Sowing the Wind

America and the West are discussing the need to increase pressure on the government in Tehran, and even overthrow it if required, due to its nuclear efforts. Meanwhile, the Americans and Israelis are exploring their military options and preparing plans to attack Iran if it is deemed necessary. Plans are being made and plots are being hatched. None of this is remarkable or objectionable if one is an American or an Israeli. Plans have long been made and studied in the U.S. on how to contain the Islamic regime in Tehran. But what if one is Iranian? How should an Iranian view the plans and preparations to "contain" it? It is not as though the U.S. and Israel have never launched attacks or worked to undermine governments when it was perceived that their national security interests were at stake.

It is odd that Iran is viewed as the chief threat in the Middle East. The U.S. has invaded and occupied two of Iran's neighbors. There are thousands of U.S. troops, and hundreds of U.S. aircraft nearby in Iraq and Afghanistan. There are dozens U.S. warships patrolling not far off Iran's shore. And still, Iran is the threat. Israel has a formidable air force and threatens to attack Iran if necessary. Despite its bluster, Iran has little effective means to attack Israel, and none to attack the U.S. It has only a modest ability to defend itself. Yet, Iran is the chief danger to peace in the Middle East.

Israel has launched numerous "preemptive" and "defensive" attacks on its neighbors. Iran has attacked no one. But, Iran is the threat to peace in the Middle East. The U.S. has railed against the government in Tehran and worked to undermine it. We have demanded Iran honor and faithfully adhere to international laws and treaties while we have often been selective in our adherence and enforcement, and creative in our interpretation of those laws and treaties. Yet, Iran is condemned. Each war fought by Israel, with the possible exception of its recent invasion of Lebanon, has ended to the benefit of Israel. Yet its survival is seen in jeopardy.

Iran claims it is being singled out for it's actions and policies. The U.S. claims that Iran is being devious in its plans and dishonest in its statements. Perhaps the U.S. and Israel are correct in their concerns and prudent in their preparations. But still, it is hard to blame the Iranians if they feel they are being treated unfairly. As they say, just because you are paranoid doesn't mean no one's out to get you.

Having a nuclear weapon would not allow Iran to take over the world or destroy it's enemies. It would not even allow Iran to take over it's neighbors. Surrounded as they are by Israel, India, Russia, and Pakistan, and with U.S. in Afghanistan, Iraq and offshore, all with nuclear weapons, whatever territorial ambitions Iran may have, if any, would be unlikely to succeed. Militarily, even with a nuclear weapon, Iran is hopelessly outmatched. The only use Iran could make of a nuclear weapon would be for self defense or an act of spite. If Iran ever decided used a nuclear weapon, it would certainly be destroyed. While some in Iran may boast and threaten, is difficult to believe the government in Tehran would accept the destruction of Iran for an act of spite. And let there be no doubt, it would be destroyed.

The greatest benefit of possessing nuclear weapons to Iran, other than the boost to its collective ego, is that those weapons would make Iran less susceptible to attack and threats from the West. Perhaps if Iran felt less threatened and more secure, its ego, fears, and ambitions would be easier to assuage. It might at least be more willing to sit down and talk to it's adversaries.

There are many that are impatient and suspicious of Iran's motives and abilities and reluctant to "waste" time negotiating. They advocate confrontation, even military action. But we should resist their calls. An attack on Iran, to put it in terms befitting the region, would be the act of sowing the wind.