Posted on 02/04/2010 10:14:42 PM PST by myknowledge
An Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear program will neither completely stop Teheran’s nuclear march, nor bring down the ayatollahs’ regime, according to former Swiss ambassador to Iran Tim Guldimann.
Speaking to The Jerusalem Post on the sidelines of this week’s Herzliya Conference, Guldimann, who knows the Iranian way of thinking well, expressed – as a personal opinion – his deep concern about the military option against Iran.
Guldimann was Swiss ambassador to Iran and Afghanistan from 1999 to 2004. As ambassador to Teheran, Guldimann – now senior adviser and head of the Middle East Project at the Center for Humanitarian Dialogue, Geneva – represented US interests in Iran, acting as a go-between. He gained notoriety for a memorandum he transmitted to the US in 2003, which posited an alleged Iranian proposal for a broad dialogue with the US, with everything on the table – including full cooperation on nuclear programs, acceptance of Israel and the termination of Iranian support for Palestinian armed groups. The proposal was rejected by the Bush administration.
(Excerpt) Read more at jpost.com ...
Your points are well taken.
You compared to American revolution in previous post ergo my reply in same context. What I agree with is that Iranian people need to take *ownership* of bringing about their Change, just as American revolutionaries did. Iranian people are trying to do that & I think they fully recognize that responsibility begins at home. That’s why I don’t think they should “flee to the hills” and let others do the job for them.
To expand, France helped America in very specific ways, providing ammunition, weapons & supplies to rebels – later actually fought the British in a Naval battle (Chesapeake Bay). Spain and Dutch republic (French allies) also considerably helped in fighting the British, if I’m not mistaken. W/out help from France, surely revolutionaries in America would not have succeeded. Anyhow, that was back in the 18th century.
What I disagree with is you saying: “Iran as a nation” is a threat. Iran as a nation is not. Iran’s leadership is - both to other countries as well as the Iranian Nation. Iranian people recognize the difference. But, a few others may not or do not.
Of course countries need to do what they determine to be in their best interest based on their own judgment, saber-rattling or not.
But, my educated guess about Iran’s current regime is that if we, in the West, are waiting for them to use nukes on Israel or the U.S. or some Arab country in the mid-east region, we’ll be waiting longer than some expect. Iranian regime may be insane, but they are also selfish, though not stupid. And, you’re right, they won’t be able to fight a “conventional war” for long. So, we need to think outside of the box to see how they will fight a war, which can carry on for years. And, incidentally, it may neither be instigated by nor be limited to “Iranians” as a nationality. It may well be a transnational war based on ideologies, using different methods of warfare.
Long story short, a *pragmatic* option (as you say), in my view, is to provide support, I alluded to in post #13, to the Iranian people in order to get rid of the present Iranian regime, not to be replaced by another Islamic or semi-Islamic regime such as the case is in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Ditto! The sooner the better,
Ok, we’re getting closer in agreement... how about these ideas...
Politics today does not allow for very much American support of revolutions in other countries. We have a long list of those who complain about us in that regard: our own left wing, western europe, russia, china, south america, the U.N., middle-eastern countries... wait, the whole world pretty much.
How many times have we supported revolutions in the past, how many times has it worked to produce a country that liked us for very long.
we have sent hundreds of billions of dollars overseas in all sorts of aid packages.
almost every other country, save a few loyal allies, says we are the bad guy, constantly.
it looks like our federal government and many state governments are going to be bankrupt - we are broke.
As far as citizens vs. leadership:
unfortunately, the leadership of a nation is the only legal matter that counts as far as threats go, since they legally represent the nation, and they give the marching orders to their military. unfortunately, “the people” go along for the ride. like here in the u.s., when obobo issues a moronic executive order, it’s America the nation that is acting, because the order will be carried out and it will legally be an action of the U.S. federal government.
The onus is on us citizens to get him replaced as soon as possible, but, since we elected him (or didn’t mobilize enough voters to not elect him), every citizen of this country is going to reap whatever comes their way as a result of his election. The individual citizen - like me - I don’t enjoy taking the blame, but it’s 1/300 millionth mine regardless - is stuck. I certainly can’t blame someone in France or Iran.
You’re right. We live in interesting times.
If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
Putting off Iranian nuclearization a few years would not help Israel? Not at all?
It might not help, but it sure would feel good.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.