|
|
Consequences of a Nuclear Iran
Jeffrey Kuhner
RightBias.com
February 10, 2013
|
According to
Iranian President
Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad, it’s official:
Iran has become a
nuclear power. The respected Israeli newspaper
Haaretz reported
that the Persian strongman this week at an Islamic conference in Cairo told an
Egyptian daily Iran is
a “nuclear country.” If true — and I stress if — then this is the most important
geopolitical development of our time. It means World War III has become a very
real possibility.
Mr.
Ahmadinejad warned the West in a long interview published in
Al-Ahram that
Iran’s nuclear program
was too advanced, and could no longer be rolled back. “They want
Iran to go back to
what it was in the past, but they won’t succeed,” he said. “They assume we’ll
give in to pressure; such thoughts are misguided.”
The Iranian tyrant may be bluffing. Fearing possible U.S. or Israeli military
strikes, Tehran’s mullahs could be wagering that pretending to be a nuclear
state will prevent a crippling attack. If so,
Mr.
Ahmadinejad is playing with fire — literally. Instead, his inflammatory
comments could spark
Israel to launch a massive bombing campaign.
Mr.
Ahmadinejad is a virulent anti-Semite and Shiite revolutionary. He has
called for the Jewish state to be “wiped off the the face of the earth.” He
denies the Holocaust took place. He claims there is a Jewish world conspiracy,
whereby “Zionists” and their “allies” run the international economy. He also
fervently preaches that his mission is to aid the coming of the “Twelfth Imam” —
the Shiite version of the Messiah — to Earth, ushering in Armageddon.
Mr.
Ahmadinejad believes this will erect a world Muslim empire. He is not only
an Islamic fascist. He is a fanatical religious zealot bent upon changing the
course of history. For him to say that
Iran now possesses the
technology and capacity to be a nuclear power is something the world should take
very seriously.
What if Mr.
Ahmadinejad is not lying? Then the West — and especially the United States —
faces a major crisis. It means the West’s policies of sanctions and diplomatic
engagement have failed. It means the Persian despot has outmaneuvered President
Obama and the
United Nations. Moreover, Mr. Obama has vowed
Iran will not be
allowed to acquire the bomb. Should he back away from his promise, American
credibility will be shattered. Our allies will never trust us again. If Mr.
Obama makes good on his pledge, then there is only one option left: a military
campaign to smash Iran’s
nuclear facilities.
An attack would trigger disastrous consequences.
Iran is not Iraq. It
is a much larger and more populous nation. It has proxies across the region —
including Hezbollah, Hamas and Syria’s besieged regime. A U.S. military strike
would likely spark a regional war, dragging in
Israel and other
Arab nations. The Iranian navy would mine the Strait of Hormuz, choking off a
large percentage of the world’s oil supply. Prices would skyrocket to $200 or
even $300 for a barrel of oil. This would send shock waves throughout the global
economy, throwing most industrial countries — especially the United States —
into a depression. Mr. Obama’s anti-war liberal base would revolt. The
Democratic Party would be torn asunder. A war-weary America may not have the
stomach for a protracted campaign.
Hence, Iran going
nuclear paves the way for possible World War III. For all of his pathology,
however,
Mr. Ahmadinejad is not
Adolf Hitler.
The Islamic Republic is not Nazi Germany.
Hitler oversaw
the most powerful military and economic state in Europe. He was adored and
supported not just by tens of millions of Germans, but countless other quislings
who shared his vision of an Aryan master race. His formidable armies nearly
conquered Europe. In contrast,
Iran is a Third World
basket case. Its economy is in shambles. Its military — although large — is
plagued with internal divisions and poor equipment. Most importantly, Tehran’s
mullahs are despised by an overwhelming majority of Iranians. Rather than being
loved, Mr.
Ahmadinejad is hated by his own people. The theocratic regime is weak and
crumbling.
This begs the question: Why did Mr. Obama and the West not support
Iran’s green
revolution in 2009, when hundreds of thousands of anti-regime protesters poured
onto the streets demanding that the mullahs step down? Instead, Mr. Obama turned
a blind eye, publicly telling Tehran that Washington will not meddle in
Iran’s internal
affairs. President Ronald Reagan used Poland’s Solidarity protest movement to
help bring down the Soviet empire — and without a shot being fired. Mr. Obama
could have followed a similar model. He didn’t. Now the world may have to suffer
the tragic consequences of his naive and reckless policies.
Jeffrey T. Kuhner is a radio commentator in Boston.
|