(Korea Times) Richard N. Haass - One future for Iran would be mostly an extension of what already exists, i.e., an Iran run by conservative clerics and an aggressive Revolutionary Guard. The emergence of such a future would present the world with a stark choice: either acquiesce to an Iran that possesses or could quickly assemble a nuclear device, or launch a preventive military attack designed to destroy much of the Iranian nuclear program. While a preventive strike would delay Iran's nuclear efforts, it would not stop the regime from rebuilding, and it might also create conditions that cause problems for the regime's domestic opponents. Despite these potential drawbacks, an armed attack on Iran's nuclear facilities will and should remain a distinct possibility given the enormous strategic costs of a nuclear-armed Iran. If history is a guide, even strong sanctions may not be enough to persuade Iran's rulers to negotiate constructively and accept meaningful constraints on their nuclear activities. These considerations raise the prospect of trying to bring about an alternative future: an Iran with a political leadership that is more moderate at home and abroad, and that forgoes developing a nuclear weapon or anything close to it. The writer is president of the Council on Foreign Relations.
2010-02-23 08:16:31Full ArticleBACK Visit the Daily Alert Archive