Iran: Decisive Action Needed Now

Rachel Neuwirth

High Noon with Holy Terror?

Diplomatic efforts by America and the West have thus far failed to dissuade Iran from developing nuclear weapons. The clock of military danger is ticking faster than the clock of a diplomatic solution. Our American leaders have failed to reveal the full extent of the danger that will soon confront us all. To assure that Iran’s WMD are disarmed in time may ultimately require a major military intervention by America. For many, the prospect of another military campaign seems too daunting, especially in light of our difficulties in Iraq.

In 1962 the Kennedy administration discovered Soviet missiles being installed in Cuba. We believed those missiles had nuclear warheads. President Kennedy promptly addressed the American people to explain the gravity of the situation and the need to directly confront the threat without delay. We learned later that America and the Soviets were eyeball to eyeball with nuclear weapons and the Soviets blinked first. Kennedy argued that in the nuclear age we could not allow the enemy to strike first and he was willing to risk war, if need be, to force the removal of the Cuban missiles.

After WWII we lamented that in the 1930’s Hitler’s threat was underestimated. He was allowed to rearm Germany in violation of the disarmament treaties after the German defeat in WWI. Germany foiled the arms inspections program of that day, and the West even traded with, and appeased, Nazi Germany while ignoring the growing danger. Stopping Hitler in the 1930’s would have had a price but the West’s failing to do so assured WWII which cost fifty million lives.

The world was lucky in WWII because the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941 mobilized American opinion and brought a united America into the war with full force. We had a few precious months to mobilize and back up England, which was fighting Germany virtually alone. We have already been warned that today America could be facing a nuclear Pearl Harbor on our homeland with dire consequences and with no time to mobilize. In Iran we also face an enemy with an ideology that sees a major war as anticipated fulfillment of a religious destiny. Such an enemy cannot be deterred by the prospects of massive casualties. Iran, in fact, has already so stated.

The Iranian regime, observing American weakness and lack of resolve, becomes emboldened and all the more provocative. We seem too eager for a deal to bribe the Iranians. We seem helpless in the face of widespread national humiliation by more and more countries. We may not realize just how much our superpower image has faded in the world but our adversaries are watching closely. In the 1930’s Hitler was emboldened by western weakness. Have we forgotten that lesson? For a superpower to appear irresolute in the face of Iranian provocations is to invite trouble.

We remain overly focused on the cost of a pre-emptive war against Iran while insufficiently focused on the dire consequences of doing too little, too late. President Bush has failed to tell Americans, in plain talk, just how vulnerable America is to a WMD attack and the dire consequences that would follow.

Our borders remain wide open and vulnerable to penetration by sleeper cells with nuclear, chemical and bacteriological weapons. Iran has also been working on an electromagnetic pulse weapon (EMP). A nuclear bomb detonated about 200 miles overhead would emit an electromagnetic energy pulse over a huge area that would burn out civilian electronic circuits below. America’s vital communications would be blinded and our economy would be paralyzed (Read here-http://www.washtimes.com/national/20051121-103434-8775r.htm ).

Iran’s existing missiles could be mounted on commercial cargo ships and moved two hundred miles off both of our shores in international waters. The missiles and the nuclear warheads need not be long range, nor accurate nor highly sophisticated, to do the job. Al-Qaeda is reported to have a fifteen-ship navy, which could be used for such a mission. In conjunction with such an EMP attack, terrorist sleeper cells could be activated inside the U.S. to attack population centers with any combination of their WMD. Such a combined attack would greatly multiply the damage by spreading panic and confusion. These scenarios have already been conceived of and warned about. We must assume that Iran and Al Qaeda are capable of planning and executing such a diabolical attack. It is necessary to comprehend the full extent of the danger we face in order to justify launching another pre-emptive war and bearing its costs.

We have been told of the difficulties of trying to take out Iran’s nuclear facilities. They are dispersed, buried deep underground in hardened sites and heavily defended. We can also anticipate a strong reaction from Syria, which has a military alliance with Iran, and from the Muslim world. Having waited too long, we now face a formidable adversary that had time to prepare.

To make the best of a bad situation we might consider the following as an example of a possible approach that would play out in stages. We must also act quickly to replace our image of weakness with one of resolute determination to take down Iran’s entire nuclear program, both civilian and military.

1. The President addresses America and the world. He cites the failed negotiations and the extreme danger in allowing Iran to go nuclear and proliferate WMD to Al-Qaeda, Hezbolla, Hamas, etc. Having exhausted all diplomatic options, America is now free to act unilaterally in its national interest and will do so. He declares that he will not shift our responsibility to Israel. He reminds us of President Kennedy’s warning that in the nuclear age we cannot afford to allow the other side to attack first. This address will inform Americans, mobilize public opinion, raise our morale and lower enemy morale.

2. Within hours of the President’s speech we detonate a nuclear weapon, without warning, high above Iran, beyond EMP range, to be widely seen in the Middle East and lighting up the night sky. We issue an ultimatum to the Iranian leadership: Dismantle your nuclear program now or face the consequences. The President orders emergency civil defense preparations including stringent fuel saving. We go on a partial war footing. Friend and foe alike must know we mean business. To European complaints about expected hikes in oil prices they should be told their long appeasement of Iran has helped cause this crisis. The Iranian people must be told that we will try to avoid civilian casualties and anything they can do now to topple their regime will receive support from us.

3. When Iran refuses to capitulate we employ successive EMP attacks to progressively disable their national infrastructure causing internal disorganization and chaos. We warn Iranian civilians to immediately evacuate certain places, which sit atop underground military installations. Any Iranian military response will be met by crushing retaliation.

4. Concerning their deep underground nuclear facilities; we should bomb all entrances to entomb both facilities and technical personnel. We avoid a bloody and costly ground war and take down the regime with an air war. The regime may still retain power but its nuclear threat will be neutralized and the regime will now have immense internal problems in caring for its 70 million people. Any attempt by them to reconstitute their military would be promptly attacked. Any country that attempts to aid them such as Syria, Saudi Arabia, or Egypt would receive the same treatment.

5. Along with Muslim rage would also come shock and then despair at the dashing of their hopes to finally conquer America and the West. It is futile to negotiate with enemies who are intractable in their determination to destroy the West. WWII showed that total defeat of an intractable enemy might be the only option left. Perhaps this limited exercise of force will cause our enemies to back off, at least for a long time to come, because our new tactics can now inflict severe punishment on them at low cost to ourselves. This will NOT become another Iraq. And Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia will now have to think twice about continuing to support the insurgency in Iraq.

6. We can expect oil prices to rise and remain high causing widespread economic hardship in oil-consuming countries including America, Europe, and China. This will require major adjustments in energy use to compensate. This will be a painful lesson but still much better than allowing ‘kooks with nukes’ to kill millions. This scenario is only an example of a possible approach. Hopefully, we have military planners who can come up with even better options. The nagging question is whether America as a nation still retains the will to do what is necessary to assure national security.


Please visit Rachel's web-site www.MiddleEastSolutions.com

###

Rachel Neuwirth, an internationally recognized, political commentator and analyst. She specializes in Middle Eastern Affairs with particular emphasis on Militant Islam and Israeli foreign policy. She has been published in prominent news papers of Europe, Asia and the US. She is frequently quoted by reputable Media. Conversant in Arabic and French.

rachterry@sbcglobal.net