The New York Times published an op-ed today that calls for war against Iran.
Alan J. Kuperman, director of the Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Program at the University of Texas at Austin, argues that the unraveling of the uranium enrichment agreement proves that the United States must conduct air strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities to prevent the Islamic Republic from developing a nuclear weapon.
Kuperman’s analysis is problematic for several reasons. Here are two.
First, Kuperman cites the failure of the P5+1 uranium enrichment proposal as evidence “that Iran, for domestic political reasons, cannot make even temporary concessions on its bomb program, regardless of incentives or sanctions.” Kuperman rejects out of hand the possibility that the Iranians simply did not view the P5+1 offer as promoting the Islamic Republic’s national interest.
Second, Kuperman says that the United States could limit the Iranian response to a bombing campaign because, “If nothing else, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have shown that the United States military can oust regimes in weeks if it wants to.” It is difficult to know where to begin here. The invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan have shown much more than the American military’s capacity for ‘regime change’ – they have shown the limits of American military military power and the supreme difficulty of filling the vacuum that ‘regime change’ creates. Does anyone seriously think that another war and occupation in the Middle East is in the United States’ strategic interests or politically feasible for the Obama administration?
The entire article can be read here.
– Ben Katcher
Whos payrole are you on??
Last week I dropped by this site and as usual great content and ideas. Love the lay out and color scheme. Is it new? Well I really really like it. Email me the theme at joanbm3@gmail.com.
People in the Middle East generally believe US power is on the decline and that the American armed forces are already overstretched without trouble with Iran. Hence, few believe that the United States has the ability to defeat Iran in any conventional war, especially as the country is far stronger and can provide much greater resistance than eneything we’ve seen in Iraq and Afghanistan. Indeed, the US government must be praying that the Iranians will not make life difficult for them in Afghanistan as things stand, otherwise, failure there is almost certain. Ironically, President Obama’s only chance for a degree of success in Afghanistan is to prevent US/Iranian relations from deteriorating further.
The war drums have begun…
My Letter to the NY Times Editor re: Kuperman’s outrageous proposal:
Alan Kuperman’s Op-Ed (12-24-08) advocates bombing Iran and minimizes negative outcomes. His position defies logic. If the Iranians must be stopped because they are fanatic enough to commit suicide by using a nuclear weapon, why would they be afraid of launching massive military action in response to U.S. bombing of nuclear sites?
Kuperman minimizes unintended consequences of such an attack, but history offers little support. For instance, the esteemed defense analyst, Anthony Cordesman, predicted in March 2003 that there was only a 5-10% chance that the Iraq war would last as long as 3 to 6 months (report still available online). Don’t we ever learn?