Fisted Iran

Fisted Iran

President Obama's policy of offering an open hand to clench-fisted regimes was plausible, to my mind, if it strengthened the sinews of determination, not if it allowed the clenched fist to intimidate. It always had to be clearly temporary; if by a given time the fist was still clenched it would be met accordingly. If the Iranians were arming because they felt threatened, they might desist if they felt respected; if however they were arming because they're truly bellicose, it will still be possible to stop them, one way or another, once this has become clear. The determination to stop them will be strengthened by the comprehension of their bellicosity and the inevitable need to curtail it.

It was a policy with two targets: the Iranian hawks were to be encouraged to loosen up; and the Western doves were to be shown - if need be - the necessity of being resolute, even to take hawkish actions, convinced that the nicer options had failed.

Obama said the crucial date would be September 2009; he finally began acting at the end of January 2010, so the Iranians got an extra four months. Whether his actions will be effective remains to be seen; the amount of Iranian nuclear development completed under cover of the year given to them is also not yet publicly known.

What is clear, however, is that at least some of the home-team doves have no intention of being swayed by the exercise. For them, any saber rattling by the Americans is wrong, always:

In Iran, after 12 months in office, Obama has got nowhere by making nice. He didn't try that hard. He didn't try for that long. And now it seems the US is reverting to type.

Yes, the Guardian. How did you guess?

Originally posted by Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations