Iran's Nukes: Can We Stop Them?

[drbob]

         Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanahu, visited President Obama this week.  They each had their own prime issue to discuss.  Obama wants an agreement that would bring about a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip alongside Israel. This is the two-state solution, which has been the core of U.S. efforts for an Israeli-Palestinian peace.  In the past, Netanahu has not been willing to seriously consider a two-state solution.  I do not know what he wants the Palestinians to do, but it seems he just wants them to go away. 
   Netanahu, for his part, wants to be assured that the U.S. will do everything that can be done to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.   Israel is the only Middle East Power with nuclear weapons and Netanahu wants to keep it that way.  The Israelis are worried that Iran will use a period of dialogue with the U.S. to give Iran the time to complete its nuclear program.
   Netanahu, it seems, wants the U.S. to continue the policies of the Bush Administration: diplomatic isolation, international sanctions, and if that fails, military power to stop Iran from obtaining atomic weapons.  President Obama has said he will take a softer approach, entering into a dialogue with Iran with the intention of convincing Iranians to voluntarily give up their nuclear aspirations.  I will make a couple of observations about this situation.
   First, the hard-line approach employed by President Bush, and encourages by Netanahu, is unlikely to work.  No nation will allow itself to be forced into not doing what it deems to be in its best interests.  We have tried the hard-line tactics for eight years (perhaps even longer) and Iran is moving forward full speed toward developing a nuclear capability.  It is difficult to see the wisdom of continuing a policy that has proven to be a failure.
   Second, while I sincerely do hope that Iran can be convinced to give up its nuclear aspirations, it has a pretty good argument for continuing its nuclear program.  Israel and Iran are avowed enemies.  A discussion of their differences and who is to blame would take much more time and space than we have here.  For our purposes here, let's just say that Israel and Iran don't like each other very much.  Since Israel already has nukes, Iran sees the need to obtain them as well.  From the Iranian point of view, they simply want to put themselves on an equal footing with their enemy. 
   Third, if Iran really wants a nuclear weapon, there is nothing, short of war, anyone can do about it.  International sanctions have proven to be ineffective.  In fact, there are very few cases where international sanctions have ever successfully persuaded any other country to do anything, at all.  I know that Libya gave in to sanctions and South Africa finally gave up on Apartheid.  Each of these cases took many years.  Overall, international sanctions have a very poor track record. 
   I read an op-ed piece by John P. Hannah, an ex-Cheney advisor, who argued that if Iran will not give in to sanctions we should take out their nuclear program with military force.  We can do that, but that means war with Iran.  I don't think anyone in their right mind wants a war with Iran.  Bombing Iran's facilities would simply drive it underground and make the Iranians even more determined to build the bomb.  So we would have to invade and occupy the country in order to put a complete stop to their nuclear program.   
   Can any approach succeed with an Iran determined to acquire nuclear weapons? Probably not, but given the stakes, we should all pray that something does. But given the history of the effectiveness of sanctions in international relations, the old Bush/Netanahu strategy suggests a triumph of hope over experience.       

[Exterminator]

As you have illustrated, there are no good solutions to this issue of growing importance.  Our best hope is that the Iranian people are weary enough from years of sanctions and their faltering economy to listen to Ahmadinejad's opponents in the upcoming elections.  A regime change to leaders less inclined to antagonize the U.S. would be a welcome one.

[drbob]

Hello Exterminator... Thanks for your comment.

You are, in my opinion, right on with your observation.  In the past, Iran has been a fairly westernized nation, perhaps there is still some of that sentiment remaining.