Sunday, April 16, 2006

Britain's Blair makes it official...he won't back a US strike on Iran



According to the Scotsman's online edition, British PM Tony Blair told George Bush that Britain cannot offer military support to any strike on Iran, regardless of whether the move wins the backing of the so-called ` international community'.

It's always important to remember that Blair is a member of Britain's Left leaning Labour party..which aside from its `peace at any price' crowd depends in part on Muslim votes. So even if he personally is on the way out, he still needs to take the Labour rank and file into consideration. This is a replay of the same political stagnation that caused a 15 month runup to the Iraq war, when Blair begged Bush to get a second UN resolution that was impossible to obtain, given who was making money off the Oil for Food plan.

That delay gave Saddam Hussein plenty of time to hide or dispose of any questionable little items he had ( most likely to Syria) and plan a bloody insurgency in Iraq.

According to what the article refers to as `Foreign Office sources' Blair has expressed to Bush `the limits of his support' for any action against Iran.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is calling on the UN to consider new sanctions against Tehran when the Security Council meets next week to discuss Iran's blatant disregard for the UN's previous motion, which called for Iran to end Uranium enrichment by April 28th.How well that worked can be gauged by what happened to El Baradi in Iran.

The day before, Ahmadinejad took off to Kashmar, Iran's northeastern province and home to some of its nuclear facilities. He gave a real firesnorter of a speech, in whuch he said, according to Iran's official IRNA news agency :

"Our answer to those who are angry about Iran obtaining the full nuclear cycle is one phrase: Be angry and die of this anger."

Rather than meeting with Ahmadinejad who was busy orating and was out of town, ElBaradei was reduced to meeting with Ali Larijani, Iran's top nuclear negotiator..the guy who put out an interview on how he had `fooled the West.'

Not suprisingly, Larijani characterized El Baradi's proposals as `nothing of much importance.'

Hmmm.

In light of all this, Blair is expected to support the call for a "Chapter 7" resolution, which is supposed to effectively isolate Iran from the international community.

Bolshoi.

Especially since Russia and China have already said that they wouldn't support or abide by sanctions.And Iran has all that lovely oil and gas to sell.

And somehow I don't think the Bush Administration could ever have counted on` our loyal allies in the War on Terror' in the UAE impounding the $300-$400 million the Mullahs have salted away in Dubai.

For her part Secretary Rice is talking to America's allies as much as Iran when she claims that the Security Council's handling of the Iranian nuclear issue is a test of the international community's credibility. "If the UN Security Council says: 'You must do these things and we'll assess in 30 days,' and Iran has not only not done those things, but has taken steps that are exactly the opposite of those that are demanded, then the Security Council is going to have to act."

Don't count on it Condi.

The buzz on `sanctions' and `isolation' has centered around a new keyword..Libya.
Among other sources,Tony Blair's favorite think tank The Foreign Policy Centre (FPC), plans to publish a report next week on this very subject.And ex-Iran hostage Barry Rosen weighed in writing in the Daily News. `Hey, Iran is just like Libya...some isolation, some tough love and they'll eventually come around.'

There are some problems with the `Iran as Libya' comparison. For starters, Libya's quiessence was not brought about by international cooperation. It happened after Reagan bombed them in retaliation for terrorist attacks (which gave Qadaffi a few second thoughts about taking on America) and after Qadaffi saw Saddam Hussein dragged out of a hidey hole by US troops and hustled off to prison. And Libya was never as defiant, as wealthy or as far along in its military and nukes program as Iran is.

We're approaching a time of decision on Iran. I hope the West is up to the challenge.

2 comments:

Big Al said...

Sadly, it appears, the west isn’t up to much of anything when it comes to the Islamic states nowadays. From cartoons to nukes, it looks like Europe just wants to put its head in the sand. Hopefully, Bush, will leave office and give us a lasting legacy by giving the bully Iran the kick in the crotch they need.

Freedom Fighter said...

Oh, I remain a bit more optomistic, Max.

Europe will either fight a civil war or end up as Eurabia, and I have a feeling that certain parts of Europe would rather fight than swith, if you get my drift.

I share your hope about President Bush, and hope he does what's necessary..but for it to have maximux effect, I hope he does something about Iran a long time before he leaves office!

More on this later.