Fareed Zakaria Rocks My Face Off

...he's got a new column on the Iranian Nuclear Situation that's worth reading- and for what it's worth, I think he's got a fairly solid take on things. Military action would only strengthen the regime and there's no guarantee we could hit everything we need to. Engagement has been rebuffed by the Iranians several times, so that only leaves-- as Zakaria points out, tough containment.

This has actually come up in my American Foreign Policy class quite a bit. After all, who are we to say who has nuclear weapons and who can't? And why can Israel have nukes and Iran can't? Are we the ones who judge who's responsible enough to handle nukes?

All good questions- the problem, I think, is that in the post-Cold War era, the old doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction no longer holds true- because in the two potential nuclear hot spots on the globe, there's no parity between the conflicting parties. Consider India and Pakistan and Iran and Israel. Both India and Iran are bigger than Pakistan and Israel respectively. If you try and apply MAD to these potential conflicts, Pakistan and Israel get wiped off the map.

Back in the day, MAD worked because there was a rough sort of parity between the USA and the USSR. We could launch nukes at each, take out some launch sites and there was a good chance that something would be left standing (although not much) after all was said and done. India and Pakistan could launch all their nukes at each other and India would still have something left. Pakistan would be ash.

Same thing with Israel and Iran. Given the fact that Israeli foreign policy has been rooted in the one core principle of preserving the Jewish state no matter the costs, its easy to see why a nuclear Iran makes Tel Aviv very, very nervous. They could launch everything they had at Iran and still not wipe 'em out. Iran could do the same back to them and that'd be it. No more Israel.

The power imbalance between today's nuclear rivals necessitates a new security doctrine of some kind, but damned if I know what it could be. Every country has a right to self-defense and a right to exist- but how do you ensure sane and sensible behavior of your enemies if they can wipe you out and you can't do the same in return? Truly, it's the death of MAD.

Plus- if someone accidentally pressed a button during the Cold War, there was a decent chance someone could make a phone call and try and convince the other guy that it really was an accident. If someone in Islamabad or Tel Aviv presses the wrong button, no one's will know until after the dust is settling. (Plus, why are we freaking out about Iran maybe getting weapons. Pakistan is a totally basket case of a country and already has them. Little bit of a policy disconnect there, I think.)

However you slice and dice it, it's a tricky situation for the Obama Administration- and one that could turn into a truly EPIC FAIL if they're not careful.