It's been a heck of a week or two, with the Iranian media circus surrounding the spineless British hostages , Nancy
Pelosi's Syrian tomfoolery (the Washington Post, no less called her "foolish"),and
Olmert's feckless signals of interest in the "take it or leave it" Saudi peace plan/Israeli suicide pact (attached, from Bud and
Phyll is interesting commentary on the Iranian affair --
Political Mavens » Ahmedinijad’s Plan “B” - The Circus Continues). The British hostage crisis was particularly contemptible on so many levels -- Winston Churchill is spinning in his grave at the dishonorable performance of the captured British sailors and marines, which only the French could be proud of, and will
undoubtedly be grist for a Saturday Night Live sketch, right down to the Brits' gleeful
receipt of their goody bags at the end of the party. But that is blaming the victim, so we should focus on to the villain.
So what is the net effect of these three events -- the British hostage charade,
Pelosi's Middle Eastern victory lap, and the Saudi "Peace" Plan? The enemy (i.e., Iran, Syria, and Arab
rejectionism of a Jewish state in their midst) got a big surge of confidence from each event. As we all know, when the extortionist feels more confident, he does not back off and moderate, but rather, plows forward on his path, newly emboldened. This will only make the world more dangerous, not less so, in the coming 6-12 months, and simply increase, by another notch, the probability that
before this year is out the US and/or Israel may attack Iran militarily, the Iranians are goign to turn the volume up on tier interference in Iraq (and losses to our brave forces there) and/or there will be a broader Israeli/Palestinian/Syrian/Lebanese war.
The West's response to each of the aforementioned events during the past week reinforced in our enemies several things:
--to the Iranians, it showed that the free world could not unite strongly behind the Brits over this very clear act of kidnapping. Most of Iran's external trade is with the EU. Had the EU stood behind its fellow member, Britain, and threatened a boycott or other trade sanctions over this heinous act, a very clear message of Western determination
would have been sent that would have sent
shock waves through the Iranian leadership class -- and potentially Iranian society. A watered-down UN resolution did not suffice. The Iranians tweaked the civilized world, and we blinked, reinforcing in the Iranians' minds the fact that we are weak, divided and will not stand up to their actions. In determining what was more
important -- getting back the sailors quickly or standing for principles -- the Brits and the rest of the
world sent a very bad message to a bunch of blackmailers. The pathetic and unprofessional behavior of the sailors taken hostage just reinforces that opinion.
--The Syrians saw firsthand the cracks in the US
power structure and realized, rightly or wrongly, that they are not as isolated as we would like them to be. Madame
Pelosi gave a good morale boost to Assad with her visit, reinforced the Iranian
impression of our resoluteness. The
Pelosi visit also subverted the Saudi attempt to isolate Syria, which further undermines the
Saudi's confidence in the US, a factor that has led to some Saudi foreign policy moves during
the past month that are not in keeping with US
interests. These moves include brokering and underwriting the Abbas-
Hamas unity government under a continued
Hamas rejectionist platform, and an attempt at a
rapprochement with Iran --both actions designed to hedge against a reduced presence of the US in the Middle East in the twilight days of our presence in the Iraqi War.
--We saw a muted Western
response, and an overly nuanced Israeli response, to the Saudi/Arab League "peace" plan for Israel which has been angrily thrown on the table as a "take it or leave it" proposition
to the Israelis and would at least tacitly allow all Palestinian refugees to "return" to Israel, in effect destroying Israel as a Jewish state and making a mockery of the concept of "one land for the Palestinians, one land for the Jews". Again, this, together with the uncertainty over how matters develop with respect to international aid to the new Palestinian "unity" government, underscore a moral ambiguity
in the West, an undermining of support for Israel and its right to be Israel, and merely encourages more behavior that leads us down the road to the
legitimization of a Jewish state of Israel.
As we said earlier, all of this points to bolder actions in the balance of
this year by enemies of the US, Israel and western interests, and the
undermining of any hope of near term societal pressure in Iran to moderate or at least "go slower". As the Christian Science
Monitor Reports (and as we urged half a year ago), the US appears to be supporting an
insurgency in Iran to put pressure on the regime (
"US Backing 'Secret War' against Iran?", but this is unlikely, alone to do the trick, as Iranian nationalism can be expected to trump ethnic separatism (see also, "
Domestic Threats to Iranian Stability: Khuzistan and Baluchistan", from the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs). More resolute
Western diplomatic and economic pressure is necessary (what a missed opportunity the EU had last week to strike a blow with the threat of meaningful economic sanctions!), together with a US outstretched hand to "put
everything on the table" with the Iranians, and offer them the one thing that rational Iranians want more than
anything else --US acceptance and lifting of economic sanctions, while withholding the call for outright for regime change.
After seeing the
looney behavior (but totally rational, in a North Korean-sort of way) of the Iranian leadership these past two weeks, does the world really want to see them have nuclear weapons? For a parting note, see this link for a map of Iranian missile range perimeters -- coming within the next 2-3 years to the East Coast of the US ("
Iran's Growing Missile Capabilities").
Have a nice weekend.
