Obama and Iran

Mr. Obama, our President-Can't-Be-Waiting, will soon pronounce a Message to the Muslims. Maybe from Jerusalem -- who knows? Or Damascus. Both places with a certain historical resonance.

The last person who tried a global address, acting as messenger for the Messenger of Allah, was Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. A-jad wrote letters to world leaders, telling them to convert to Islam pronto, or face the wrath of Iran's jihadi warriors. The West didn't even get it. Westerners just don't have the historical framework, and live so much in the present that the idea of an Iranian ruler imitating Mohammed's letter to the emperors of his time, before destroying them, does not even occur to them. So A'jad's hand-written missive to the Infidels was a wasted effort, except to the Faithful, who applauded and looked for the next Mumbai

What will inevitably happen when Barack Obama, the One, addresses the Muslim world? Ahmadinejad will turn it against him. He represents a rather more ancient global imperialism than Mr. Obama's. He will tell him that he, too, represents a great desire for world peace -- with certain conditions, natch. The only way for Obamanism to become the One, True Way for the World is to adopt Ahmadinejad's version of Islam -- or suffer the consequences. It's Islam or the Sword, baby.  

I don't know if Obama will turn to the Pope next, or maybe the Patriarch of Moscow, but they will give him a more peaceful version of the same reply. Socialism is not exactly the first world-conquering imperial enterprise in human history.

The real trouble is that A'jad will soon back up his answer with a Bomb

Obama appears to think he has just the right response to that, reportedly, by promising to retaliate against any nuclear aggression against Israel, the Saudis and our other Arab allies. It's the "nuclear umbrella" from the Cold War.

There are two things wrong with that idea. One is that a verbal promise means nothing in the face of nuclear annihilation. So nobody will believe Mr. Obama's promise. He does not have a record of keeping his word, after all.

If the United States gets more serious, and tries to include Middle Eastern countries into the formal treaty structure of NATO, the Europeans will run scared -- just as the Germans just ran scared from the idea that NATO should include Georgia and Ukraine. Europe has once again turned its fat backside on small, threatened nations in the face of Putinism, another imperialistic thrust Mr. Obama hasn't reckoned on. 

The only possibility therefore is an entirely new NATO for the Middle East -- a Middle East Treaty Organization. We have previously argued for that, because it gives the weight and predictability of a multi-national treaty to the endless instability of the Middle East. It has its uses. However, for the Saudis and Egyptians to join Israel in a joint defense treaty will take years of delicate negotiations. Including major Israeli concessions of territory and security. Don't expect it by the time Iran explodes its first bomb.

But there is a second problem with an American promise of nuclear deterrence. The Iranians are a martyrdom creed, or at least they acted that way in their last big war against Saddam Hussein. They've been chanting it every day, ever since Jimmy Carter and Zbig Brzezinski were suckered into letting Ayatollah Khomeini overthrow the Shah in 1979. That was the beginning of all our current nuclear troubles in the ME. If Ahmadinejad is a martyrdom fanatic, he will not be deterred even by the threat of nuclear retaliation. (Not that he will attack directly, you understand. No, he will act like Pakistan, and sponsor deniable terrorism against his enemies, safe in the knowledge that no sane nation will strike back at a nuclear power. The level of terrorism will go up and up and up until he has his enemies where he wants them.) 

And that brings everything back to an effective anti-missile defense, the most important national security achievement of the Bush Administration -- that's the administration the media are pretending doesn't exist anymore. 

Bottom line -- if Obama wants his Nobel Peace Prize he will have to follow in the footsteps of Harry S Truman and George W. Bush. We need a Middle East Treaty Organization that is not dependent on NATO and the Europeans; and we need effective missile defense, which is rapidly turning into a laser-operated space-based system, mocked as "Star Wars" by the Left ever since it was proposed by one Ronald Reagan.

Of course Mr. Obama doesn't have to follow Ronald Reagan's example. But in that case the Chinese, the Russians, Indians, Iranians, and Israelis will get there first.

Reality does get the last word in these things.
Mr. Obama, our President-Can't-Be-Waiting, will soon pronounce a Message to the Muslims. Maybe from Jerusalem -- who knows? Or Damascus. Both places with a certain historical resonance.

The last person who tried a global address, acting as messenger for the Messenger of Allah, was Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. A-jad wrote letters to world leaders, telling them to convert to Islam pronto, or face the wrath of Iran's jihadi warriors. The West didn't even get it. Westerners just don't have the historical framework, and live so much in the present that the idea of an Iranian ruler imitating Mohammed's letter to the emperors of his time, before destroying them, does not even occur to them. So A'jad's hand-written missive to the Infidels was a wasted effort, except to the Faithful, who applauded and looked for the next Mumbai

What will inevitably happen when Barack Obama, the One, addresses the Muslim world? Ahmadinejad will turn it against him. He represents a rather more ancient global imperialism than Mr. Obama's. He will tell him that he, too, represents a great desire for world peace -- with certain conditions, natch. The only way for Obamanism to become the One, True Way for the World is to adopt Ahmadinejad's version of Islam -- or suffer the consequences. It's Islam or the Sword, baby.  

I don't know if Obama will turn to the Pope next, or maybe the Patriarch of Moscow, but they will give him a more peaceful version of the same reply. Socialism is not exactly the first world-conquering imperial enterprise in human history.

The real trouble is that A'jad will soon back up his answer with a Bomb

Obama appears to think he has just the right response to that, reportedly, by promising to retaliate against any nuclear aggression against Israel, the Saudis and our other Arab allies. It's the "nuclear umbrella" from the Cold War.

There are two things wrong with that idea. One is that a verbal promise means nothing in the face of nuclear annihilation. So nobody will believe Mr. Obama's promise. He does not have a record of keeping his word, after all.

If the United States gets more serious, and tries to include Middle Eastern countries into the formal treaty structure of NATO, the Europeans will run scared -- just as the Germans just ran scared from the idea that NATO should include Georgia and Ukraine. Europe has once again turned its fat backside on small, threatened nations in the face of Putinism, another imperialistic thrust Mr. Obama hasn't reckoned on. 

The only possibility therefore is an entirely new NATO for the Middle East -- a Middle East Treaty Organization. We have previously argued for that, because it gives the weight and predictability of a multi-national treaty to the endless instability of the Middle East. It has its uses. However, for the Saudis and Egyptians to join Israel in a joint defense treaty will take years of delicate negotiations. Including major Israeli concessions of territory and security. Don't expect it by the time Iran explodes its first bomb.

But there is a second problem with an American promise of nuclear deterrence. The Iranians are a martyrdom creed, or at least they acted that way in their last big war against Saddam Hussein. They've been chanting it every day, ever since Jimmy Carter and Zbig Brzezinski were suckered into letting Ayatollah Khomeini overthrow the Shah in 1979. That was the beginning of all our current nuclear troubles in the ME. If Ahmadinejad is a martyrdom fanatic, he will not be deterred even by the threat of nuclear retaliation. (Not that he will attack directly, you understand. No, he will act like Pakistan, and sponsor deniable terrorism against his enemies, safe in the knowledge that no sane nation will strike back at a nuclear power. The level of terrorism will go up and up and up until he has his enemies where he wants them.) 

And that brings everything back to an effective anti-missile defense, the most important national security achievement of the Bush Administration -- that's the administration the media are pretending doesn't exist anymore. 

Bottom line -- if Obama wants his Nobel Peace Prize he will have to follow in the footsteps of Harry S Truman and George W. Bush. We need a Middle East Treaty Organization that is not dependent on NATO and the Europeans; and we need effective missile defense, which is rapidly turning into a laser-operated space-based system, mocked as "Star Wars" by the Left ever since it was proposed by one Ronald Reagan.

Of course Mr. Obama doesn't have to follow Ronald Reagan's example. But in that case the Chinese, the Russians, Indians, Iranians, and Israelis will get there first.

Reality does get the last word in these things.