Is Iran trying to provoke Israel to attack it?
On Thursday, the anniversary of Iran's 1979 Islamic revolution, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the regime's puppet thug of a president announced that Iran had succeeded in enriching uranium by 20%--the threshold considered "highly enriched." As internet and other informational media were all but shut down to limit the ability of dissenters to organize, and anti-regime protesters were beaten, gassed, and imprisoned, Ahmadinejad boasted that the government had the ability to enrich the uranium to much higher levels (i.e. to weapons-grade material), but has no need to do so because it nuclear program is purely for "peaceful purposes." Right.
Meanwhile, the feckless Obama White House continues its silence on human rights violations in Iran, while prattling on about tough sanctions against Iran's "unacceptable" behavior, and dismissing Ahmadinejad's latest claims as based on "politics not on physics."
Clearly, Thursday's pugnacious speech was intended to taunt the US and its western allies in the UN, as they flail about trying to devise a package of meaningful sanctions that Russia and China will support (good luck with that). But might Ahmadinejad and his theocratic masters have another aim in mind?
To wit, is Iran doing all it can to provoke Israel into attacking its enrichment facilities? Despite explicitly warning Israel against any military response, it could be that such a reaction is precisely what is hoped for. As defense analyst Brent Talbot persuasively argues, it is a question of when, not if Israel will attempt to take out Iranian nuclear sites; Israel's use of the term "unacceptable" is considerably more absolute than that of our president. Faced with the alternative of nuclear annihilation, Israel will bear whatever consequences associated with attacking Iran's nuclear facilities.
So why would Iran desire such an attack? A number of reasons are plausible. First, Israel's operation almost certainly would be limited to destroying Iran's enrichment sites, and not unseating the regime. Second, such an attack would likely cause the Iranian people to rally around their government; however much they dislike the theocrats, very few would side with Israel in a fight. Third, the attack would legitimize Iranian retaliation. Lobbing a few ballistic missiles into Israel would not only fulfill one of Ahmedinejad's long-standing threats, it would enhance Iran's standing in the Islamic world. That such an exchange could ignite a regional war-or worse-is perhaps a risk the regime is willing to run.
Regardless of motive however, the course that Ahmedinejad and the ayatollahs have charted for Iran is deeply concerning, and any sanctions as may be mustered by the US or UN in the days to come are unlikely to be any more effective deterrent that the three previous rounds have been. Our current administration does not inspire confidence that it is prepared to do much else.
FOLLOW US ON
Recent Articles
- Biden's National Censorship Regime
- Four Years, Five Fiascos: The Toll of Government Overreach
- The Legacy of the Roberts Court
- Parental Rights at Risk from Tyrannical State Overreach
- Alexander Hamilton: A Brilliant and Conflicted Leader
- The Death of the Center-Left in America
- ‘Make Peace, You Fools! What Else Can You Do?’
- When Nuclear Regulation Goes Awry
- The Danger of Nothing
- A New Pope With Courage
Blog Posts
- Britain bans French philosopher who conceptualized the 'great replacement' theory, from entering country
- AOC versus visionary leadership
- The color revolution waged by our judiciary
- Fredi Otto, the new Greta Thunberg
- Why Democrats should become Republicans
- Terrorism works?
- Are we prepared for a new Chinese period of the warring states?
- Trump challenges the Fed
- The last Austrian standing
- Tim Walz: helping China colonize Minnesota?
- Another insubordinate officer?
- Keeping terrorists in America
- Celebrate Earth Day by not burning a Tesla
- Minnesota state bureaucrat charged with vandalizing Teslas to the tune of $20,000 is let off scot-free
- Trump’s plan for Gaza vs. the New York Times