Theater (Never-ending?)

We had a dream last night. There was Neville Chamberlain, waving that piece of paper bearing Hitler’s signature before the hopeful crowd. That was history, right? But this morning, as we went to the news, we find that it was not history at all, not by the way of example, or of lessons learned. Nothing has changed it seems. There are plenty of Chamberlains sculpting foreign policy right now; there are plenty of desperate crowds, holding hands, shouting out together in the dark.

UN types have been on a two-week bender given Iran’s acceptance of the last IAEA deal. Iranian apologists everywhere have been ecstatic, waving the agreement in the faces of nonbelievers. In accepting this deal Iran agreed to ship about 75% of its enriched uranium to Russia for processing, then to France for conversion to fuel rods, then (harmlessly) back. Sure.

Today (10/31) Iran reneged. Diplomats are "shocked." Come on now.

Will there be no end to this theater with Iran? The answer is no, not until either Israel sees to her own welfare, or, Obama comes to understand lessons apparently long lost on him, or more likely, never learned.

Now what? Next week, all scamper back to the table. The cattleman in Fresno, the mechanic in Atlanta, the average guy, they understand the situation, that it’s nothing but a stall, that Ahmadinejad and the rest are crackpots. Very simple. Those entrusted with our security apparently do not.

Israel moves closer to a strike with each week. She has few friends in the world; she feels further isolated given recent signals from the Obama administration. The ‘07 release of the NEI estimate changed everything for Israeli planners, never expecting from that day forward to receive an American endorsement, or support, deciding then to prepare to go it alone. Yet they knew that Bush kept the Iranian thugs a tad off balance, giving them time. Now they know, as we all do, that the Iranians and other world nut cases see BO as little more than a push over, a guy who desperately wants to be liked, and so when encountered with decision of 1) bad or 2) worse, votes "present." And Clinton’s stupid remark that the US will "obliterate" Iran if it strikes Israel simply further assured Israel that we will do nothing preemptively. Finally, and key - Israel knows the Iranian leadership to be untethered, not constrained, but in fact immune to rational self interest. One need only recall the Iranian sponsored conference on the Holocaust - denying this ever happened at the same time it was trying to convince the international community of its sanity to husband nuclear weapons!

So no one doubts Israel will strike, notwithstanding Zbigniew Brzezinski’s recommendation to shoot down Israeli war planes if they take off for Iran (this guy remains a nut case). Will it be successful? No one knows for sure. Won’t the implications be catastrophic? Perhaps. These questions however are moot, an aside for a nation seeking to secure its very existence. This is why Netanyahu can be seen traveling all over the globe, building an alliance, securing the private response ("We won't move on you when you strike.") but knowing that publicly Russia, Germany or the Saudis must pretend to be very critical of the move.

There is of course a preferred solution (short of a Delta Force strike, an "industrial accident"). We highlighted this two years ago; now, most agree with us - sanctions on gasoline exports to Iran, perhaps even a gasoline blockade. The economy would slam to a halt, the brave masses would take out the thugs, sow seedlings of infant democracy.

Obama is hesitant. Naturally. He only amplifies the signature failure of the Democratic party - the inability to make tough decisions. Better to wait for an Iranian strike on Israel, or even the threat of such a strike? That’s even worse.

Iran might react to a blockade by the 3rd fleet. They might even try to take out Saudi oil fields with surface-to-surface missiles, knowing that instantly 10MM barrels would evaporate from the market; crude would hit $450 or $500. But the alternative is a Israeli strike and then the Iranians would react for certain, not just targeting the oil fields.

So next week we know Obama will "man" the phone, looking for consensus. What will he find? China could care less, she has too many business deals at stake. For Russian it’s win/win, as the more tension, the higher the oil prices. But Obama will find the Europeans are scared. Since the cold war they have grown accustomed to the protection of the US. They knew it and acted accordingly. Now, they are alarmed because they occupy a position in the political hierarchy, for the fist time ever, to the right of the American president. They complained of Bush but accepted his protection. From Obama they’re not so certain. They want action but have seen nothing by the way of example. Indeed, how many of us expected that we would live to see the day that an American president was lectured by a French president of matters of strength and principle?

As from Obama? He will continue to vote "present" until it is too late.

Robert Craven