gk today current affairs august 2019
gk
today current affairs august 2019 A Policy Options—Diplomatic (Political The
United States has been seeking a diplomatic solution to the crisis with Iran
for the past several years. Washington D.C. has not negotiated directly with
Tehran with which Washington has no diplomatic relations. Instead the
administration of American President George W. Bush stepped back to let Britain
France and Germany attempt to convince Iran to terminate its nuclear program.
This constitutes an exception to normal American foreign policy the US
government especially under Bush has preferred to address what it perceives to
be security threats by itself or as a leader of an alliance. Relying completely
on other countries in this instance means the US government is not in ultimate
control of what happens. If the president says jump the leader of another
country will not necessarily say how high. Still with the American commitments
in Afghanistan and Iraq the US government might not have wanted to stretch
itself further by tackling the Iranian problem. The Europeans did not accomplish
their objective. Iran continued its nuclear research while not taking its
negotiations with Europe seriously. Iran was always ready to go with another
nuclear transgression for any imagined slight. Eventually the Europeans
conceded defeat so the Security Council has now taken charge of the issue. The
Security Council has not had any more success than the Europeans did alone so
far though. It has only managed a toothless resolution on March 29 that Iran
ignored altogether. Furthermore nearly a month after the Security Council
issued its commands Iranian President Ahmadinejad speechified regarding the
Security Council The Iranian nation wont give a damn about such useless
resolutions… Today they want to force us to give up our way through threats and
sanctions but those who resort to language of coercion should know that nuclear
energy is a national demand and by the grace of God today Iran is a nuclear
country.[19] UN diplomacy does not appear to be a winning strategy. The US
could engage with Iran directly but that would necessitate recognizing Irans
government and opening diplomatic relations with it. Washington would be averse
to doing that especially with Ahmadinejad occupying the Iranian presidency.
Besides which Iran already knows the might of the United States forms the
backbone of every diplomatic maneuver so far yet Iran does not seem to care.
For the US to open direct negotiations with Iran would therefore not help. All
it would do is give Iran the status of being a nation the US has deemed fit for
recognition in exchange for nothing which would bolster Iran and humiliate the
United States. <b>III. B Policy Options—Economic</b> In an effort
to fabricate a compromise whereby Iran could have nuclear energy but the rest
of the world could feel safe Iran was not gaining dangerous nuclear know-how
Russia offered to enrich uranium for Iran on Russias own soil and then ship the
uranium back to Iran. Nothing has come of this Russian initiative though.[20]
Iran has apparently decided it wants to enrich uranium itself. If Iran does not
start cooperating with the United Nations the Security Council could meet again
and insist Iran alter course for international peace and security. Iranian
noncompliance with such a resolution would permit the Security Council to enact
economic sanctions against Iran. China and Russia however have been squeamish
about such a move.[21] Also implementing broad economic sanctions against Iran
would constrict or prevent the flow of oil out of that country. As the world
grapples with high oil prices across-the-board sanctions could damage everyones
economy even as Iran hurts. The situation could be like Thomas Jeffersons
embargo of Britain and France all over again. Perhaps sanctions could leave
alone oil trade with Iran that would have a better chance of sticking. Because
oil is already the lifeblood of Irans economy and because oil would become more
important with trade in everything else forbidden Iran could not afford to cut
off oil supplies or fiddle with prices too much. So the rest of the world would
not hurt for oil although Iran would still suffer the pain of sanctions. If
Iran continues its intransigence Russia and China might support limited
sanctions as they would not threaten oil supplies although a lot of skilled
diplomacy would be necessary. <b>III. C Policy Options—Military</b>
In the April 17 2006 issue of The New Yorker Seymour Hersh unveils to the
American people secret plans the US government has for war with Iran. The end
objective of the war would be the overthrow of the theocracy. To achieve this
the US military would bomb Iran extensively which planners hope would embarrass
the Iranian government thereby inspiring the Iranian citizenry to revolt and
depose the mullahs. Concurrently the American military would drop bunker-buster
tactical nukes on Iranian nuclear facilities such as the one at Natanz.[22]
That is one of the most idiotic plans in the history of military strategy. The
American dream of happy Iraqis valiantly rising against their oppressors and
eagerly embracing regime change Washington would like turned out to be fantasy.
No reason exists to believe the same American dream would come true in Iran.
Two hundred years of Western imperialism in Iran has ensured Iranian revulsion
of foreign influence. Most Iranians would stick by their own people rather than
act as foreigners attacking their home want. The Shia clergy who have
centuries-old traditional claims to Iranian hearts and not bomb-happy Americans
would find the most supporters in Iran. Because of this not even Iranian
opposition groups want American intervention believing it would damage their
cause.[23] Plus targeted American strikes against Iranian nuclear
infrastructure could likely fail. The Iranians have had the Israeli destruction
of Iraqs French-supplied nuclear reactor at Osirak as well as hundreds of
American and British sorties across Iraq in the 1990s from which to learn. They
protected against bombing runs by constructing some of their nuclear
installations underground. In addition the US government does not know the
locations of a few of Irans important nuclear assets. A bombing campaign could
miss them.[24] After the United States gained nothing from starting a war Iran
could inflict grievous costs in retaliation. The Shia Iranians through shared
faith with Shia Iraqis command enormous influence with them. Many more Shia
Iraqis than who are insurgents now could become such at the urging of their
Shia brethren in Iran. Iranian troops could start attacking American soldiers
in Iraq. Iran could even capture parts of Iraq. One Pentagon affiliate has said
The Iranians could take Basra with ten mullahs and one sound truck. Hezbollah
could come out of hibernation as well attacking Israel and American interests
in the Middle East.[25] And deciding it has nothing to lose Iran could use its
oil as an economic weapon to harm Western economies. Sometimes the benefits of
military action can outweigh horrendous consequences. World War II stands as
the most powerful demonstration of that truth. Attacking Iran as the military
plans in Hershs article suggest would not however yield sufficient gains to
offset the damage to American interests and operations or to justify the
enormous loss of life in Iran Iraq and Israel (if not more countries).
<b>IV. Policy Recommendation</b> I have not seen any policy or
strategy under consideration of which I approve so I will devise my own. The
United States and Europe should continue pursuing diplomatic solutions to the
Iranian nuclear issue. I do not think Iran would capitulate to such an approach
though. Iranians with reason loathe foreign attempts to influence their
politics and control their resources. As a result I do not believe Iran will
voluntarily strike a deal with anyone to limit or eliminate a national program it
sees as its right. Meddlesome foreigners can go to hell. Before I outline my
proposal I must state I do not believe Iran will use nuclear weapons
offensively if it learns how to make them. Any obvious first use of nuclear
weapons on Irans part would invite nuclear retaliation from Israel and the
United States and possibly from France and Britain. Passing nuclear weapons off
to terrorists would not be a viable option for Iran either because nuclear
forensics could trace a bombs fissile material back to its source.[26] One
might say the so-called Mad Mullahs are just that—mad—but Irans lack of
military aggressiveness over the past 20 years with trigger-happy Americans and
Israelis nearby argues against that. Irans theocrats are evil but not
demonstrably insane or suicidal. They would place their own collective survival
above global Islamist revolution. If nothing else a dead revolutionary movement
cannot advance its cause. With Irans rationality in mind I propose what I call
neo-containment. In the neo-containment framework if Iran were to develop
nuclear weapons the United Nations would place limited sanctions as I described
above on Iran. Food water and medicine for the Iranian people in addition to
oil would be the only exemptions to the sanctions. Limited sanctions would
prevent mass starvation and famine while squeezing the Iranian economy.
Militarily the United States would officially point nuclear missiles at Iran
and promise it will suffer the missiles fury if it does use nuclear weapons on
anyone. If Iran does not want to struggle under sanctions and squirm under
nuclear threat Iran could dismantle its nuclear weapons and relinquish the
capability to create more. If that does not happen then Irans economic and
technological capabilities can wilt under sanctions and its psyche can suffer
from knowing the worlds sole remaining superpower with an arsenal of thousands
of nuclear weapons might use those weapons on Iran annihilating it. Iran could
never build enough nuclear weapons to combat that threat. From these economic
and military coercive devices frustration and fear could build in the Iranian
population undermining cultural health and thereby national cohesion. To try to
ensure the resulting anger flows to the Iranian government and not the United
States the American government should utilize soft power resources. Washington
should emphasize its foe is the theocracy of Iran not its people. The US should
publicly appear not to be interfering with Iran internally but to be sitting
back after promising to recognize Iran officially and extend economic and
technological assistance to Iran if the Iranians overthrow their government.
Covertly Americans should spread through Muslim networks messages about the
benefits of disarmament and democracy and the evils of nuclear-intent mullahs.
When Iranians receive these messages they should see them as coming from Muslim
brothers not American imperialists. To complement this tactic Iranian
expatriates who know the positives of republican government and the negatives
of Shia theocracy could tell their stories to the world. This could all inspire
hope and desire within Iranians for something better than lives of terror under
a repressive theocracy. Containment worked against the Soviet Union. It took 40
years to do its job but the United States avoided a devastating war that would
have left the world a worse place than it is now. I believe the similar
strategy I described above would handle Iran just as adeptly. Indeed
neo-containment could perform even better. Iran could never threaten the United
States with nuclear extinction so Americans would not have to live with the
dread of that again. Since Iran would be incapable of wiping out either the
American people or their nuclear capability no matter what the Iranian government
would be insane to employ nuclear weapons in anything other than clear
self-defense. So Americans need not fear even the loss of a city. The risk of
such an attack would not be zero because Irans government could theoretically
defy rationality. But the danger would be minimal and it would not be anything
we do not already face from China Pakistan or Russia. gk
today current affairs august 2019
gk today current affairs august 2019
