Ahmadinejad: Tyrannical Israel 'Will be Destroyed'
Before departing Jankarta after talks with the Indonesian president, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took more verbal shots at both Israel and the United States, defiant and rightfully fearless toward the unlikely possibility of UN Security Council sanctions.
Ahmadinejad called Israel, the region’s only fully functional democracy, “a tyrannical regime “that will one day will be destroyed.” With regards to the international conflict over Iran’s ’peaceful nuclear program’, he said within the same conversation that “There are no limits to our dialogue. But if someone points an arm (a weapon) at your face and says you must speak, will you do that?”
Yesterday, however, the Iranian president went out of his way to define the limits of Iran’s dialogue, declaring that Iran would not back down. In three years of talks with the EU-3, the UN and Russia, Iran has talked at length but negotiated little. There indeed may be no end to Iran’s dialogue, but its clandestine nuclear program has proven to be, without doubt, non-negotiable. As far as any negotiations with the United States are concerned, the defiant Ahmadinejad suggested that America first lose its “bad attitude.”
Ahmadinejad has reason to be confident, as it has been evident since the beginning of the process that Iran has little to fear from the UN Security Council with partners China and Russia shielding the regime from any hint of sanctions from the international body. That protection from Iran’s partners doomed any efforts to reach a binding UN resolution compelling Iran to abide by IAEA directions and requests, including halting its enrichment program. Yet, ironically, in a move hailed by IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei himself, the failure to deliver any enforcement mechanism behind the IAEA’s own efforts resulted in what is being called the “carrot and stick” plan, driven principally by the EU-3 nations of Britain, Germany and France.
Said ElBaradei, “The only solution to the Iran situation is a comprehensive package through dialogue, through negotiation.” He added further, “It is very good that the Security Council holds its horses.” But is it? His IAEA has absolutely no enforcement capabilities without those horses galloping at the Iranian gates. Stabling them reduces his inspection regime and requests to comical fodder for the Iranian regime. Yet, he cheers his organization’s own weakening? Recall that Iran broke the IAEA seals at the Natanz facility and removed the cameras with IAEA inspectors observing helplessly. Enrichment continues today.
The “carrot and stick” plan is an attempt to communicate to Iran options, including economic and security reward for good behavior as well as consequences for continued belligerence.
But the ‘carrot’ alternative to an enforceable UN resolution cannot be discussed without noting that the EU-3 made extensive economic offers in the form of highly favorable trade agreements in 2004. Iran rejected them then and will reject them now. Their nuclear program is seen as a manifest destiny and simply is not for sale and non-negotiable.
Further, the ‘stick’ has already been laughed at, and for good reason. Both China and Russia have proven to be steadfast and reliable partners in Iran’s management of the nuclear crisis, fueled as much by their common opposition to American endeavors as their lucrative oil, defense and technology trade relationships with the mullah regime.
So when Ahmadinejad declares that Iran is “open to talks,” the world can rest assured that Iran knows the precise limitations of any such talks – limitations comfortably within the scope of Iran’s interests and the preservation of their clandestine nuclear weapons program with a little help from their friends.
The world might well prepare itself for one of two impending realities. One potential reality is a pre-emptive strike from Israel, more concerned for its own survival than global consensus. The other is a nuclear-armed state sponsor of terrorism and all of the fallout that would result.
The UN is paralyzed without consensus – a consensus that will never materialize among the Security Council Permanent Five – reducing the IAEA to dismissible status.
The EU lacks the courage to confront Iran and America currently lacks the political will.
That will leave Israel to defend itself against a nuclear armed nation that routinely publicly announces its destruction in pursuit of a religiously inspired ‘manifest destiny’. The world may think of an attack on Israel as a tragedy. Israel thinks of it as death. Israelis do not refer to Israel in the third person.
Dark days appear to lie ahead if the current course remains unaltered.