America Can't Have a Foreign Policy Based on Maybe's
Bush Administration's Approach to Iran is Based on Hypotheticals
"Mr. Bush, how can you say nothing has changed? You may see it this way, but the rest of the world is going to see the lead as the fact that the nuclear weapons program was halted in 2003."
"Right," was Mr. Bush's response.
Yet during the press conference Mr. Bush appeared eager to continue portraying Iran as a country determined to develop nuclear weapons. The problem is that the president's case against Iran is built upon hypotheticals and maybe's.
Some examples from the president's own word's at the press conference:
"I think it is very important for the international community to recognize the fact that if Iran were to develop the knowledge that they could transfer to a clandestine program it would create a danger for the world."
"Look, Iran was dangerous, Iran is dangerous, and Iran will be dangerous if they have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon."
"What's to say they couldn't start another covert nuclear weapons program?"
"But what is certain is that if Iran ever had the knowledge to develop a nuclear weapon and they passed that knowledge on to a covert program, which at one time in their history has existed, the world would be more dangerous. "
The National Intelligence Estimate is pretty clear about the fact that there is little evidence to back Mr. Bush's hypothetical analysis of the situation.
For example, the NIE says that:
1. "We assess with high confidence that in fall of 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear program."
2. "We assess with moderate confidence that Tehran had not restarted its nuclear weapons program as of mid-2007, but we do not know if it currently intends to develop nuclear weapons."
3. "Tehran's decision to halt its nuclear weapons program suggests it is less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been previously judging since 2005. Our assessment is that the program probably was halted primarily in response to international pressure suggests Iran may be more vulnerable to influence on the issue than we judged previously."
The NIE acknowledged the possibility that Iran could eventually develop a nuclear weapon if it wanted to. And there is no doubt that Iran should be prevented from developing nuclear weapons.
The United States should continue to take a diplomatic approach to the situation, working hand in hand with the international community to ensure that Iran's nuclear program remains halted - permanently. But what the United States cannot do is engage in military action against Iran Any such move would be based purely on speculation, not on verifiable facts.
That is why Reasonable Foreign Policy is calling on Americans to let Congress know that we do not want to see military action taken against Iran.
Sign the petition to members of Congress by clicking the link below:
Hey Congress: Say "No" to Military Action Against Iran
David Anderson
Reasonable Foreign Policy
Published by David Anderson
David Anderson has been blogging about politics and the environment since 2007. Current projects include New Hampshire Primary 2012: Green, a blog tracking the 2012 presidential candidates statements on clim... View profile
- A Look at the Iran Nuclear ProgramOf late, there has been a lot of talk about Iran nuclear program. At one hand are the Iranians who claim that it is only meant for peaceful purposes. On one hand are the people who oppose it accusing Iran of conspirin...
- Iran's Nuclear ProgramAn editorial on the tension between the West and Iran over it's nuclear program.
- Top National News Stories of 2007In no particular order, the author summarizes key national news stories of the year.
Iran Nuclear Program - is America Creating the Terror Hype?After the 9-11 tragedy in 2001, American President George W. Bush declared an overarching global war against terrorism.- What the Pre-War Intelligence Reports Won't Tell You About Iraq's NukesAn in-depth examination of Bush's pre-invasion claims regarding Iraq's nuclear capabilities. By comparing Bush's own words with the findings of both pre-war intelligence commissions, it is clear Bush knowingly lied ab...
- Iran Continues Its Nuclear Program as the World Holds Its Breath
- Soviet Foreign Policy in Iran: 1945-1979
- American Foreign Policy is Easy to Second Guess
- The Message to America Revealed in the Current National Intelligence Estimate
- Analyzing the National Intelligence Estimate on Iran, Nuclear Weapons
- Assessing the National Intelligence Estimate
- Israeli Think Tank Assesses U.S. Intelligence Estimate on Iran
- America can't base its foreign policy upon "if's" and "maybe's".
- The Bush administration's view of the threat emanating from Iran is based upon hypotheticals.
- Facts, not assumptions, need to drive American's foreign policy.
3 Comments
Post a CommentNo, I really don't want to engage Iran militarily. That is one of the scariest things I can imagine so I fully understand where you are coming from. But I don't think we should jump the gun. I'm saying that in order to keep the pressure on Iran, we need to keep that option on the table. In fact, it is only smart to keep all options on the table. Indeed, the NIE report does say that there is no way of proving that Iran has resumed or will resume its weapons program and that goes directly to my point because that also means that there is no way to disprove it either. We simply can't know for certain what their status is. Also, it cites the vague "international pressure" as it's reason for Iran dropping the program. What exactly do you think the international pressure that happened in 2003 was? Are you suggesting that after seeing what we did to Saddam's regime, they didn't care about the US military but instead were petrified that we might threaten them with trade sanctions? I
Well written, and dead on. It is imperative that we deny our madman to start a conflict with their madman just to benefit each of their individual Armageddon complexes.
We will never have hard facts to rely on when it comes to foreign policy. We will always have to guess what the other players in the situation will do next. And this is true historically- throughout WWII, Kennedy and the Cuban missle crisis, Carter and the hostages in Iran...the list goes on. We always have to make moves with incomplete information. And, as you mentioned, the NIE report says that Iran has the capability to restart the weapons program at any time. And why do we think they aren't making a weapon now? Because Iran is telling us that. We have to either choose to believe Iran or not because we don't have complete knowledge on what they are doing or what they capability is. And the report says that international pressures in 2003 caused them to stop. Now, what was it that happened in 2003 that could have done that? Oh yeah, we deposed Saddam.