The political news you missed over spring break
From Where I Sit
Bradley Hart |
UNLIKE THE STUDENTS here at Fresno State, politics and international affairs didn’t take a spring break last week.
In case you missed it, two interesting and potentially important events took place.
Late last week, a seventh high-ranking military officer publicly called for the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
The list of former officers calling for Rumsfeld’s removal now includes former Marine General Anthony Zinni, a critic of the War in Iraq, and former Supreme Allied Commander of Europe General Wesley Clark, who made an abortive run for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2004.
For his part, President Bush has said Rumsfeld will not be leaving his post, telling reporters, “I hear the voices, and I read the front page and I know the speculation. But I’m the decider and I decide what’s best.”
No matter who calls for Secretary Rumsfeld to resign, the President is highly unlikely to accept his resignation.
Rumsfeld has become the personification of the American war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan and his removal from office would send a clear message to the world that the president is trying to strike out on a new foreign policy course.
The decision to do that will almost certainly be made by this administration, which has up until recently been reluctant to even talk to its domestic political opponents, let alone its adversaries and wary allies in the rest of the world.
Meanwhile, another situation in the Middle East is developing that will almost certainly require President Bush and his political allies to open up further dialogue with its NATO and UN partners — or perhaps not, if a new article from investigative journalist Seymour Hersh is to be believed.
In the April 17 edition of the New Yorker magazine, Hersh wrote that the Bush administration is examining its military options against Iran, which recently announced that it has enriched uranium that could be used for a nuclear weapon.
Hersh’s article stated that in response to Iran’s apparent nuclear ambitions, the Bush administration is considering plans for a major air strike on Iranian facilities, including the possible use of tactical nuclear weapons.
Some of the Pentagon insiders anonymously quoted by Hersh expressed concerns about the plan, with one warning that bombing Iran could produce a chain reaction of attacks on American and allied targets by Iranian agents or sympathizers around the globe. Perhaps in an effort to give the military as many options as possible, President Bush said Tuesday that “all options are on the table” but added “we’ll continue to work diplomatically to get this problem solved.”
It’s highly unlikely that the United States would use nuclear weapons in any kind of first strike on any country. The political fallout from the use of an atomic weapon would be widespread, as would be radioactive fallout, which could possibly affect U.S. troops as far away as Afghanistan, depending on the wind.
A more plausible scenario is a series of U.S. and possibly Israeli air strikes on alleged nuclear facilities and military bunkers.
Yet the fallout from this action would be widespread as well, particularly if Israel is involved. The Pentagon insider’s prediction of widespread terrorist retaliation seems all too plausible.
Military action against Iran will benefit no one. The Bush Administration risks alienating allies that are currently working to diplomatically resolve the crisis if it strikes in the immediate future.
The Iranians surely know that they risk war if they rebuff these diplomatic overtures altogether, and there has been some reason for limited hope for negotiations in the past weeks.
It will be interesting in the coming weeks and months to see how the administration and its allies handle this potential crisis.
The President may be right to keep all his options on the table right now — but all Americans should hope that negotiations succeed, at least to the degree that tensions can be reduced, regardless of what technology and weapons Iran actually acquires.
Comment on this story in the Opinion forum >>
|
