IRAN: WHY DIPLOMACY WILL FAIL - THE SUNDAY COMMENTARY

First let me state that diplomacy by all means should be exhausted before any country goes to war. War in itself is a tragedy but a necessary evil that brings about results when all else fails. The problem between war and diplomacy is that some not only do not consider war tragic but have no distaste or fear of it. Ask any civilized soldier or commander whether military or civilian and they will agree that they hate war. They will also tell you that they realize that war is necessary because of those who do not have the same fear and respect for it. Diplomacy is always the best method but diplomacy many times does not achieve the needed result. There are those who also do not believe in diplomacy except as a means to delay and prepare for military conflict. Adolph Hitler was this type of , "diplomat, " Josef Stalin was also this type of , "diplomat, " and unfortunately the current regime in Iran is also this type of, "diplomat!" Since the 70's when the fanatical Islamic theocracy that controls Iran took power, the leadership has proven time and again that the only reason for diplomacy is to deceive other nations long enough so that Iran could achieve whatever goal that they were seeking. In the past the nations of the world have accepted this , "diplomatic, " method by Iran and Iran has used this type of deceptive diplomacy to develop a nuclear capability that now threatens the Middle East, Asia and Europe through missile strike capability and the United States and other more geographically western nations with the possibility of nuclear terrorism. Iran has a history of deception using diplomatic means to stretch the envelope long enough to fulfill whatever it desires. They have never under this regime been a nation that cooperated with other nations nor desired to be a part of peaceful nations of the world. They have been clear sponsors of Islamic terrorism and now look to expand their arsenal with nuclear capability. Some argue that Iran seeks this capability to allow defense from other nuclear powers in the region such as Israel and Russia. Yet whenever the rhetoric from Iran escalates defense is not in the vocabulary only the Islamic fanaticism to destroy Israel and the west which is what they have preached since the beginnings of this regime. Why then will diplomacy fail with Iran? First, they do not believe in it except as a deception and second, they do not fear military retaliation but actually desire it. Their arrogance causes a belief that they will be the ultimate victor because of the weakness of the west that does not follow their fanaticism. Additionally their desire is the destruction of those who do not believe as they do and that is where the danger lies. This fanatical attitude will not allow them to use nuclear capabilities as a deterrent as we and other nations do but as a means to attack and achieve their goal of destruction of the west and those in the their region who do not believe as they do.

There have been many historic examples compared to Iran but I believe the clearest example is the Soviet Union. Their communist fanaticism drove them to expansion and domination of their neighbors and a desire to conquer the world. Several bad political decision toward the end of WWII contributed to early Soviet expansionism especially in Europe because of the policy of different spheres of influence in post war Europe which gave the Soviets the means and ability to quickly expand. They just as Iran over the next several decades used diplomacy as a means to deceive the world and continue to press their communist fanaticism and expansion. Throughout what would become known as the Cold War the Soviets backed down from their fanatic militarism only twice. In 1962 when President Kennedy stood steadfast to their threats in Cuba and a nuclear confrontation. Kennedy's refusal to back down caused the Soviets to blink thus ending the Cuban Missile Crises. The second time was when President Reagan again refused despite world criticism to back down from the Soviets and called their diplomatic bluffs with a military expansion that eventually brought about the collapse of the, "Evil Empire."

The major difference between the Soviet Union and the fanatical Islamic regime in Iran is clear. The Soviets despite their fanaticism and expansionism feared military response to their actions. The world as a whole appeased this until Reagan called their bluff and brought about their defeat. Iran does not fear the strength of the United States nor any other nation of the world. Their fanatical arrogance unlike that of the Soviets does not fear but actually desires military retaliation which does not lead to a diplomatic solution nor a solution by any other peaceful means. Those who believe that Iran is seeking nuclear capability for energy purposes are deceiving themselves and thinking of Iran as a nation that desires peace. Those that believe that Iran is seeking nuclear capability only to defend itself from nuclear neighbors as a deterrent again are deceiving themselves. Iran does not believe that peace is an answer. They do not believe that strength is a means to deter an enemy. Rather they believe that any nation or people who do not believe as they do deserves only destruction if they do not become as Iran and fanatical Islam. The Soviets followed a political dogma that feared their destruction which in itself became a deterrent. Iran follows a religious dogma that arrogantly does not fear its destruction because of martyrdom and believes that they will be the destroyer ! Does the west and in particular the United States have the means to defeat this fanatical regime ? Absolutely ! The hope has always been that by supporting those in Iran who do not follow the Islamic fanaticism and seek a democratic Iran that a time would come that their desire for freedom would overcome the fanatics who rule the country. The problem now is that time for this is quickly running out and the military option is drawing closer. Many who know now believe that Iran is closer to nuclear capability that is conventionally thought. A report surfaced last week of Iran and nuclear facilities underground that are much further along than previously thought, ( http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/4/20/175353.shtml?s=et ). Should diplomacy continue ? By all means. Yet this situation is a powder gag waiting to blow and time is running out to act and unfortunately because of their history and their fanatic belief act through military strength is what the world will have to do.

Ken Taylor