Let's Make a Giant Omelet!! Or Not

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare

Memo
To: Robert Zoellick, Deputy Secretary of State
From: Jude Wanniski
Re: Negotiating With Iran

You know Bob that I thanked the Lord when Condoleezza picked you
to be her right-hand man at State. You really do believe in diplomacy,
not war. You are only one man in an administration otherwise dominated
by neo-cons who want to whip the whole world into shape in the President's
second term, while they still hold the whip hand. It will be even
more difficult for you now that Vice President Cheney — the mother
hen to the neo-cons — has persuaded the President to name John Bolton
the U.N. Ambassador. Anyone who has watched Bolton over the years
must suspect he is not even human; he is a Robot constructed by
the neo-cons to do their bidding, a Terminator programmed to stamp
out diplomatic initiatives whenever they come onto his scope and
ultimately designed to blow up the United Nations if the opportunity
presents itself. Dick Cheney seems like such a nice fellow, how
could he have done this? Well, the Veep has been known to quote
V.I. Lenin now and then: u201CYou can't make an omelet without breaking
eggs.u201D Bolton breaks them by the carload, before breakfast and all
day long.

Even as the Veep has the President stirring up trouble in Lebanon
and Syria, as if his hands aren't full in Iraq, he has now made
a move on the Iranian front that is vintage Perle & Wolfowitz. Our
European allies who are trying to work things out with Tehran, to
get an agreement whereby Iran can proceed with peaceful development
of nuclear power and not engage in nuclear weapon development. Now
I read in The New York Times today that u201Cwe,u201D the USA, have
agreed on how to proceed with the negotiations, offering Tehran
u201Cincentives.u201D As I read the
story,
it became perfectly clear that in exchange for the modest
incentives you folks are offering, Iran has to agree to strip naked
before the whole Islamic world + Israel, kiss the President's foot,
and sing the Star-Spangled Banner!

The pertinent sentence is this: u201CThe American incentives would go
into effect only if Iran agreed to halt the enrichment of uranium
permanently.”

Then we are reminded by the Times:

Iran
has voluntarily halted its enrichment activities while it is engaged
in negotiations with Britain, France and Germany. But its leaders
have repeatedly declared that it will never give up its right
to enrich uranium for what it insists are peaceful purposes. The
Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which Iran has ratified, gives
all signers the right to enrich uranium as long as the work is
peaceful, declared and fully monitored by the International Atomic
Energy Agency. The monitoring is intended to assure that a country
is only producing low-enriched uranium capable of fueling commercial
nuclear reactors, rather than high-enriched uranium for nuclear
weapons.

Iran’s
senior negotiator, Hassan Rowhani, told a conference in Tehran
last weekend that the country would never agree to a permanent
cessation of enrichment. But the senior American official involved
in the administration’s negotiations with Europe said that, after
some heated internal debate, “the Europeans are now with us in
the view that we could never monitor their enrichment
activity reliably enough” to ensure that Iran was not producing
bomb-grade uranium. Some European diplomats have argued that
point in recent weeks, saying that Iran cannot be prohibited from
enrichment while other signers of the treaty are permitted to
produce nuclear fuel. But the American official insisted
“that argument is now over.”

Now Bob, think
this over a minute. You took a course in logic in college and I've
learned over the years that you are a very logical fellow. So tell
me how it is that if Iran agrees to the strictest, most intrusive,
perpetual inspections of any suspected nuclear-sites, you can say
that we could never monitor their enrichment activity reliably
enough to ensure that Iran was not producing bomb-grade uranium?
Doesn't this mean that the Non-Proliferation Treaty is deader than
a doornail? Doesn't this mean we might as well Terminate the United
Nations and the International Atomic Energy Agency? You know that
Iran would never agree to such terms because you say u201Cthe argument
is over.u201D Which means Iran will walk away from the negotiations,
u201Cweu201D will then take the issue to the Security Council, and Russia
and China will flip us the bird, as we did in sending them Bolton.

Logic should tell you that the neo-cons are not interested in Iran's
nukes any more than they were interested in Saddam Hussein's. They
know neither Iran nor Iraq has them or a program to develop them
in the next several years. What they want to do is promote a civil
war in Iran. They want Regime Change!!! The whole aim and intent
is to provoke confrontation, no matter how much it costs u201Cin the
short run.u201D They want to remake the entire map of the Middle East,
and they believe chaos works in that direction. Over the last dozen
years, a million Iraqis have gone to their Reward because of this
game plan by the neo-cons. When Secretary Madeleine Albright was
asked on CBS if it was worth the lives of 500,000 Iraqi children
to die of malnutrition and disease because of sanctions requiring
Saddam Hussein to get rid of his weapons, when he already had, she
did not pause a moment. Absolutely, she said. After all, you cannot
make omelets without breaking eggs.

Bob, for goodness sakes, explain all this to Condi so she can explain
it to you know who in the White House. The whole world is counting
on you.

March
12, 2005

Jude
Wanniski [send him mail]
runs the financial/political advisory service Wanniski.com.

Jude
Wanniski Archives

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare
  • LRC Blog

  • LRC Podcasts