Somebody has awaken

It seems that the "International community" is finally waking up a little and is maybe even willing to face reality: that Iran has been keeping mucking around with the Western World and was playing for time ever since the beginning. Iran will never voluntarily stop its course towards nuclear military capabilities. The case is - hopefully - going to be referred to the U.N. Security Council which could be a bit more united than it was back in the beginning of 2003. It is time now for the U.N. Security Council to deal with the case. What has to happen is a very clear request towards Iran to immediately and fully freeze its activities and to co-operate unconditionally (which Iran won't of course). A way has to be found to put a very strict regime of efficient and isolating sanctions in place. It is now time and opportunity to recognize and to prepare for the very likely eventuality of a military conflict. From the beginning this seemed inevitable to many (me as well). When you have such a mad regime engaged in a race for nuclear armement you only have very few options. Hope or tolerance are however not part of it. A voluntary renouncement by Iran is not realistic. 2006 will show whether the U.N. Security Council is able to assume its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. This is the prototype case of a threat to World peace. Former "moderate" Iranian president Ali Akbar Hashemi "Hitler-did-only-kill-20'000-jews" Rafsanjani did of course not forget to threaten the, as he perfectly knows, scary and weak Europeans and told them "not to do anything they would regret later"... This enigmatic talk reminds me of the famous speech Rafsanjani delivered in 2001: If one day, the Islamic world is also equipped with weapons like those that Israel possesses now, then the imperialists' strategy will reach a standstill because the use of even one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy everything. However, it will only harm the Islamic world. It is not irrational to contemplate such an eventuality. Somehow I am glad that Ahmadinejad has been elected president. Having this mad guy not even trying to hide Iran's real intentions has proven salutary in a way. I do not believe that another Iranian president would have de facto behaved very differently. After all, it's not Ahmadinejad who started the nuclear programm. But his spooky fantasies have forced the West to take the case seriously. I only hope that the responsible nations will now not shy away and desperately try to get back to normal... UPDATE I (12.01.2006, 00:45): Breaking news via Vital Perspective: (Reuters) Emergency IAEA meeting on Iran and referral to the Security Council expected within two weeks. UPDATE II (12.01.2006, 01:10): Found on two ladies' blogs: Alexandra asks herself whether Israel has convinced Washington. Atlas has an intersting analysis on why diplomacy with Iran had to fail. Excerpt: The attempt to conciliate Iran has further inflamed the boldness of Iran's mullahs. What it has taught them is that the West lacks the intellectual self-confidence to name its enemies and deal with them accordingly. It has vindicated the mullahs' view that their religious worldview can bring a scientific, technologically advanced West to its knees. Whether or not negotiations yield a deal, "diplomacy" abets Iran. The deal would have sustained Iran's economy, propped up its dictatorial government and perpetuated its terrorist war against the West. But even without a deal, simply by prolonging "negotiations," Iran grows stronger because it gains time to continue covert nuclear-weapons research. This approach of diplomacy-with-anyone-at-any-cost necessarily results in nourishing one's enemy and sharpening its fangs. That is what happened under a 1994 deal with communist North Korea. After endless negotiations and offers of aid, North Korea promised not to develop nuclear weapons. When the North was caught cheating on its pledge, the West pursued yet more negotiations, and the North eventually promised anew to end its nuclear program. In February 2005 North Korea declared (plausibly) that it had succeeded in building nuclear weapons. Another, older, attempt to negotiate with an avowed enemy was a cataclysmic failure. In 1938 [in Munich -ed.] the Europeans pretended that Hitler's intentions were not really hostile, and insisted that "peace in our time" could be brokered diplomatically (by letting him take Czechoslovakia [not really, they "only" gave him the Sudetes -ed.]). The negotiations afforded him time to build his military machine and emboldened him to launch World War II. Ignoring the lessons of history, the Europeans embarked on negotiations with Iran that likewise sought the reckless pretence of peace today, at the cost of unleashing catastrophic dangers tomorrow. english / Mideast