Iran in the news...uh oh
Iran has been headline news in UK recently which is a little worrying because most of the news is a sort of watered down propoganda, either by Iran or by the US as opposed to any real information. The announcement that Iran is part of the 'nuclear club' made proudly by ahmadinejad couldn't have come at a better time for the US warmongers (sorry 'hawks'). This is an excellent article by Simon Jenkins from the Guardian which actually makes some sense - i especially like his interpretation of Jack Straw's statement that the alleged plans to nuke Iran was 'completely nuts' but actually it's pretty scary too.
A fact seems always to get missed with Iran and nuclear capability - Iran has consistently said that they do not want nuclear weapons as it is against Islam - of course part absolute mistrust; part I guess that no-one can really understand why on earth Iran would not want to have nuclear weapons cos that's what they would want. On one level you can understand the mistrust but it is hard to imagine why they would keep insisting that it is for peaceful purposes when they know they are not believed (and also must suspect that the iranian public would probably support iran obtaining nuclear weapons) - what is the point?
A fact seems always to get missed with Iran and nuclear capability - Iran has consistently said that they do not want nuclear weapons as it is against Islam - of course part absolute mistrust; part I guess that no-one can really understand why on earth Iran would not want to have nuclear weapons cos that's what they would want. On one level you can understand the mistrust but it is hard to imagine why they would keep insisting that it is for peaceful purposes when they know they are not believed (and also must suspect that the iranian public would probably support iran obtaining nuclear weapons) - what is the point?
posted by Akash at 8:34 PM
3 Comments:
Yes, an interesting article, although the comments posted after the piece are illuminating too.
Yes now that Iran is engaged as an issue, should we provoke them as Jenkins argues. Probably not, and the West seems to be following diplomacy heavy route, none of which precluides some light sabre-rattling. He doesn;t reflect on the Iranian rhetoric at all, but hey them's the pitfalls of limited column inches.
Articles berating our leaders, however justly, always run the risk of apperaing a little blinkered, and dismissive, which is a tad disingenuous i feel.
Iraq was never a straightforward situation, but asking simple questions such as was Saddam a bad man, wouldn;t we be better off without him, and you'll generally say yes. A simple minded and self righteous approach of course, and one that will end up messily ( i think this ends up being called the law of unitneded consequences)
Iran and how it fits in geopolitically is again complex. Rogue and unfriendly states plainly exist, and we should be worried about a potential nexus between these and active jihadist groups.
However, while this is a risk, it's probably only a small and very limited one. Afganistan was in my mind a very unique example, and only likely to repeat in chaotic areas. After all, Iraq was nowhere near the lawless place where terrorists can roam free. Is this is more genuine concern with Iran ? Iran surely is guilty of deeply anti-western rhetoric, and the pressure they are under is partly of their own making, but i'm not aware of terrorist training infrastructure. Does a global jihadist ideology hold that much sway the Iranian leaders or arte they simply just very anti-western. Amongst some surely, but the majority, i don't know.
So should we fear a nuclear Iran in the way portrayed? I don;t know how to chose between reliance on MAD as a deterring framework, and the less is more (weapons) approach. I guess the one thing you cannot accuse B&B of is indecision.
Anyway, it does seem like the Iran situation will come to a head slowly rather than quickly, and doubt, perhaps foolishly, that a ground invasion is the most likely outcome, because that really would be dumb following dumber.
Once again i would urge a reading of Robert Cooper's Breaking of Nations - Chaos and Disorder in the 21st Century. He was the historian, and Blairs hired foreign policy hawk - but his book is the best, and least reactionary exposition of where we are today vis-a-vis rogue states and pre-emption, but comes in to its own in thinking about how to deal with the issues going forward.
The one thing i took away from this analysis was that teh author himself didn;t really have any clear answers having thought it all through. To which i concur, becase we all know where simple minded thinking leads us.
Hi Sandy, seems like this is the only way we communicate now - a sign of the times. I have also signed up to comment on the "comment is free" siteon the Guardian under the moniker "HomerHK" - for obvious reasons....
Yes, as i now have too, under the sandyb blogname.
I found your post aswell, well written as ever. You see, i've spent 20 mintues perusing the posts on a couple of stories, and find it a mixture of interesting and depressing.
My mate Sean has long been banging on about my oppostion to invading Iraq, and is a huge Nic Cohen, David Aaraonoviotch, Johann Hari fan. Make no mistake i thinkj they are excellent young jounalists, but he's forced me to think about this manifesto issue long ago. The tone of the manifesto i have some sympathy with, i.e. if you oppose invasion are you comfortable singing the same tune as some Islamists. Fine, whatever, on many issues in life will there be heads that nod that you rather wouldn;t.
Much of the comment misses the big picture, which you state quite well, i.e. question th premise. For me, pre-emptive invasion in Iraq is apolitical, so many of the posts are irrelevant sidenotes. It was always about risk versus reward, the chances of reward being really quite low, and the risks being manifold, as we have seen. My ire at B&B was due to what i perceived as an improper (i.e.absent) consideration of teh risks /rewards, motivated as they were by blind faith. Misguided, contorted by power, but not nevcessarily morally bankrupt, as i have asserted before.
'just when i thought i was out, they pulled me back in'...i thought i'd moved on. Anyway, this is distracting me from booking a few days golf in spain....i need some sun....
Post a Comment
<< Home