Last night I visited a smart historical friend who said that the Iran threat is bogus, it grows out of Israel’s need for an enemy, and the US has to try to denuclearize the region. Tony Karon says some of the same in the National:
But if the US is committed to escalating pressure to force Iran to back down, what next? A naval blockade? The Iranians would treat it as an act of war, and respond in some nasty, asymmetrical way. And then what? A military strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities? That would certainly start a war, with unpredictable and potentially catastrophic consequences throughout the Middle East, and wouldn’t even necessarily end Iran’s pursuit of nuclear capacity.
Those who advocate that Mr Obama tie his diplomatic outreach to tight deadlines that trigger new sanctions are committing the US to a path of ever-escalating pressure that could easily drag him into a war he would prefer to avoid. The only real argument being advanced for imposing new sanctions on Iran is the idea that if the US fails to show progress in its diplomatic effort to limit Iran’s nuclear ambitions by the end of this year, Israel will take matters into its own hands and launch a military strike.
But Washington will restrain Israel from taking actions that will prejudice US security, and allowing the Israeli leadership’s more alarmist reading of the situation to set the clock for Washington’s dealings with Iran could leave Mr Obama in a very uncomfortable place.
