BMOC* or One Trick Pony?
*Big Man on Crater
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has proven one thing at least: it takes very little to scare the West. His ranting and raving, in advance of even having a bomb, has sent oil to $68 today, and who knows what price if he keeps escalating the rhetoric. VDH sees method in his madness as he uses the decayed intelligentsia of the West in his mission to get the bomb and destroy Israel:
He has studied the recent Western postmodern mind, nursed on its holy trinity of multiculturalism, moral equivalence and relativism. As a third-world populist, Ahmadinejad expects that his own fascism will escape scrutiny if he just recites enough the past sins of the West. He also understands victimology. So he also knows that to destroy the Israelis, he–not they–must become the victim, and the Europeans the ones who forced his hand. Ahmadinejad also grasps that there are millions of highly educated but cynical Westerners who see nothing much exceptional about their own culture. So if democratic America has nuclear weapons, why not theocratic Iran? Moreover, he knows how Western relativism works. So who is to say what are “facts” or what is “true”–given the tendency of the powerful to “construct” their own narratives and call the result “history.” Was not the Holocaust exaggerated, or perhaps even fabricated, as mere jails became “death camps” through a trick of language to take over Palestinian land?
Ahmadinejad is a menace, and perhaps even the clever menace described by VDH, using the West’s decadence against itself. But still, something is wrong with this picture. Ahmadinejad’s game appears to be an all-or-nothing strategy, since he has little conventional military capability. The Iranian military budget is less than 1% of that of the US. Let’s consider some scenarios.
What’s his plan: (a) tell EU countries to repatriate Jews from Israel or else Boom? (b) tell OPEC to cut off the West from oil unless it agrees to the Israel plan or else Boom? (c) blockade the Strait of Hormuz to stop oil shipments and threaten any US naval response with Boom? or other? In each case Iran’s options for intermediate escalation of any conflict appear to be limited by its inability to project conventional military force. If Israel refuses to depopulate, if the EU scoffs at a Jewish relocation to Europe, if OPEC ignores Iran’s policy dictates, or the Navy provides escorts to takers through the Strait of Hormuz, Iran has to either back off or proceed quickly to push the big red button. This is not a normal strategy for success in international relations, and would, in many past times, have resulted in the aggressor’s backing down in humiliation. (Of course Mahmoud Ahmadinejad may be thinking that there is no end to the appetite for appeasement in the West, and that is another matter entirely.)
Perhaps the idea is to give Hamas or Hezbollah a few bombs and let them take care of business. We dealt with this yesterday. If a terorist nuke goes off somewhere, Iran will be destroyed — that seems to be the implication of the Chirac Doctrine. If what remains of Iran afterwords can prove that it was North Korea instead, then L’il Kim will be next in line, but that will be no solace to the late country of the late Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Addendum
Of course, there is no current need for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to confront any of this at present, since he gets what he wants every day simply by his threats and bluster — even without a bomb. If we were in his shoes, we’d do more of it and louder, since it seems to work so well, and we’d be sure to get the bomb ASAP (savoring all the while the laughable threats of “sanctions” by the doddering and toothless UN). We’d enjoy every day seeing the mighty EU3 stew in their juices, and watching the financial markets shudder with each bellicose pronouncement. The one thing we wouldn’t like is to have the West call our bluff early on, since all we would have is an all-or-nothing strategy.
But so far, Ahmadinejad is still the Big Man, since calling his bluff is the last thing on the West’s agenda.
UPDATE
Much of human history is the story of the folly of expecting rational actions from an enemy, an competitor, a friend, a lover or an ally. We have tried to learn from this sad train of experience but are not always successful. In that vein, we find that our take on the idea that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wants a repatriation of Jews to Europe may not have taken the man seriously enough (via Haaretz):
In a new attack on the existence of Israel, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has challenged Europe to take back the Jews who emigrated to Israel, adding that no Jews would remain in Israel if Europe were to open its doors. Ahmadinejad delivered the challenge after arriving in Syria for a two-day visit on Thursday. Addressing Europe, he asked: “Would you open the doors of your own countries to these (Jewish) immigrants so that they could travel to any part of Europe they chose?” “Would you offer the necessary guarantees that you would provide for their security when they came to your countries and not allow another anti-Semitic wave in Europe?”
Scenario “a” above was intended to illustrate an absurd demand. Maybe we need to reconsider.
January 20th, 2006 at 2:18 pm
The only thing wrong with most scenarios that have Iran behaving in a rational manner is that it avoids the implications of Ahmadinejad actually believing in his theology. If the Iranians believe that the return of the 12th Imam is imminent, then they have every reason to precipitate armageddon. I do not see any way for us to feel assured that he is simply playing the great game using the cards he has versus a greater game to usher in the 12th Imam, and certainly Israel cannot be expected to bet their lives on this.
As far as Ahmadinejad underestimating his enemies ability to respond, I believe that al Qaeda did exactly that with 9/11.