Much has been made lately of Iran's move to acquire nuclear weapons. The blogosphere has been ablaze with condemnation, as exemplified in this quote from Oregon blogger New Sisyphus: "It pains me to say this, but it can no longer be in doubt: we are going to war again, probably soon, and in the not-too-distant future, the weekend we're having right now will be looked back upon as the 'good old days.'" From Jonah Goldberg to the UW's Hillel chapter, the brewing fight with Iran seems to be "the good war" all over again.
This is insane. With just a little thought, it should be obvious to anyone that a nuclear Iran is no more or less a threat than a non-nuclear Iran.
The big threat Iran poses, according to the "Iran Must Go" camp, is its ability to fulfill its claims of wiping Israel off the map in a grand nuclear strike. Really, all it would take is one nuclear missile hitting Jerusalem to end the game — the resulting spread of radiation would finish off the rest of the country. And Iran has certainly been talking tough about the Zionist Entity lately.
But to anyone willing to go beyond simple rhetoric, it should be obvious that this is far from a worry. According to all reliable experts, Iran has vast quantities of chemical and biological weapons. And no one denies Iran's close ties with terrorist groups — especially Hizbollah, a group dedicated to wiping Israel off the map. So why haven't the Iranians armed their terrorist friends with chemical bombs? For that matter, why haven't the Iranians recruited some of the terrorists they've been sending across the Iraq border to carry out chem/bio attacks on American military bases?
The simple answer: Iran is a logical, sane country. The mullahs who are so dedicated to ending the existence of Israel are even more dedicated to the continued existence of Iran. A chemical attack on Israel or American outposts in Iraq would be pretty quickly pinned on Iran. A nuclear attack would be even more quickly traceable — every nuclear device leaves a distinctive "fingerprint" pointing to its country of origin. Iran knows that if it tried to carry out any kind of WMD attack on anyone, it would become a premier tourist attraction as the world's first and only glass parking lot. Iran knows this. And because the Iranian leadership — yes, even the current president — isn't blindingly stupid, they will act within these boundaries.
Indeed, we may see that Iran's possession of a nuke would bring about some very beneficial changes. Once armed with the ultimate weapon, Iran's xenophobia — and the oppressive internal police force that rests on a fear of insecurity — will be exposed. The mullahs would be forced to end their rhetoric of the threat of the Great Satan.
Once the illusory external threat is defended against, Iranians will have no reason to support the hardliners who ostensibly are protecting the country now. The regime will have to start actually providing for its people. This is, of course, the one thing it really isn't equipped to do. Reformist president Khatami came to power during the 1990s, when the threat of foreign attack was at a low ebb. Faced with military "parity" with the West and internal stagnation, Iran will look increasingly like the Soviet Union of the 1980s — and will meet the same end.
There is no good reason to attack Iran. Such an act would serve only to further distance the long-suffering Iranian people from the freedom they so deserve by driving them back into the arms of the mullahs. America must stand by the Iranian people — we must continue to call for their freedom. But like Reagan calling for the Berlin Wall to be torn down, military strikes are not the answer. Instead of a knee-jerk missile strike, real understanding and rational action must be our guide in dealing with Iran. An attack would serve only to ruin the hopes of both American policy and the Iranian people.
Steve Schwerbel ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in international studies, political science and history.
