History Repeating
By Anna Schwartz
Did Iran learn nothing from the war in Iraq? The International Atomic Energy Agency, nuclear watchdog for the United Nations, slapped Iran with a censure for the nuclear weapons program it has concealed for the past 18 years this morning. The censure did not include any immediate action by the U.N., but did leave open the possibility for sanctions by the Security Council. After President Bush labeled it one third of the “axis of evil” in last year’s State of the Union address, one would expect that Iran would take the hint and dismantle its nuclear weapons program. Exactly the opposite occurred, however, and the Iranians have continued on the secretive path to weapons development by pursuing plutonium and uranium enrichment, violating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
The threat of U.N. sanctions is an insufficient means to dissuade a nation that has pursued a nuclear weapons program, despite its agreement to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, to dismantle its program entirely. The New York Times recommended yesterday that today’s resolution include “a trigger mechanism to force international action if Iran reverts to stonewalling or deception.” Is the idle threat of “international action” sufficient recourse, however? Iraq faced the same ultimatum last fall, but when it came down to the wire, Security Council members were unwilling to commit to the use of force. The United States withdrew its position that today’s resolution should include economic sanctions – probably to build political capital with other nations within the UN – but this was an unwise decision.
Experts claim that Iran could have a nuclear weapon within a few years, if its programs continued to develop at a rapid pace. But Iran’s only incentive to dismantle its program is the threat of United States-led invasion – and that threat has not been posed. The fact that Iran has been developing its weapons program for 18 years – since just after the 1979 Islamic Revolution – means that its commitment to the program is not likely to wane because of a slap on the wrist – a slap that comes with no force or negative reinforcement to back it up. Mohamed El Baradei, head of the I.A.E.A., called today’s actions a “very serious and ominous message” to Iran; this statement remains true only if the message that the I.A.E.A. intends to send is that the weapons program should continue.
The Iranian Foreign Minister claimed that today’s resolution demonstrated Iran’s commitment to “peaceful nuclear activities,” an exercise in diplomatic rhetoric: although Iran has agreed to suspend its uranium enrichment program and give weapons inspectors full access to its nuclear facilities, it has not committed to total suspension of nuclear programs. Iran’s only practical use for nuclear weapons is as a deterrent against a United States attack, but the timeline is faulty: without actually possessing the weapons, Iran is powerless against U.S.-led invasion. The lack of support that the United States currently has for chasing down WMD – both domestically and within the international community – does not mean that an attempt to dismantle the nuclear program is unwise. As the global hegemon, the United States must sometimes pursue unpopular policy. For this reason, we should not have abandoned the idea of sanctions as a deterrent – especially if the Bush administration wishes to claim that the Iraq war was really about WMD. An I.A.E.A. censure is ultimately useless in preventing nuclear proliferation: in due course, for the interests of national security, the United States should make a more credible threat – with economic sanctions and the potential use of force. Only then will Iran learn to apply the lessons of Iraq.
By Anna Schwartz
Did Iran learn nothing from the war in Iraq? The International Atomic Energy Agency, nuclear watchdog for the United Nations, slapped Iran with a censure for the nuclear weapons program it has concealed for the past 18 years this morning. The censure did not include any immediate action by the U.N., but did leave open the possibility for sanctions by the Security Council. After President Bush labeled it one third of the “axis of evil” in last year’s State of the Union address, one would expect that Iran would take the hint and dismantle its nuclear weapons program. Exactly the opposite occurred, however, and the Iranians have continued on the secretive path to weapons development by pursuing plutonium and uranium enrichment, violating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
The threat of U.N. sanctions is an insufficient means to dissuade a nation that has pursued a nuclear weapons program, despite its agreement to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, to dismantle its program entirely. The New York Times recommended yesterday that today’s resolution include “a trigger mechanism to force international action if Iran reverts to stonewalling or deception.” Is the idle threat of “international action” sufficient recourse, however? Iraq faced the same ultimatum last fall, but when it came down to the wire, Security Council members were unwilling to commit to the use of force. The United States withdrew its position that today’s resolution should include economic sanctions – probably to build political capital with other nations within the UN – but this was an unwise decision.
Experts claim that Iran could have a nuclear weapon within a few years, if its programs continued to develop at a rapid pace. But Iran’s only incentive to dismantle its program is the threat of United States-led invasion – and that threat has not been posed. The fact that Iran has been developing its weapons program for 18 years – since just after the 1979 Islamic Revolution – means that its commitment to the program is not likely to wane because of a slap on the wrist – a slap that comes with no force or negative reinforcement to back it up. Mohamed El Baradei, head of the I.A.E.A., called today’s actions a “very serious and ominous message” to Iran; this statement remains true only if the message that the I.A.E.A. intends to send is that the weapons program should continue.
The Iranian Foreign Minister claimed that today’s resolution demonstrated Iran’s commitment to “peaceful nuclear activities,” an exercise in diplomatic rhetoric: although Iran has agreed to suspend its uranium enrichment program and give weapons inspectors full access to its nuclear facilities, it has not committed to total suspension of nuclear programs. Iran’s only practical use for nuclear weapons is as a deterrent against a United States attack, but the timeline is faulty: without actually possessing the weapons, Iran is powerless against U.S.-led invasion. The lack of support that the United States currently has for chasing down WMD – both domestically and within the international community – does not mean that an attempt to dismantle the nuclear program is unwise. As the global hegemon, the United States must sometimes pursue unpopular policy. For this reason, we should not have abandoned the idea of sanctions as a deterrent – especially if the Bush administration wishes to claim that the Iraq war was really about WMD. An I.A.E.A. censure is ultimately useless in preventing nuclear proliferation: in due course, for the interests of national security, the United States should make a more credible threat – with economic sanctions and the potential use of force. Only then will Iran learn to apply the lessons of Iraq.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home