Naturally, Ahmadinejad is the architect of disorder and unrest in Iraq. Iran wants Iraq, a nation with which it waged an eight year war (1980-88), in the Iranian sphere. Who wouldn't want a neighbor to the west with similar extremist Islamic leanings?
Since Washington has had no diplomatic relations with Iran since 1979, Washington is unable to talk directly to Ahmadinejad and his government. To do so now would only raise Ahmadinejad's prestige and give him a free "win" in the diplomatic shell game. Ahmadinejad knows this.
He knows he can keep pressing his advantage to the limit; the limit being an air strike or other hostile act by the United States. So Ahmadinejad defies the U.N., makes bombastic statements ("the Zionist state should be wiped from the map") and pursues his nuclear ambitions. He also funded and armed Hezbollah and other terror groups and stands behind and fosters the insurgents in Iraq.
The future of the Iraqi people, one would normally assume, lies totally in their own hands. But in this case, the future of the Iraqi people is in many hands indeed. The choices of the west are limited. An air strike or similar military action may seem to be an overreaction, especially among radical Islamic extremists. This may just incite more terrorism against the United States from some quarters. Economic sanctions might seem, to the Islamic extremists, like an Iranian victory. The sanctions might be seen as western near-impotence.
So the United States is on the proverbial horns of a dilemma. Or maybe Iran might be.
Mr. Carey is former president of International Defense Consultants, Inc. He first went to Iran in the 1970s.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
