Blustering and fuming, Iran seems to be spoiling for war.
The United States and Iran have treated each other with outright hostility for more than three decades now, ever since the mullahs captured the Iranian revolution in 1979 and then sent students to seize the American embassy. But never before has the relationship teetered so close to military conflict.
Even with the atmosphere freighted with bellicosity, the threats and hostile acts keep coming. On Sunday Iran issued a stark warning, saying neighboring Gulf states had better not sell oil to European states and others that impose embargoes on Iran. Ignoring that, on Monday Saudi Arabia announced it would do just that ― earning an angry rebuke from Tehran.
Particularly striking is that preposterous threat to close the Strait of Hormuz, which would penalize Iran more than anyplace else. All of its own commerce passes through the strait. Iran’s economy would collapse.
But that, more than anything else, set off the strident talk of war. The United States responded by saying, in essence: Don’t you dare. Bring it on! And Matthew Kroenig, a Defense Department official until last July, wrote a piece in Foreign Affairs magazine entitled: “Time to attack Iran: Why a strike is the least-bad option.”
I disagree. Any discussion of this question inevitably sets off fountains of explanation and prediction that support one side of the argument or another. But two thoughts convince me that an attack would be foolhardy.
First, the United States just pulled out of Iraq, a war that cost the U.S. dearly in lives, dollars ― and its standing in the world. America is still fighting another war in the region, one that was more justifiable when it was launched. But the plan to pull out from Afghanistan is well known. Another military action in the Middle East would do incalculable damage to America’s image, especially considering that all of Iran’s wanton retaliatory attacks would be blamed on the U.S. Most people would think: “Didn’t they know this would happen?”
Second, sanctions are working ― at last. Paradoxically, President Obama is facing Iran with more tenacity and resolve than former President George W. Bush ever did. Even Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran’s impetuous president, admits that. The latest sanctions are “the most extensive ever,” he hyperbolized, speaking to his parliament, “the heaviest economic onslaught on a nation in history.”
American officials are fanning out around the world, coaxing states to stop buying Iranian oil. And it’s working. In the last week, for example, Japan and South Korea, big importers, both have begun searching for new suppliers, prompting Iran’s threat. A powerful impetus for this is the new U.S. law that sanctions any country doing business with Iran’s central bank.
China, of course, is refusing to cooperate but has cut its Iranian oil imports nonetheless. Trying to take advantage of the turmoil, Beijing is suddenly demanding that Iran slash its oil prices. So far, Iran has refused.
All of this is wreaking havoc in Iran. The nation’s currency, the riel, is losing value so fast that businessmen are running to the bank to get dollars. Inflation is now believed to exceed 20 percent. Food prices have risen 40 percent. Iran’s economy is in a tailspin.
Journalists working in the country are reporting that a panicked population is suffering desperate hardship, while government officials are locked in self-absorbed squabbles and power-grabs.
I’m not one, like those fevered former Bush administration officials, who believes the nation is on the verge of regime change. But all of this seems to have focused the minds of Iran’s leaders.
Just a few days ago Tehran said it would finally permit a team from the United Nations nuclear agency to investigate Iran’s claim that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only. For more than three years Iran had refused to let those inspectors in ― raising even more suspicion. But Tehran suddenly relented and on Tuesday set the date for the visit: Jan. 29. How Iran treats that U.N. team will be a telling moment.
In fact, late January will be a crucial period in this long-running conflict. On Jan. 23, European Union ministers are expected to impose that oil embargo. Europe buys 20 percent of Iran’s oil. France has already announced it will buy no more oil, and French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe just said: “We want the Europeans to take a similar step” to “show our determination.”
With these two events looming only days ahead, we may finally have a chance to end this drama ― without war.
By Joel Brinkley
Joel Brinkley, a professor of journalism at Stanford University, is a Pulitzer Prize-winning former foreign correspondent for the New York Times. ― Ed.
(Tribune Media Services)
