Thursday, January 20th | 19 Shevat 5782

July 6, 2015 6:45 am

On Iran Nuclear Deal, Beware of ‘Peace in Our Time’ Promise

avatar by Yoram Ettinger

The Iranian nuclear program's heavy-water reactor at Arak. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.

The Iranian nuclear program’s heavy-water reactor at Arak. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.

National security and foreign policymakers should study a critical lesson from the medical profession: The failure to think beyond the stage one ‎effect of painkillers may solve short-term problems but will trigger long-‎term health risks: addiction, organ damage, nausea, headaches, ‎dizziness, memory impairment and decreased cognitive performance.‎

National security and foreign policymakers should also heed the ‎following observation by Thomas Sowell: “When most voters do not think ‎beyond stage one, many elected officials have no incentive to weigh ‎what the consequences will be in later stages. … These reactions would ‎lead to consequences much less desirable than those at stage one. … ‎Most thinking stops at stage one.”

Sowell argues that “basic economics ‎is generally misapplied because politicians think only in stage one — the ‎immediate result of an action, without determining what happens next. ‎Many politicians cannot see beyond stage one because they do not think ‎beyond the next election.” ‎

However, the track record of Western national security and foreign policy‎makers documents such shortsightedness: a tendency to sacrifice long-‎term considerations, complexity, principles and interests on the altar of ‎short-term, stage one convenience and oversimplification. They ignore ‎the glaring writing on the wall and lessons of the recent past. ‎

Related coverage

January 27, 2019 6:35 pm

Hezbollah Says Two Obstacles Remain for Lebanon Government

The leader of Lebanon's Iran-backed terrorist group Hezbollah said on Saturday that two obstacles remain before the formation of a...

The late chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Democratic ‎Senator Daniel Inouye, detected the shortsightedness and self-‎destructive conduct of Israeli and U.S. policymakers regarding the ‎Palestinian issue. He lamented his own participation — at the request of ‎then-President Bill Clinton — in the September 1993 Oslo ‎Accord signing ceremony: “While most participants rejoice the Rabin-Arafat handshake of ‎the moment, I fear that in the long run it could lead to a funeral ‎procession of the Jewish state.”‎

Contrary to Inouye, Israeli and U.S. policymakers did not weigh ‎the long-term consequences. Israel’s eagerness to conclude the Oslo ‎Accord with Palestinian leaders Mahmoud Abbas and Yasser Arafat was a stage one, short-lived ‎pain reliever. As predicted by Inouye, the snappy stage one was ‎succeeded by a second stage and long-term national security ‎predicaments: “organ damage” (unprecedented Palestinian non‎compliance, hate education and terrorism), “headaches” (intensified ‎international pressure), “dizziness” (eroded posture of deterrence), ‎‎”memory impairment, nausea and decreased cognitive performance” ‎‎(addiction to further sweeping concessions, to the Palestine Liberation Organization and Syria, by ‎Prime Ministers Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, Ehud Barak, Ariel Sharon, Ehud Olmert and Benjamin Netanyahu, as ‎well as U.S. Presidents Clinton and Barack Obama), recklessly ignoring the ‎thundering Palestinian mission statement, featured prominently in Abbas’ school textbooks, mosques and media: It’s the ‎existence — not the size — of Israel! ‎

“Peace in our time” — and not thinking beyond stage one — has channeled ‎U.S. zeal into making a deal with the ayatollahs. ‎

U.S. policymakers assume that a nuclear Iran would act rationally and ‎could be contained. They believe that a constructive agreement can ‎be achieved at stage one without a dramatic, long-term transformation of ‎the nature of the ayatollahs. They underestimate the deep roots of the ‎overtly anti-U.S., apocalyptic, terrorist, subversive, expansionist, ‎supremacist, repressive, deceitful and noncompliant ‎nature of the ayatollah regime. ‎

Therefore, they assume that just like the USSR, a nuclear Iran would be ‎deterred by mutual assured destruction. However, unlike the ‎USSR, the ayatollahs are driven by martyrdom and apocalypse. They are ‎enticed — not deterred — by MAD. A conventional Iran is controllable, but ‎a threshold Iran would be chaotically uncontrollable. ‎

U.S. policymakers focus on a stage one agreement with the ayatollahs, ‎overlooking the staggering second stage cost to vital U.S. interests of the U.S., ‎thereby playing directly into the hands of the ayatollahs. The cost to the U.S. is ‎spelled out in the heinous anti-U.S. ‎writing, in bold, 40-point letters, written on the Ayatollah Wall, which was erected in 1979. It is reflected ‎by the ayatollahs’ track record, domestically, regionally and globally, ‎including Death to America Day, observed annually on November 4 and featuring the ‎burning of U.S. flags and photographs of U.S. presidents. ‎

Stage-one-thinking policymaking could yield an uplifting ceremony in ‎Lausanne. However, the succeeding stages would transform the ‎ayatollahs into a threshold nuclear power, compounding the existing lethal ‎threats to global sanity and paving the road to nuclear war.

This article was originally published by Israel Hayom. 

Share this Story: Share On Facebook Share On Twitter

Let your voice be heard!

Join the Algemeiner

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.