كيف أصبح لطهران اليد العليا

بقلم: فريد هيل

هيرالد تريبيون - 2/2/2007

How Tehran got the upper hand

Fred Hill

Published: February 2, 2007

ARROWSIC, Maine : The Bush/Cheney build-up against Iran is taking shape. The terrible irony is that there are much more persuasive grounds for a full- scale confrontation, if not necessarily full- fledged war, with Iran than there were against Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq . And irony of ironies: the ability of the United States to lead a serious campaign against Iran's newly emboldened regime has been undermined significantly by the Bush administration's own failings and lack of strategic vision.

Briefly, five critical mistakes by the White House placed political and ideological aims ahead of the national interest, and left the United States in a weaker position to deal with Iran 's growing assertiveness and lack of respect for U.S. power. They are:

Rejecting the traditional U.S. role as an honest broker in the peace process.

Never developing a serious energy policy (so that an economically challenged Iran has enriched itself with high oil prices.

Attacking Iraq without major allies and a plan.

Failing to commit sufficient troops to the post-war phase to bring stability to Iraq .

Rejecting various opportunities to engage Iran 's leadership in quiet, possibly constructive dialogue.

If the Bush administration had pursued any two of these with some success, not only would Iraq be more stable, but Iran 's leaders would not dare to be so bold today. But, because of repeated failures at the very top of the U.S. government, Iran is, at this point, the "winner" in Iraq . Two hostile regimes on either side of Iran , led by the Taliban and Saddam, have been overthrown by the U.S. military, and Iraq 's embattled government is run by a Shiite majority with which Shiite Iran has strong influence.

Gary Sick, a leading American expert, recently noted: "From Iran 's perspective, (the U.S. war in Iraq ) is a gift of unparalleled proportions."

Robert Gates, the new Secretary of Defense, was candid enough to admit that the U.S. would be "the supplicant" if U.S.-Iran discussions were held now. What a result for the Bush/Cheney team as leaders of the sole superpower in the world!

Make no mistake. Iran is everything that Iraq was not. Unlike Iraq , Iran 's leaders have supported deadly acts of terror around the world for more than 25 years, many aimed at Americans. Starting with the hostage taking at the embassy in 1979, Tehran has been directly or indirectly responsible for deadly attacks on the Marine barracks in Beirut that killed nearly 300 Americans, on the Israeli embassy in Argentina , the Khobar Towers attack in Saudi Arabia that killed 19 American soldiers, and sponsorship of many violent groups.

Secondly, Iran 's leadership has steadily undermined the peace process.

Thirdly, unlike Saddam, who had no weapons of mass destruction, Iran 's leaders, while professing interest only in nuclear energy, have pursued nuclear weapons for two decades.

While obscured by plans to add U.S. troops in Iraq, news reports now indicate that the Bush administration has adopted a more aggressive strategy towards Iran — both in responding to its meddling in Iraq and in confronting Iran's policies on terrorism and nuclear weapons, not to mention destabilizing Lebanon. A recent essay by Sick outlines an ambitious effort to forge an informal coalition of the United States, Israel and moderate Arab states, to block Iran's emergence as the regional hegemon — and to distract attention from Iraq.

Experts see two potential scenarios behind Washington 's new plan. The first is to provoke Iran to retaliate against the arrests of Iranian agents inside Iraq and offer a pretext to attack Iran . The main problem there is that given the quagmire in Iraq , most military experts do not see military conflict with Iran as a viable option today. The second is a more multi- prong strategy — bundling diplomatic, economic sanctions and military pressure against Iran — to set the table for eventual talks whose aim would be to help bring stability to Iraq and permit Iran to develop nuclear power but draw the line at nuclear weapons.

There are signs that the emerging strategy is having some effect. Security Council sanctions worry Iran ; U.S. pressure on the international banking system is being felt; and Saudi Arabia , a Sunni-led state worried about Iranian radicalism, is supporting higher oil production which keeps prices in line. Iran 's clerical rulers are now questioning the leadership of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whose hair-on-fire rhetoric is isolating Iran in the international community.

Bush and Cheney have so far ruled out discussions with Iran or Syria . But, one would hope, given the grave situation in Iraq that they would be prepared to have diplomats sit down at some point. Even the Israeli government, most immediately concerned about an Iranian weapons program, may prefer that course.

The Bush administration was offered a promising opportunity to improve U.S.-Iranian relations in 2003. Just after the fall of Saddam's statue, a secret effort by top State Department officials — a package of mutual steps on terrorism, Iraq's stability and the nuclear issue — drew an encouraging Iranian response that indicated willingness to discuss all key issues. Even though Iran provided major assistance to the U.S. intervention against the Taliban in 2001-2002, the White House rejected the 2003 opening.

Not having exhausted diplomatic and economic means to deal with Iraq before invading in 2003, it is hard to believe that Bush and Cheney would resort to force without exploring all nonmilitary options.

"What do you have to lose?" former Congressman Lee Hamilton asked recently. "Can the situation get any worse? Are we so fearful that by sitting down with Iran and Syria we will give away the store? That shows a total lack of confidence in our diplomatic ability."

Fred Hill covered Iran for The Baltimore Sun. He recently retired from the State Department.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/02/02/opinion/edhill.php?page=2

ـ

ـ

من حق الزائر الكريم أن ينقل وأن ينشر كل ما يعجبه من موقعنا . معزواً إلينا ، أو غير معزو .ـ