“No country without an atomic bomb can properly call itself independent.” Ahmadinejad did not say that. Charles de Gaulle did!
If spoken by Ahmadinejad, those words would be a demagogic diatribe by an apocalyptic nutcase. But in the mouth of President de Gaulle, that viewpoint was an expression of geopolitical reality.
Back then (1954-1960), nuclear weapons were a national status symbol and
a path to international prestige. So, France acquired Nukes. That is also
substantially why Iran is hell bent on joining Club Nuke.
So, why does Iran want what it does not need? The answer involves a history lesson.
Iran was not always Iran. For centuries it was Persia. That is Iran’s glory. In fact, Persia may be the first truly significant empire in history. That may be arguable. But what is not subject to debate is that Persia’s celebrated Emperor, Cyrus, was the first person in history to be called “The Great.” That is of great significance to Iran.
Under Cyrus’ reign, the Persian empire stretched from India to Egypt and Greece. During Cyrus’ benevolent rule, disparate ethnicities and subject nations were permitted to conduct their own affairs and to practice their own customs and beliefs.
In addition, Cyrus bestowed upon the world its first charter of human rights. In recognition of his immense accomplishments, Cyrus is extolled as the Father of the Iranian nation. Cyrus-The-Great was and is the focal point of Iranian history and of Iran’s national psyche.
Not tangentially, Cyrus even emancipated the Jews of Persia. They had been brought there in 586 BCE by the Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar. He had conquered the Kingdom of Judah and deported its Jews. Cryus permitted the Jews to return to their homeland. In gratitude for his largesse, the Jews labeled Cyrus as “The Anointed Of The Lord.”
Cyrus’ towering greatness is illustrated by an anecdote concerning President Harry Truman. He was, not incidentally, the American President who ordered that an atomic bomb be detonated over Japan. President Truman also had the outlandish temerity –some call it Chutzpa- to formally recognize the existence of the State Of Israel.
Shortly after that momentous event, Truman is said to have been present at a party. A quarrelsome guest approached the President. The guest reproached Truman by questioning: “Who in the hell do you think you are recognizing Israel?” To which provocation Truman allegedly threw his hands skyward and haughtily exclaimed: “I am Cyrus!”
Ahmadinejad is no Cyrus. In actuality, nothing significant happens in Iran without the tacit imprimatur of its Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. But he too is no Cyrus. Both Ahmadinejad and Khamenei assuredly recognize that they are but existential blips in Iran’s long history dating back to Cyrus. And that’s the rub.
Ahmadinejad, Khamenei and Iranian nationalists clearly aspire to recapture the glory of Cyrus and the Persian Empire. That is not an evil. That is a goal to be applauded. That national aspiration could be as noble, as elegant and as inspirational as was Cyrus.
Regrettably, the path to regional hegemony pursued by contemporary Iran is perverted by its fixation on acquiring what it wants but does not need. Iran must now distance itself from the notion that a nation needs nukes to survive or to acquire eminence.
Twenty-first century Iran is not cold war era France which thought it needed nukes for prestige. But, is there a contemporary nation with significant international stature, extensive influence and hegemonic capacity that does not possess nukes? With the possible exception of Brazil, none exist. That is the conundrum facing Iran…and the world.
By virtue of its size, its geographic location, its resources, its demographics, its culture, its history and even its name, Iran believes –with abundant justification – that it deserves to be a regional power.
It is noteworthy that the name Iran derives from the Sanskrit term Arya.
In fact, Persians are the original Aryans. Arya means elevated, exalted
or noble. It denotes a patrician culture. It refers to the upper crust
of society. It implies ascendancy, preeminence and dominance.
The opposite of Aryan is Anaryan. A person so classified is deemed to
be a low-class, plebian peasant. Anaryan is arguably the opposite of everything Iranian. As such, Iranians habitually refer to Arabs as Anaryans.
Underneath the bluster and bellicosity, what Iran really wants is to
return to its Aryan origins. It aspires to be a noble, exalted and prestigious regional hegemon. That eminent status is implicit it its
name. Iran does not need nukes to achieve that goal.
But, considering the braggadocio & bravado about its growing nuclear prowess, Iran’s leaders should consider Margaret Thatcher’s trenchant aphorism: “Power is like being a lady... if you have to tell people you are, you aren't.”
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Dragon Breath And Bear Claws
What do bears and dragons have in common? Nothing. Well, not exactly. That’s only true if dragons are mythical animals. On the other hand, even if dragons are mythical, their contemporary manifestations are all too real.
Take a moment to think about bears and dragons. Real or mythical, they are dangerous. On the one hand, bears are not terribly subtle. They often seem clumsy. When agitated, they tend to maul anything that moves nearby. On the other hand, it is also never wise to antagonize a dragon. Dragons have bad breath. When stressed, they spew fire.
So, let’s talk bears and dragons. Does anyone remember the Russian Bear? Oh yes, it’s alive and well. It certainly was not hibernating while the Security Council was deliberating about Syria. When it came time to vote, the Russian Bear acted completely in character. It flat-out mauled the Security Council’s resolution with one swipe of its massive bear claw. How could even a casual observer not see that claw coming?
That said, is there any doubt about the rising reality of the Chinese Dragon? Of course not. In fact, the Chinese Dragon has a long standing pattern of passively prowling around while just watching and waiting to exhale fire. The Chinese expressly refer to that calculated behavior as Deng Xiaoping’s Twenty-four Character strategy.
Deng’s policy requires the Dragon to observe affairs calmly, to bide its time, to maintain a low profile and to never claim leadership. That is precisely how the Chinese Dragon conducted itself while the Security Council agonized about censuring Syria. Indeed, The Dragon was delighted to let the Russian Bear lead the veto and take considerable heat for opposing the proposed resolution.
In the aftermath of the Russian and Chinese vetoes, can anyone dispute the perilous reality of The Bear and The Dragon on prowl at the U.N.? Just ask, Susan Rice, the American Ambassador to the U.N. She literally fumed that the Russian Bear and the Chinese Dragon are absolutely “disgusting.” Did she expect something else from bear stench and dragon breath?
Ambassador Rice may not like dealing with The Bear and The Dragon. But she should have been wise enough not to even hope for their votes. Regrettably, the good Ambassador’s considerable pique suggests that she simply may not be sufficiently attuned to The Bear and The Dragon. Why else was she so viscerally upset when both Russia and China acted precisely as even a casual observer would have foreseen?
The Russian Bear has vested interests in Syria. It sells weapons to Syria. It does significant business with Syria. It has a budding naval base at Tartous, Syria. It has a long-standing relationship with Syria’s Alawite government. In fact, Russia has been aligned with Syria for decades. And not least of all, Russia does not have a reputation as a fickle friend. As such, The Bear’s veto was a foregone conclusion.
So, too was The Dragon’s veto. China has a long standing policy of strict non-intervention in the internal affairs of other nations. Even when The Dragon gives substantial aid to or invests big bucks in other countries, it expressly does so without conditions and without strings attached.
Ambassador Rice assuredly knows this about The Dragon. She surely knows that China refused to intervene with its client Sudan about the latter's unconscionable behavior in Darfur. She clearly knows that China was less-than-pleased with the West’s armed intervention that helped topple Qadaffi. Indeed, she knows that neither China nor Russia voted for the U.N. resolution upon which NATO relied to bomb Libya.
Maybe it’s simply that Ambassador Rice was too focused on toppling the al-Assad regime. Maybe she did not properly pause to appreciate precisely what the Russian Bear and the Chinese Dragon are really all about. Perhaps she was just peeved that The Bear and The Dragon screwed up her hard work to pressure Syria to alter its reprehensible behavior. Ms. Rice must have harbored fond hopes that this time The Bear and The Dragon would act conscionably. Wrong!
The problem is that the Russian Bear and the Chinese Dragon naturally comport themselves as do bears and dragons. That is precisely why they are known as The Russian Bear and The Chinese Dragon. Their behaviors do not arise out of concerned conscience. They do not pontificate. Their acts are not grounded in compassion. Their comportment is not calculated to empathize, moralize or democratize.
Quite the contrary. The Russian Bear and The Chinese Dragon are named for creatures consumed with self-interest and self-preservation. They –those animals, the Russians and the Chinese – customarily pursue their objectives ruthlessly and relentlessly.
That said, it is no wonder that the Russian Bear saw fit to bare its claws at the Security Council. It was not at all unexpected that the Chinese Dragon would consort with the Russian Bear to extrude its own considerable talons. Regrettably, the American Eagle’s wings were also summarily –if temporarily- clipped at last Saturday’s session of the U.N. Security Council.
What does that say about the American Eagle’s ability to effectively launch itself into more critical matters? Can and will The Eagle confront Iran’s drive to join Club Nuke?
Take a moment to think about bears and dragons. Real or mythical, they are dangerous. On the one hand, bears are not terribly subtle. They often seem clumsy. When agitated, they tend to maul anything that moves nearby. On the other hand, it is also never wise to antagonize a dragon. Dragons have bad breath. When stressed, they spew fire.
So, let’s talk bears and dragons. Does anyone remember the Russian Bear? Oh yes, it’s alive and well. It certainly was not hibernating while the Security Council was deliberating about Syria. When it came time to vote, the Russian Bear acted completely in character. It flat-out mauled the Security Council’s resolution with one swipe of its massive bear claw. How could even a casual observer not see that claw coming?
That said, is there any doubt about the rising reality of the Chinese Dragon? Of course not. In fact, the Chinese Dragon has a long standing pattern of passively prowling around while just watching and waiting to exhale fire. The Chinese expressly refer to that calculated behavior as Deng Xiaoping’s Twenty-four Character strategy.
Deng’s policy requires the Dragon to observe affairs calmly, to bide its time, to maintain a low profile and to never claim leadership. That is precisely how the Chinese Dragon conducted itself while the Security Council agonized about censuring Syria. Indeed, The Dragon was delighted to let the Russian Bear lead the veto and take considerable heat for opposing the proposed resolution.
In the aftermath of the Russian and Chinese vetoes, can anyone dispute the perilous reality of The Bear and The Dragon on prowl at the U.N.? Just ask, Susan Rice, the American Ambassador to the U.N. She literally fumed that the Russian Bear and the Chinese Dragon are absolutely “disgusting.” Did she expect something else from bear stench and dragon breath?
Ambassador Rice may not like dealing with The Bear and The Dragon. But she should have been wise enough not to even hope for their votes. Regrettably, the good Ambassador’s considerable pique suggests that she simply may not be sufficiently attuned to The Bear and The Dragon. Why else was she so viscerally upset when both Russia and China acted precisely as even a casual observer would have foreseen?
The Russian Bear has vested interests in Syria. It sells weapons to Syria. It does significant business with Syria. It has a budding naval base at Tartous, Syria. It has a long-standing relationship with Syria’s Alawite government. In fact, Russia has been aligned with Syria for decades. And not least of all, Russia does not have a reputation as a fickle friend. As such, The Bear’s veto was a foregone conclusion.
So, too was The Dragon’s veto. China has a long standing policy of strict non-intervention in the internal affairs of other nations. Even when The Dragon gives substantial aid to or invests big bucks in other countries, it expressly does so without conditions and without strings attached.
Ambassador Rice assuredly knows this about The Dragon. She surely knows that China refused to intervene with its client Sudan about the latter's unconscionable behavior in Darfur. She clearly knows that China was less-than-pleased with the West’s armed intervention that helped topple Qadaffi. Indeed, she knows that neither China nor Russia voted for the U.N. resolution upon which NATO relied to bomb Libya.
Maybe it’s simply that Ambassador Rice was too focused on toppling the al-Assad regime. Maybe she did not properly pause to appreciate precisely what the Russian Bear and the Chinese Dragon are really all about. Perhaps she was just peeved that The Bear and The Dragon screwed up her hard work to pressure Syria to alter its reprehensible behavior. Ms. Rice must have harbored fond hopes that this time The Bear and The Dragon would act conscionably. Wrong!
The problem is that the Russian Bear and the Chinese Dragon naturally comport themselves as do bears and dragons. That is precisely why they are known as The Russian Bear and The Chinese Dragon. Their behaviors do not arise out of concerned conscience. They do not pontificate. Their acts are not grounded in compassion. Their comportment is not calculated to empathize, moralize or democratize.
Quite the contrary. The Russian Bear and The Chinese Dragon are named for creatures consumed with self-interest and self-preservation. They –those animals, the Russians and the Chinese – customarily pursue their objectives ruthlessly and relentlessly.
That said, it is no wonder that the Russian Bear saw fit to bare its claws at the Security Council. It was not at all unexpected that the Chinese Dragon would consort with the Russian Bear to extrude its own considerable talons. Regrettably, the American Eagle’s wings were also summarily –if temporarily- clipped at last Saturday’s session of the U.N. Security Council.
What does that say about the American Eagle’s ability to effectively launch itself into more critical matters? Can and will The Eagle confront Iran’s drive to join Club Nuke?
Sunday, February 5, 2012
Whose Lunch Is The Dragon Eating?
China! Now that’s an economic, demographic and geopolitical mouthful. In fact, China is a much bigger now than it ever used to be. O.K., so China is not getting geographically larger, but it is growing in virtually every other respect.
But wait, the Chinese prefer to say that China is rising. That’s a semantic nicety. It’s an artful euphemism. It’s a diplomatically astute technique that cleverly deflects the world’s attention from the fact that China is expanding everywhere. The Chinese Dragon is desperately trying to satiate its prodigious appetite for resources. In short, the Chinese Dragon is eating the world’s lunch.
Now, let’s be crystal clear. The Chinese Dragon has a right to eat lunch. In fact, the self-interests of the Chinese Dragon do not differ dramatically from the self-preservation needs of the Russian Bear or the American Eagle. But with about nine times Russia’s population and four times the number of Americans, the Chinese Dragon needs a whole lot more to eat to keep it happy. And, that’s not necessarily a bad thing. But seeing the Chinese Dragon gobble up resources is not easy to watch. It’s a scenario that merits closer inspection.
Take a minute and consider the Burmese. You may remember them. They share a border with China. They now call their country Myanmar. Well, most everyone calls it Myanmar except its most famous citizen, Aung San Suu Kyi, who still calls it Burma.
Burma is rich in natural resources. Burma has the oil, gas, timber, minerals and water resources that the Dragon eyes with envy. So, the Dragon eagerly chose to construct the 3.6 billion dollar Myistone dam on Burma’s Irrawaddy River. China had also begun building oil and gas pipelines across the old Burma Road into China. That pipeline project costs 2.5 billion dollars. In the process, the Dragon will get oil, gas and hydro-electric resources while the Burmese will get cash. Sounds good, but not so fast.
The Burmese may be poor, but they are not dumb. The Myistone dam would have destroyed one of the world’s most bio-diverse hotspots. It would have displaced ten thousand Kachin tribesmen, submerged many of their unique cultural heritage sites and flooded the rain forest.
Amazingly, Burma's ruling junta (now cloaked in civilian garb) just nixed the whole dam project while it was being built. That ticked off the Chinese Dragon which will lose both its multi-billion dollar investment and the hydro-electricity that would have been generated, 90% of which was to be sent to China. But, as many Burmese fumed: “Dam be damned!”
So, what made the Burmese abruptly alter course and risk the ire of the Dragon? That’s easy. To paraphrase the Burmese: “We got tired of the Dragon trotting into our kitchen, eating our lunch and then leaving the rubbish.” That is certainly a simplification of what happened. But, to the Dragon’s chagrin, the Irrawaddy dam project is now on indefinite hold.
The oil/gas pipeline projects across Burma from the Andaman Sea into China are now also undergoing extensive scrutiny and reconsideration. The Dragon is anxiously watching those developments. Those oil/gas pipelines would save China 1,200 kilometers of transport across sea lanes through the Strait of Malacca. Those pipelines, once operational, would have mitigated China’s worrisome “Malacca dilemma.” The demise of the pipeline projects would be a significant and strategic loss to the Dragon. Can you feel hot Dragon breath?
The Mekong River is another case in point. It is another “resource” that the Dragon wants to drink. So, what’s going on with the Mekong? Well, for starters, the Mekong is not just a Vietnamese river. Quite the contrary, about half of the mighty Mekong flows through China where the Mekong is known as the Lancang River.
What’s the problem? The Mekong is Vietnam’s lifeblood. But the Mekong is now experiencing its lowest water level in fifty years. Less water means less fish. Less fish mean less fishermen. Less water also means less irrigation. Less irrigation yields less rice. Less water means less shrimp. Less fish, less shrimp and less rice mean less commerce. The Vietnamese are justifiably concerned. Enter the Dragon.
Back up in China on the Lancang River, the Dragon is watching the completion of the Xiowan dam. When completed this spring, it will be as tall as the Eiffel tower, i.e. about as tall as a 100 story skyscraper. The Xiowan Dam will create a lake that is 820 feet deep. More importantly, the dam will further deplete the amount of water flowing down the Mekong into Vietnam. Do you catch my drift: Less water less….
Not unexpectedly, the Dragon did not consult the Vietnamese Tiger about the dam’s ominous repercussions. In fact, the Dragon has repeatedly refused to enter into a single water-sharing agreement with any of the Dragon’s riparian neighbors. In fact, in its thirst for water resources, the Dragon has become the world’s most aggressive water hegemon. Still, the Dragon needs water to drink. That is elementary to the Dragon’s very survival.
And so it goes. The Dragon must drink and the Dragon must eat. Indeed, the Chinese Dragon has a prodigious thirst and a voracious appetite. That should leave the rest of the world wondering: Whose lunch will the Dragon eat next?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
