| Submit your comments on this article |
| Terror Networks |
| A Nuclear Test for Diplomacy |
| 2006-05-16 |
| By Henry A. Kissinger EFL The recent letter from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to President Bush needs to be considered on several levels. It can be treated as a ploy to obstruct U.N. Security Council deliberations on Iran's disregard of its obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty. This consideration, and the demagogic tone of the letter, merited its rejection by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. But the first direct approach by an Iranian leader to a U.S. president in more than 25 years may also have intentions beyond the tactical and propagandistic, and its demagoguery may be a way to get the radical part of the Iranian public used to dialogue with the United States. America's challenge is to define its own strategy and purposes regarding the most fateful issue confronting us today. The world is faced with the nightmarish prospect that nuclear weapons will become a standard part of national armament and wind up in terrorist hands. The negotiations on Korean and Iranian nuclear proliferation mark a watershed. A failed diplomacy would leave us with a choice between the use of force or a world where restraint has been eroded by the inability or unwillingness of countries that have the most to lose to restrain defiant fanatics. One need only imagine what would have happened had any of the terrorist attacks on New York, Washington, London, Madrid, Istanbul or Bali involved even the crudest nuclear weapon. These are the introductory paragraphs to a fairly thorough analysis by Kissinger about our negotiations with North Korea and Iran. The rest is at the link. |
| Posted by:ryuge |
| #6 Kissinger is a one trick pony who insists on seeing everything through his personal biases. Iran is NOT a normal political state. Statements like "... radical part of the Iranian public used to dialogue with the United States. " are an example of Kissinger trying to see this conflict through his "rational actors" paradigm. This isn't a rational enemy like the USSR this is a theocracy with a death cult mentality. Where is his analysis of the call to convert to Islam that is prescribed by Mo-ham-head as the precursor to war? This is a very blinkered European view and if it prevails will get us all killed or enslaved. |
| Posted by: AlanC 2006-05-16 15:07 |
| #5 Iran would make a nice solar cell. |
| Posted by: 3dc 2006-05-16 12:15 |
| #4 The world community doesn't want us involved in this, we arent in range of Iran, and if we are involved Russia and China will try to spoil the deal on purpose to screw us. Let the EUniks do what they want and give Israel the backup they need to handle this. |
| Posted by: bigjim-ky 2006-05-16 09:54 |
| #3 "The world is faced with the nightmarish prospect that nuclear weapons will become a standard part of national armament and wind up in terrorist hands." The reality is that its only a matter of time before this happens, although I prefer latter then sooner. |
| Posted by: Bernardz 2006-05-16 08:32 |
| #2 The issue before the nations involved is similar to what the world faced in 1938 and at the beginning of the Cold War: whether to overcome fears and hesitancy about undertaking the difficult path demanded by necessity. The failure of that test in 1938 produced a catastrophic war; the ability to master it in the immediate aftermath of World War II led to victory without war. Money quote, in my opinion. |
| Posted by: 11A5S 2006-05-16 07:42 |
| #1 Kissinger was wrong about a lot of things, but I still listen to him when he speaks. |
| Posted by: gromky 2006-05-16 03:54 |