Who can keep up with the twists and turns of Iran’s nuclear weapons program? It’s no easy task.
A few days ago, leaders from Brazil and Turkey announced they had reached an agreement with Iran in which it would get rid of part of its nuclear fuel. A day later, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced that some major nations in the U.N. had agreed on a proposed “resolution” to impose new economic sanctions on Iran because of its attempts to build nukes.
Do you believe Iran would follow through on promises to get rid of part of its nuclear fuel? Even if it did, would that ensure it did not have enough left to build nukes?
Do you think the U.N., which failed to keep Communist North Korea from getting nuclear weapons despite U.N. inspections, will be able to pressure Iran’s fanatical leaders to give up their quest for nukes by threatening new, “tough” sanctions?
There is no easy solution to the problem of Iran. Israel — which Iran’s president says should be wiped off the map — could possibly seek to destroy Iran’s nuclear capabilities with air strikes, as it did in Iraq in 1981. Israel was sharply criticized for that operation. But unlike Israel, most of the critics would not likely have been targeted by Iraqi nukes.
But today, there is no guarantee that Israel would be capable of ending Iran’s nuclear operations entirely.
Will the United States one day face the decision either to destroy Iran’s nuclear program ourselves or to allow the radical Muslim regime there to have such weapons?
That is not an appealing prospect.
What is sure is this: Pretending that Iran will willingly abandon its nuclear weapons dreams is no more realistic than relying on U.N. resolutions and sanctions.
There is no simple answer. But playing make-believe is the worst response to the grave threat Iran poses.