Iran: Threat or Harmless Instigator?

For non-cave-dwelling folk, the situation involving Iran and British sailors was a frightening affair, especially if you happen to be an American citizen or ally. Iran has a history of bi-polar diplomacy, and this situation is a prime example of their willing-today-resitant-tomorrow approach to dealing with Western nations. However, they sure pick one hell of a time to stop taking their meds. The original problem posed by Iran was their insistence on nuclear enrichment. The Iranian government claimed it was for providing its citizens with power, and while nuclear power is the most efficient as well the most environmentally considerate method of producing energy, it is not something the mentally unstable should be in control of. Chernobyl is a good example of the ruinous effects of nuclear power when it is in the hands of the unfit. The USSR carelessly handled many of their industrial projects, and the radiation tainted land that came as a result of the Chernobyl meltdown is a prime example of what happens when dunderheads are allowed nuclear freedom.

Iran, however, has shown they have the resources and capability to run a nuclear plant (with help from Russia), but their apparent desire to alienate the world gives the UN more reason to impose harsher sanctions on the country. While the Iranian population is in favor of the Western War on Terror, and is surprisingly a large market for Western products, it is their government who has managed to frighten numerous nations with their constant provocation. Nevertheless, Iran is not the threat the media wants us to believe, especially when compared to North Korea who already has nuclear weaponry. Instead, Iran is like that 5 foot tall drunkard in a bar who starts a fight and then files a lawsuit after getting beat up. And right now the United States is currently on probation, meaning any other fight would surely result in a negative outcome. Iran is well aware of our situation, and they are simply playing their cards to the best of their ability. However, Iran's insistence on nuclear technology may be the result of Israel having a fairly large stockpile of nuclear weaponry. Many Arab nations have expressed their feelings in regards to Israel being in possession of nuclear weapons and most are in strong opposition. Nevertheless, capturing the Britons was a smart move as it delayed further nuclear talks and created more uncertainty in the minds of Western leaders. Fortunately, British PM, Tony Blair, handled the situation without violent means and such resolution is something Americans should be overly joyous about.

Since Britain was our strongest ally when we moved into Iraq, the US is obligated to help the UK when trouble comes knocking. Turning our backs on Britain would be a foreign policy blunder sure to come back and haunt us. However, attacking a country with a population that is surprisingly supportive of US involvement in the Middle East could easily be the spark that ignites the fuse to World War 3. A US attack on Iran would give the Iranian government the support they need to get away with even crazier policies and behavior. It comes as no surprise that Tony Blair softened his stance during the negotiations involving the British hostages. He understands that the first military action must not be carried out by a western nation, but by Iran. When it comes to Iran, the best course of action is to not take any action at all, aside from diplomacy. If the Iranian government continues to avoid UN negotiations then UN sanctions will aide Iran in changing their mind. When North Korea decided to test their weapons, UN sanctions managed to settle North Korea's rambunctious attitude, and since then North Korea has remained fairly well behaved.

Only time will tell if Iran is serious with their constant provocations, and unfortunately we have to let them prove so before the US can take any military action against Iran. Iran must make the first violent move, and taking British hostages is not that move. Nevertheless, Iran knows better, and their current behavior can be viewed as the bluff of a desperate nation who is one hand away from going all-in, only to risk losing it all on the flop--a risk President Ahmadinejad is not ready to take. If Iran chooses to act first then they will certainly regret such an ill-informed decision. With US military bases established in both Iraq and Afghanistan, the US has a tactical advantage that would be hard to overcome--not to mention a technologically superior arsenal of weaponry. As stated earlier, Iran is simply trying to get hit first so they can use the "self-defense" defense to justify irrational action in response. Expect more hostages to be taken by Iran once they realize we aren't so quick to bomb their country. Politics is an ugly creature.