As if the Persian Gulf wasn't volatile enough. Iran, never known for its sagacity in diplomacy, has recently decided to test the turbulent waters of the Gulf. Iran's latest blunder — the seizure of 15 British sailors and marines on the northwestern extremity of the Persian Gulf at the mouth of the Shatt Al-Arab waterway — has the European Union and Britain up in arms. If Iran is still interested in sneaking a few nukes out of its nuclear energy program, it really is doing a rather lousy job of looking innocuous.
Iran is increasingly looking like the irresponsible teenager who wants the keys to the car for the night. Unfortunately, teenage Iran has evinced a determined tendency to purposefully run his bicycle, moped and jet skis into innocent bystanders, pedestrians and the occasional sea whale, all the while yelling obscenities and frequent anti-Semitic remarks. Wanton violence and aggressive behavior? Keep the keys out of this kid's hands.
Iran's seizure of British sailors is quickly turning into an international my-word versus your-word situation. Iran claims the British ships were in Iranian waters, while the British response has asserted that the seizure took place in Iraqi waters. According to MSNBC, a nearby Iraqi fisher even got into the fray, insisting the boats were anchored in Iraqi waters.
So, who to believe? Is it Iran, a nation known for its censorship and manipulative control of information? A nation whose president seems to deny the historicity of the Holocaust? Or do we believe Great Britain, a nation that somehow managed to get itself into a war based on misinformation — a war that very well may be the next Vietnam. Perhaps you'll side with the Iraqi fisherman. He seems like a nice guy.
This incident brings to light the rather large question that plagues the Iranian nuclear issue. Who should we believe?
Iran claims its nuclear program has been, is, and will always be for peaceful purposes. America and its allies insist the Islamic republic has much more hostile intentions in mind, and Iran is providing the West with myriad examples to point to Iran's violent disposition. If Iran truly desires to exercise its right to peaceful nuclear energy, it sure is acting funny.
Iran is often cited as a major supplier and contributor to the Hezbollah terrorist group in Palestine, and the United States and Great Britain have been insisting that Shiite insurgent groups in Iraq are reaping the benefits of doting neighbor Iran. Supplying terrorist groups like Hezbollah and the violent civilian slaughterers in Iraq is no way to instill confidence that, should you achieve nuclear capabilities, you're more than happy to leave nuclear warheads sitting around, unused for a few decades, Cold-War style.
Iran is not helping its peaceful intentions case by taking the provocative actions it took on Friday. It also isn't helping its image as a peaceful, mindful, responsible member of the international community by hosting the world's largest Holocaust-denier conference, boasting some of the world's foremost white supremacists and at least one former Ku Klux Klan leader. This conference, by the way, wasn't just a gathering of Iranian intellectuals and academics. It was attended by and enjoyed an address from President Ahmadinejad himself.
The veritable kidnapping of 15 British sailors in what the European Union and Britain believe to be international waters, is yet another example of Iran's bungling diplomacy in the wake of its nuclear ambitions. And with their refusal to comply with the United Nations' expectations concerning their nuclear program, Iran is working itself into a corner.
The world is losing faith in Iran. The United Nations Security Council unanimously passed additional sanctions against Iran aimed at curbing its arming of insurgencies in Iraq and at crippling its nuclear program. All 15 permanent and temporary members of the Security Council managed to come together to indicate to Iran that they don't trust them.
You can't fault Iran for trying, really. After all, we have nukes, Israel must have nukes, and India managed to make a few. For goodness' sake, Pakistan has them! So why shouldn't Iran? President Ahmadinejad, best known for his vitriolic and oft-mistranslated rants against Israel, the United States and the West must figure nuclear weapons are governed by the same rules that defined our preschool and grade-school experiences. If everyone else gets to have a snack and a nap, we should too, right?
Unfortunately for Mr. Ahmadinejad, the world doesn't operate on the kindergarten system for nuclear weapon distribution. It's not snack time or naptime for Iran. No, Iran's got this whole nuclear ambitions thing all wrong. If Iran wants nukes, it would be best served by behavior that is conducive to powers like the Great Britain, the United States, and the United Nations turning a blind eye to their actions. And its abrasive stance of aggression is just rubbing a few too many members of the United Nations the wrong way. Everybody is watching, and nobody is trusting.
Gerald Cox ([email protected]) is a junior majoring in economics and Middle Eastern Studies.
