GOP warmongering on Iran

By Mitchell Blatt
0 Comment(s)Print E-mail China.org.cn, June 5, 2015
Adjust font size:

Neoconservative fears about Iran have greatly exaggerated the threat. Cruz called Iran "the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism." Marco Rubio even naively suggested that Iran would try to bomb American cities or blow up an embassy. (Iran has bombed embassies in the past, and they don't need a nuclear bomb to do it.)

Iran is one of the four remaining countries on the U.S. Department of State's list of "state sponsors of terror," but the list is outdated and politically motivated. It wasn't until the U.S. opened diplomatic relations with Cuba that they finally removed it from the list this May, long after Cuba had stopped sponsoring terrorism. The list could more accurately be called "America's least favorite governments of small countries."

Daniel Byman, the director of the Center for Peace and Security Studies at Georgetown University, wrote in The National Interest magazine that, "Of those on the list, only Syria and Iran remain problems, and in both cases their involvement in traditional international terrorism is down considerably from their peaks in the 1980s."

In an interview with CNN, Cruz went so far as to compare Iran to ISIS. Both are radical Islamic terrorist states, he said. It's a childish comparison that ignores the significant distinction between a genocidal terrorist organization bent on destroying traditional concepts of state and the state fighting them. Iran abuses its subjects' human rights and denies them freedom, but that isn't a threat to the U.S. or to world order the way ISIS is. Cruz's simple-minded conception of the world ignores that the U.S. allied with Joseph Stalin to win World War II and is currently partnered with Syria, which shares almost all the human rights failings of Iran.

As for terrorism and support of militant groups outside its borders, nuclear capabilities might cause Iran to be more well-behaved. In his final article before his death, prominent international relations scholar Kenneth Waltz wrote in Foreign Affairs magazine in 2012 that, "History shows that when countries acquire the bomb, they feel increasingly vulnerable and become acutely aware that their nuclear weapons make them a potential target in the eyes of major powers. This awareness discourages nuclear states from bold and aggressive action."

Citing the examples of China, India, and Pakistan, he says countries have "become more cautious since going nuclear." It is the very absence of nuclear weapons, in other words, that encourages Iran to be more fearful and to rely on bellicose and militant groups.

Almost every Republican presidential candidate is against the proposed Iran deal that the Obama administration and the P5+1 nations have negotiated. Even Rand Paul currently says he opposes the deal, but he also opposes war. Among those who have publicly advocated the possibility of going to war with Iran are Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindal, and Lindsey Graham, who talked about introducing a war resolution in the Senate as far back as 2013. Rick Perry says he would invalidate any Iran agreement Obama agrees to.

Some of the posturing is undoubtedly for political purposes. Candidates will say a lot of stupid stuff to get elected. But it's never easy to tell what language is merely politicking and what is meant in earnest, and it's a big gamble to guess on war policy.

The author is a columnist with China.org.cn. For more information please visit: http://www.china.org.cn/opinion/MitchellBlatt.htm

Opinion articles reflect the views of their authors, not necessarily those of China.org.cn.

 

Follow China.org.cn on Twitter and Facebook to join the conversation.
   Previous   1   2  


Print E-mail Bookmark and Share

Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)

No comments.

Add your comments...

  • User Name Required
  • Your Comment
  • Enter the words you see:   
    Racist, abusive and off-topic comments may be removed by the moderator.
Send your storiesGet more from China.org.cnMobileRSSNewsletter