Daily Alert Archives

Why Give Iran a Reason Not to Fear a Military Attack?

(Washington Post) Editorial - Part of President Obama's mantra about Iran has been that "all options are on the table" - meaning he will not rule out military action to stop its attempt to acquire nuclear weapons. So why does Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates keep undercutting the message? Twice in the past week, Mr. Gates has publicly argued against a military option - even though neither the U.S. nor Israel appears to be close to launching a strike. To be clear: We agree that the administration should continue to focus for now on non-military strategies such as sanctions and support for the Iranian opposition. But that does not require publicly talking down military action. Mr. Gates' prediction of how Iranians would react to an attack is speculative, but what we do know for sure is that the last decision Iran made to curb its nuclear program, in 2003, came when the regime feared - reasonably or not - that it could be a target of the U.S. forces that had just destroyed the Iraqi army. As for the effect of the sanctions, Tehran has not shown itself ready to begin serious bargaining about its uranium enrichment. Mr. Gates' Pentagon has been a center of opposition to discussing military options for Iran for years. Given the potentially high costs and uncertain outcome of such a mission, that's understandable. But by sending the message to Iran that U.S. military action is not a serious possibility, the defense establishment only makes it more likely that the U.S. and Israel will eventually face a terrible choice between launching an attack and accepting an Iranian bomb.
2010-11-19 08:32:58
Full Article