See other World News Articles
Title: John Bolton Is Threatening Iran. Good.
Source:
[None]
URL Source: https://www.politico.com/magazine/s ... s-threatening-iran-good-224015
Published: Jan 15, 2019
Author: RAY TAKEYH
Post Date: 2019-01-15 19:37:11 by BTP Holdings
Keywords: None
Views: 122
Comments: 4
John Bolton Is Threatening Iran. Good. History shows that the Islamic Republic backs down when challenged. By RAY TAKEYH January 15, 2019 The latest news to rattle the Washington establishment is that John Bolton, President Donald Trump’s national security adviser, has asked the Pentagon for military options against Iran. The commentariat and the Democrats in exile are aghast, and insist that such bellicosity will only invite belligerence from Iran. Many former Obama administration officials fear that Bolton’s truculence may lead Iran to resume its nuclear program. But the truth is that when dealing with Iran, threats usually work while blandishments only whet the appetite of the mullahs who run the country. No president was more concerned with the Islamic revolutionaries’ sensibilities than Jimmy Carter. Even after Iranian militants stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and took American diplomats hostages, Carter hoped to resolve the crisis in a manner that did not jeopardize the possibility of resuming ties with the theocracy. Such deference helped prolong the crisis for 444 days and essentially doomed Carter’s presidency. However, during the long hostage saga, on one occasion, Carter took forceful action and his policy actually worked. After storming of the embassy, there was much loose talk in Tehran that the U.S. officials would be put on trial. The administration sent a private note to Iran that any harm done to the hostages would provoke American military retaliation. Soon, all the talk of public trial was quietly shelved. This proved to be a lesson not learned, not just by Carter but by many other American statesmen who would go on to deal with Iran. The Reagan administration may best be known for the Iran-Contra affair, whereby it traded arms for the release of American hostages held in Lebanon by Iran’s Hezbollah proxy. However, the tragic and accidental shooting down of an Iranian commercial airliner in July 1988 was actually critical to ending the Iran-Iraq war. For eight years, Iran had rebuffed all entreaties and offers of diplomatic mediation, as Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini held tight to his goal of deposing Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein irrespective of the conflict’s human toll. By the summer of 1988, there was an ongoing conflict between American naval ships and Iranian speed boats laying down mines in the Gulf waters. As the confrontation on the high seas was taking place, an Iranian passenger plane was making its way to Dubai. As the aircraft approached, USS Vincennes mistook it for a hostile vessel and shot it down, killing 290 passengers. Despite days of mourning and incendiary speeches, Iran’s reaction was basically subdued, as Tehran appreciated that the asymmetry of power militated against escalation of the conflict. The one dramatic consequence of downing of the passenger plane was that it finally convinced the clerical elite that it was time to abandon the war with Iraq—they mistakenly believed the shooting down of the Airbus was a prelude to America entering the war on Saddam’s behalf with the purpose of overthrowing the Islamic Republic. Even Ayatollah Khomeini, who was indifferent to loss of human life, proved too respectful of American power to persist with a war that he felt might now include the United States. So Khomeini opted for an armistice, which he famously compared with drinking a “poisoned chalice.” The world’s handling of Iran’s nuclear ambitions is also instructive. For much of its tenure in power, the Islamic Republic has maintained a nuclear apparatus. And by late 1990s, it was busy establishing an elaborate and clandestine facility in Natanz, approximately 200 miles south of Tehran. Iran was also active in developing plutonium capabilities. The uranium conversion facility in Isfahan and the nearly completed heavy-water production plant in Arak demonstrated the scope of a program that had been effectively concealed from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The Islamic Republic had carefully constructed a nuclear infrastructure that offered it multiple paths to the bomb. All this came crashing down in 2002, when an opposition group reveled Tehran’s secrets. Ali Khamenei, Khomeini’s successor as supreme leader, immediately understood that he had a serious problem on his hands. The revelations came at a time when America was feeling shock-and-awe confidence in the wake of its rapid displacement of the Taliban in Afghanistan and on the cusp of destruction of the Baathist regime in Iraq in three weeks. The latter campaign shocked an Iranian political establishment that had been confidently told by its military leaders that America could not discharge that task with such ease and speed. The fear in Tehran was that America would next turn its gaze on the Islamic Republic. So what happened next? President George W. Bush’s inclusion of Iran in his “axis of evil” speech alarmed Iranian leaders. It was time for the clerical state to buy time and wait for the storm to pass. It was at this juncture that Iran cut a deal with the so-called EU-3—Britain, France and Germany—to suspend all aspects of its nuclear program. This suspension would last for two years. By then, America found itself in a sectarian civil war in Iraq that was inflamed by Iran and its proxies. Once America became distracted in Iraq, Iran resumed its enrichment activities. Still, the lesson of 2003 is that threats work in compelling Iran to abandon its nuclear program far more than all the diplomacy that ensued in the coming decade. Trump and Bolton are the latest American policymakers to unsettle the Islamic Republic. The signs coming out of the White House may at times be ambiguous, but the tough talk and the tough actions have had an impact in Tehran. The U.S. has withdrawn from the flawed Iran nuclear deal and re-imposed sanctions on Iran that have knocked off nearly a million barrels from its oil exports and crippled its economy. And yet the U.S. has faced no retaliatory Iranian response. The Islamic Republic has maintained its compliance with the nuclear agreement and will likely do so during the duration of the Trump presidency. Why? Because it respects and fears the power of the United States when wielded appropriately. The lesson: American determination, forcefully expressed, usually yields Iranian retreat. The American strategist who seems to have internalized the right lessons in dealing with Iran is John Bolton. He appreciates Iran’s history of creating chaos in the Middle East and the fallacy of an arms control agreement that was paving its way toward the bomb. More importantly, he seems to appreciate that threats work better than soothing words in tempering a theocratic regime destined for the ash heap of history. Poster Comment: If history shows us anything it is that John Bolton is a rabid Neocon. Anything he does is bound the benefit Israel is some way, shape or form. Iran may have a really great nuclear program, and why not? With the $33.6 Billion paid out to Iran during the last two years of the Obama administration. But then someone should tell this to the Israelis since they destroyed a nuclear facility in Iran in 2013.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: BTP Holdings (#0)
(Edited)
The walrus needs to go far, far away, asap, as do all pnac, neo-zio-cons.
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken
If you like Bolton, you're gonna love Dick, Liz & Donnell! This entire joke started in 1952 when the US put in THEIR puppet. Iran took back their country in 1978. BTW: the people were going to be let go in august of the year of the election, but the Reagan boys got Iran to hold them until Reagan got elected.
You must be trying to recall these events from memory. Just a little time spent to research them is helpful. en.wikipedia.org /wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27état BTW, the hostages at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran were held 444 days and were not released until Reagan was sworn in as POTUS. It was the Carter administration that made a deal to release $3 Billion in assets that had been frozen. ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
#2. To: BTP Holdings, Team Bolton (#0)
Neocon Revival 2014 - Laying the groundwork for Trump
Published on Jun 17, 2014 
DACA Shithole Dreamers - Make America Great Again?
#3. To: BTP Holdings (#0)
#4. To: Darkwing (#3)
This entire joke started in 1952 when the US put in THEIR puppet. Iran took back their country in 1978. BTW: the people were going to be let go in august of the year of the election, but the Reagan boys got Iran to hold them until Reagan got elected.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest