it wasn't all that great for us, either (Korea or Vietnam, anyone).

My favorite quote from his article:

"The belief that there is an upside to a nuclear-capable Iran is a rationalization of perceived impotence; those who suppose we are unable to prevent this from happening seek to make a virtue out of necessity." [emphasis added]

This statement, particularly the italicized part, seems to me to be a fair restatement of the entirety of European (minus Britain) strategic thinking since WWII.


Post a Comment

<< Home