Iraq was a preemptive war. But that language has been discredited, so the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a station of the Israel lobby, has put out a paper all-but-calling for military strikes against Iran, which it describes as "Preventive Military Action." Sounds a lot better.
Here's what I gleaned from a rapid preemptive reading. Military action is really the only real answer WINEP contemplates, after the diplomatic ratcheting-up fails to bite. The realists' answer–deterrence–isn't given any space here. Nor is the progressive answer: making Israel give up its nukes.
In fact, the authors don’t want Israel to do the strike against Iran because they fear it would convert a global conversation on a nuclear Iran into a “bilateral Israel-Iran issue on which many around the world would side against Israel. The situation could undercut efforts to pressure Iran not to rebuild its nuclear program.” I.e., Other countries would say, What about Israel’s nukes? But WINEP is determined to preserve Israel’s hegemony in the region. I’m having dual-loyalty twinges.
One action the authors seem to favor is hitting “vulnerable” oil facilities. Don’t worry: Oil prices won’t necessarily “soar.” No, we only have to get world reserves in order before we strike. Yeah, right.
The authors also feel that a limited strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities could lead to “revolution” in Iran, or war, but could also be “deemed a success and convince them not to go on” with building nukes. Doesn’t seem likely to me. A lot of national pride is now at stake.
Then there’s this gem. The U.S. could invade, but probably doesn’t have the stomach to in the wake of Iraq, “especially given the likelihood that a small but significant minority would be quite prepared to resist a U.S. occupation.” Got that? Only a minority would resist U.S. occupation. The rest would welcome us with flowers.
And as for international opinion, the report says the French are behind the effort to denuclear-ize Iran. WINEP spoke too soon here. Sarkozy has now been to Israel, and said, Yes he’s behind the anti-Iran initiative but he wants action from Israel re the Palestinians. “There cannot be peace without an immediate and complete halt to settlement,” he said. Not a word about moving on the Palestinian occupation and oppression here. WINEP seems to believe the road to Jerusalem lies through Tehran. Haven’t we heard this sort or rap before?
