The news, the bloggers, the pundits (both pro and amateur) are all blasting out opinion about the latest boast from Iran's Renfield-like president. Certainly, if all the recent developments by Iran are true, we are witnessing perhaps one of the greatest periods of innovation by a theocracy since the Taliban converted soccer fields to Islamist auto-de-fes.
And, right on cue, the sides are lining up: We must attack Iran now! We must not attack Iran, ever! Bush is hungry for more war! Bush doesn't have a choice! We must negotiate! The time is now! We have plenty of time! Blah, blah, blaah-blaah-blaah.
I have read declarative statements from many people who know nothing more than the rest of us, but who have some reason to believe that they do. It's getting so a reactionary blogger can't get the straight poop anymore. But I suspect that only I know what's going on, because, well, because.
Okay, I don't know what's going on. Truth is, nobody else does either. Iran, by all accounts is either 16 days or ten years away from a nuke. That's a pretty big window. Or rather, Iran could be huffing and puffing for all we know. Is it possible that that Iran is looking for a fight? Of course, but the motivations are a bit muddy.
Ahmadinejad is famous for being a member of some radical Muslim cult (go figure) that seeks to hasten Armageddon in order to bring back some long lost imam. There are those who say that we must do all we can in order to forestall that option. Why? Unless you're part of Mahmoud's cult, why would you care if he believes that the imam will make his way back on the wings of a snow white nuke? When I hear Ahmadinejad talk of the end of the world I get about the same feeling I get when I hear Jerry Falwell drool over prospects to be first in line at The Rapture. Then again, Jerry doesn't have nukes.
Ah, but what if Iran isn't close to having a nuke and they are just baiting the hook? What would the motivation be then? I can only think of two scenarios. The mullahs took in the last several years of watching US foreign bungling (it can not be termed "policy" without enlisting snickers, or Milky Way) and concluded that they can either end up like Saddam or Kim Jong Il. Saddam is in his BVDs when not in his courtroom crib and Kim is swimming the backstroke and drinking Cristal. If they grab some uranium, enrich it so that they can at least say they have some nebulous kind of might, they know that the US will back off.
But this scenario requires that the mullahs and their henchman don't see Bush in the way as his domestic opponents do; namely, a wild ideologue bent on world conquest. Instead, they understand that, regardless of the faint-inducing incompetence displayed by the administration (and contra to reactionary opinion) this president knows that he is in the domestic doghouse and is just as legacy-obsessed as his illustrious predecessor. In other words, Iran considers Bush to be weak but rational and ready to negotiate.
Or, perhaps, Iran is angling to be the mouse that roars, bringing world powers to their knees by grabbing (metaphorically at least) the doomsday weapon. This isn't exact, because Iran has plenty of money, but the country is impoverished in other ways. The point here is that we may be dealing with a bunch of empty tunics who, if we don't pay attention, could end up dictating terms.
Comments