Nation-Building

It seems that every year, there's a breathless report that Iran is a year ortwo away from having nuclear weapons. Once again : Two of the nation's top military officials said Wednesday that Iran could produce bomb-grade fuel for at least one nuclear weapon within a year, but would most likely need two to five years to manufacture a workable atomic bomb. The time frame ... was roughly in line with the finding of a 2007 National Intelligence Estimate . That document, which is about to be updated, said that Iran would probably be able to produce a nuclear weapon between 2010 and 2015, while cautioning that there was no evidence that the Iranian government had decided to do so. (...) The generals offered a number of significant caveats about their assessment of Iran's capabilities. When asked, for example, how long it would take Iran to convert its current supplies of low-enriched uranium into bomb-grade material, General Burgess said, "The general consensus - not knowing ...

In March 2002, Joe Biden gave the following speech to the American-Iranian Council, outlining a five-point plan for Iran policy . Given Biden's new role as Vice President-elect, I think (and hope) that these remarks provide a preview of the policy the Obama Administration will pursue towards Iran. Remarks by Joseph R. Biden, Jr. "Prospects for Progress: America and Iran After 9-11" It is an honor to be invited to speak before such a distinguished gathering. The number of accomplished individuals in the audience today is a testament to the extraordinary achievements of the thriving Iranian-American community. You have enriched the United States with your many talents, and your cultural traditions have strengthened the diversity of our country. You also have a critical role to play in serving as a bridge between Iran and the United States. Today, I would like to share with you my views on United States policy toward Iran and the kind of relationship I believe Ira...

At RedState, Pejman takes Andrew Sullivan to task for an assertion that McCain would withdraw troops from Iraq. I am not defending Andrew's assertion (if anything, the opposite seems more likely, that Obama will not withdaw from Iraq, nor would any Democratic president ). However, Pejman makes the following statement in the course of his argument: al Qaeda will consolidate itself in an anarchic Iraq and use it as a staging ground for the next terrifying attack on the United States and on American interests--think Afghanistan in the run-up to 9/11 is simply misinformed. No one who reads Michael Yon or Michael Totten on a regular basis will believe that Al Qaeda will ever be able to reconstitute itself in Iraq, not with the infrastructure (weak and fledgling though it remains at present) of the Iraqi forces and the tribes. Whatever leverage AQ-Iraq had in the past has been squandered and they are hated fiercely. Afghanistan is another matter, and there is where the true danger of...

Scott MacLeod at TIME's middle-east blog reports on how former Iranian President Mohammed Khatami is upping the ante in critique of current president Ahmadinejad, on both fiscal policy as well as democratic freedom: Speaking to students at Tehran University on Student Day in Iran, where protesters recently called Ahmadinejad a "dictator," Khatami delivered backhanded criticism on various international and domestic issues, like presidential provocations that have increased international pressure on Iran and the jailing of Iranian students. Interestingly, Khatami also issued a frontal attack on Ahmadinejad's Robin Hood economic policies, suggesting they were designed to win popularity but in fact were ill-conceived, could wreck the economy and therefore are harmful to the poorer classes Ahmadinejad claims to champion. "It is this kind of 'justice' that which makes the concept null and void of all essence," he said. "It is this 'justice' w...

Robert Kagan is no tranzi progressive moonbat leftist. Unlike the Podhoretz/Kristol/etc pundit tribe, he's always been an intellectually honest and genuinely thouhgtful policy wonk first and foremost. That he largely stands on the opposite side of the foreign policy debate from my opinions is in my opinion a very good thing. He's been wrong before, but always in a way I can respect. So it's hardly a surprise that Kagan steps up to the plate with respect to Iran and pronounces diplomacy as the only available option remaining to the Bush Administration: Regardless of what one thinks about the National Intelligence Estimate's conclusion that Iran stopped its nuclear weapons program in 2003 -- and there is much to question in the report -- its practical effects are indisputable. The Bush administration cannot take military action against Iran during its remaining time in office, or credibly threaten to do so, unless it is in response to an extremely provocative Iranian act...

I suppose it is somewhat old news by now, but the consensus of all our intelligence agencies is that Iran is not actively pursuing a nuclear weapons program . I'm not interested in the domestic political dimension as to what this means for the Bush Administrations rhetoric on Iran. What interests me more is the geopolitical issue of what this means for actual policy regarding Iran. Some of the better analysis on the issue from the VSP follows: Michael Rubin raises some questions about the implications of the NIE. A USA Today editorial points out three good implications of the NIE. Michael Cohen of Democracy Arsenal puts the NIE in perspective . Abu Aardvark points out that Iran is pursuing economic and diplmatic ties with its Sunni Arab neighbors. all in all, though, the position that Iran is a rational actor, and not an imminent existential nuclear threat to Israel let alone the United States, has been thoroughly vindicated by the NIE.

The Economist reveals that the Ayatollah apocalyptic quote that Norman Podhoretz is throwing around doesn't actually seem to exist . Norman Podhoretz, when pressed for a source, says it was Amir Taheri . And that the quote was from 1980. And that the dog ate the quote in subsequent compilations of the Ayatollah's speeches. thus spake the Tool: The quote, along with many other passages, disappeared from several subsequent editions as the Islamic Republic tried to mobilize nationalistic feelings against Iraq, which had invaded Iran in 1980. The practice of editing and even censoring Khomeini to suit the circumstances is widely known by Iranian scholars. This is how Professor Ahmad Karimi-Hakkak, the Director of the Center for Persian Studies at the University of Maryland and a specialist in Islamic censorship, states the problem: “Khumayni’s [sic] speeches are regularly published in fresh editions wherein new selections are made, certain references deleted, and various a...