In his debunking of the myths surrounding the Cuban missile crisis, Slate journalist Fred Kaplan derives lessons that can be applied to the ongoing dispute over Iran’s nuclear program. His second and third points, in particular, stand out (emphasis mine):
Second, at some point, one side might clearly have the [...]]]>
In his debunking of the myths surrounding the Cuban missile crisis, Slate journalist Fred Kaplan derives lessons that can be applied to the ongoing dispute over Iran’s nuclear program. His second and third points, in particular, stand out (emphasis mine):
Second, at some point, one side might clearly have the upper hand, in which case it should seek ways to give the other side a way out. This doesn’t necessarily mean surrendering the interests at stake. The Jupiter missiles that JFK traded weren’t much good anyway. The United States was about to station new Polaris submarines in the Mediterranean; each sub carried 16 nuclear missiles and was less vulnerable to attack. The United States, in other words, gave up nothing in military capability.
Third, there is no contradiction between striking a deal and maintaining vigilance; compromise is not the same as appeasement. According to a cleverly titled new book by David Coleman, The Fourteenth Day: JFK and the Aftermath of the Cuban Missile Crisis, disputes continued for months after the Turkish deal was struck, and tensions occasionally flared, over the terms and timing of the withdrawal of Soviet weapons from Cuba. Kennedy held his ground. But neither side stormed off or retriggered the crisis.
Guardiano, a contributor to neoconservative blogs and former Marine, derides Donilon’s ability to competently focus on Iran:
Donilon may not know [...]]]>
Guardiano, a contributor to neoconservative blogs and former Marine, derides Donilon’s ability to competently focus on Iran:
Donilon may not know much, but he possesses the surefire cockiness of a lifelong pol; and he is determined to set policymaking in a far-left direction.
Thus, according to the New York Times, Donilon “has urged what he calls a ‘rebalancing’ of American foreign policy to rapidly disengage American forces in Iraq and to focus more on China, Iran and other emerging challenges.”
But of course, China isn’t killing our soldiers and Marines; Iraqi Islamic extremists are. Iran also has American blood on its hand; however, there is absolutely no reason to think that Donilon has even the foggiest notion about how to address this problem. And, if the past is prologue — and it is — his dovish instincts are not reassuring; they are cause for alarm.
Other publications and journalists think little will change.
Ben Smith, Glenn Thrush, and Laura Rozen write at Politico:
Former and current administration officials say that that Jones’s long-anticipated departure won’t have much impact because Donilon and National Security Council chief of staff Denis McDonough — who has just been elevated to Donilon’s old job — were running things anyway.
At Slate, Fred Kaplan added that “Donilon has been de facto national security adviser for many months now, while Jones has been, to a startling degree, a West Wing wallflower.”
]]>- The National: Michael Theodoulou reports that new sanctions will exacerbate corruption and mismanagement in Iran’s economy but do little to change Tehran’s nuclear policy. However, the sanctions could give the White House the “political space” domestically to attempt engagement again, said Sir Richard Dalton, Britain’s former ambassador to Tehran and a fellow at Chatham House, a leading British think tank. “The drumbeat for war from neo-conservative pundits and from Israel has only increased” since the “crippling, indiscriminate” new sanctions were imposed, said Trita Parsi, an Iran expert at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
- Agence France-Presse (via Defense News): The White House denies reports that Obama warned Turkey that it could lose access to U.S. weapons due to its position opposing UN sanctions against Iran. Turkey preferred a plan for Iran to carry out a nuclear fuel swap, arranged by Turkey and Brazil. While both Turkish and U.S. leaders insisted that relations are positive, Turkey-Israel relations have been tense since the May 31st raid on a Gaza-bound aid ship left nine Turkish nationals dead.
- Congressional Quarterly: Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA), “an outspoken Middle East Hawk,” is reportedly preparing a bill that will prohibit foreign subsidiaries of U.S. firms from conducting business in Iran and participating in commercial transactions with Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps. The Obama has yet to fully implement the existing sanctions legislation and Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) told the CQ that while Congress now needs to focus on making sure that the administration utilizes all the powers granted it, there is no immediate need to pressure the White House. ” I think when we get to September, October, it may be time for a first review,” Lieberman said.
- Slate: Christopher Hitchens argues that a nuclear weapons possessing Iran would threaten more than just the existence of the state of Israel. Hitchens predicts that if Iran becomes a nuclear power, the legitimacy of the UN and the IAEA will be destroyed; Iran’s Revoutionary Guard Corp. will gain domestic power; Hezbollah or “any Iranian collusion with the Taliban or with nihilist forces in Iraq would be harder to counter”; Sunni Arab Gulf states, such as Bahrain, would also find increased Iranian aggression difficult to counter; the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will never be resolved since rejectionist Palestinians will be backed by “a regime which calls for Israel’s elimination” and rejectionist Jews will be vindicated in their belief that concessions to Palestinians are a waste of time; and the concept of “nonproliferation” will be relegated to the history books.
- Agence France-Presse (via Yahoo): Former U.S. envoy to the UN, John Bolton warned on Monday that Israel has eight days to launch a military strike against the Bushehr nuclear facility before the plant is brought online on August 21st. “Once that uranium, once those fuel rods are very close to the reactor, certainly once they’re in the reactor, attacking means a release of radiation, no question about it,” Bolton told Fox Business Network. Bolton acknowledged that it was unlikely that the Israelis would launch a bombing mission before August 21st.