- Editorial The referral of Iran by the Governing Board of the International Atomic Energy Agency to the UN Security Council includes no call to action, which Russia and China object to in any event. While the threat of Tehran's decision to resume enriching uranium is very real, the seriousness is mostly pretend. For now, the weight of elite opinion seems to be on the side of acquiescence. And the Iranians know it. Iranian President Ahmadinejad has publicly mused that the Jewish state should be "wiped off the map," and former President Rafsanjani has said that "the use of a nuclear bomb in Israel will leave nothing on the ground, whereas it will only damage the world of Islam." Why should we assume they don't mean this? The complacent tell us not to worry because no state would dare use a nuke because that would only guarantee its own destruction. But what if you're a cleric who likes that trade-off? A bomb would give Iran far more leverage to press its influence abroad since it will believe it is immune to retaliation. A nuclear Iran could wield a predominating influence in OPEC. It could disrupt maritime traffic in the Persian Gulf and force the U.S. Navy out of its narrow, shallow waters. It could menace Europe, and eventually the U.S. homeland, as its ballistic missile capabilities develop. It could arm Palestinian terrorists with sophisticated weapons, turning Gaza into a risk not just for Israel but the entire Mediterranean basin.
2006-02-03 00:00:00Full ArticleBACK Visit the Daily Alert Archive