The New Appeasement Continues

BBC NEWS sayz "Iran defiant over nuclear plans"

The Mullahcracy has spoken. The Islamic Republic has enriched some uranium. The IR will continue to do so. Nuclear energy is every Iranians' right. No one can stop the vanguard of the new Caliphate.

And what is the West's response?

Classic Chamberlainesque courage.

Consider this contrast:

IAEA head Mohamad ElBaradei's arrival in Tehran, and Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's reception: Speaking as Mr ElBaradei arrived in Tehran, Mr Ahmadinejad said: "Our answer to those who are angry about Iran obtaining the full nuclear cycle is one phrase, we say: Be angry and die of this anger."

"We will not hold talks with anyone about the Iranian nation's right [to enrichment] and no one has the right to step back, even one iota," he added, the official IRNA news agency reported.

The BBC's Frances Harrison in Tehran says there is no sign of a compromise from Iran - but there is debate within the country about whether that is the right direction.

Iranians give their views on the nuclear dispute

The US and Europe are pressing for sanctions against Iran, a step UN Security Council members Russia and China have opposed.

A senior Chinese arms control official, Assistant Foreign Minister, Cui Tiankai, is due in Tehran for talks on Friday.

The BBC's Daniel Griffiths in Beijing says China has so far kept a low profile but it is increasingly keen to be seen as a responsible, international player, and Iran is a perfect opportunity to strengthen those credentials.

'Strong steps'

Mr ElBaradei, who heads the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), is to report back to the UN Security Council at the end of this month on whether Tehran is complying with its demand to stop all enrichment activity by 28 April, or risk isolation.

He said he wanted to discuss "how we can bring Iran in line" with demands by the international community that it cease enrichment and take "confidence-building measures".

Iran's rhetoric in recent days has been triumphalist, our correspondent reports. Nuclear officials are boasting they will now accelerate their work to produce nuclear fuel on an industrial scale.

One newspaper headline said the West was now "checkmated". Another said Mr ElBaradei was welcome to join Iran's nuclear celebrations.

Meanwhile, the BBC ignores the gathered evidence of it's own reporters and insists on supporting the appeasement status quo. Frances Harrison says there's "debate" over Iran's nuclear direction. Well and good. Unfortunately, the selection of photos and captions the BBC presents for this very story indicate that the debate is very one-sided. At least six out of the eight people pictured basically said, "Damn the torpedos and full speed ahead!" Very promising.

Alexandra of All Things Beautiful refuses to put on such blinders:

Republicans, aware of the bigger picture, are looking for international allies who might support the U.S. during the preemptive strikes; they are also working hard to determine who our foes are, both overtly and covertly. One fine example is Ed Morrissey's take on Saudis' visit to Moscow.

Democrats in turn are busy dishing out blame--nothing new there--on the basis that the U.S. military cannot accomplish the mission and that, if attempted nonetheless, the adverse effects would be detrimental.

Hugh Hewitt believes this to be the biggest debate of all. However, it seems to me, that in order for this debate to be genuinely acknowledged, it must be predicated upon a proper understanding of what threat we are facing. We must somehow achieve consensus on the answer to the question of all questions: "What Do The Iranian Leaders Really Want".

Following on from yesterday's urge to take heed of "When they say “Islamic Republic,” they mean it. And refusing to take their words at face value has bedeviled Western strategists for three decades", and the question, "Will they do it?", Amir Taheri's essay, is a further step towards building such consensus, without which, I am afraid, any action or inaction will most likely lead to such a disastrously acrimonious divide between us, with such detrimental long-term consequences for our collective psyche, that it might very well dwarf anything else. Future generations and historians may view the domestic conflicts experienced during the Vietnam era and the Seventies, as a mere blip in comparison.

So what do the Iranians want? Well, in a word:

The Council on Foreign Relations cannot liberate itself from the typical deal maker's mentality. It cannot conceive of a regime and a movement that put their messianic mission above conjectural maneuvers and compromises. They do not understand movements and regimes that, given something, would demand more because they believe that they should have it all.

Let us return to the question: What do the Iranian leaders really want?

The answer is simple: They want nothing in particular; they want everything!

Nuclear power not only positions the mullahcracy to become a nuclear arms dealer. It also transitions them from a fossil-fuel economy that could well become irrelevent as technology adapts. Without needing to spend their FF resources for their own electricity generation, the Iranians can write their own ticket as an exporter. Plus, when FF approaches obsolescence, Iran will not only have the means to continue powering its own economy. It can export this technology to the highest bidder.

In short, Iran can use its nuclear card to become the pre-eminent power in the Middle East.

Unfortunately, the West can't risk Iran's use of its nuclear program for peaceful purposes. It's worldwide network of client terrorists organizations and islamofascist messiahanic claims preclude giving the Mullahs that kind of benefit-of-the-doubt.

But the world is not ready to make a stand. Russia and China have the perfect wedge issue in which to assert new roles of international influence. Western Europe lacks the internal and external fortitude to play brinksmanship with an aggressive Iran. Eastern Europe isn't ready for prime-time. Japan, Korea and the Asian Tigers have their own distractions with North Korea to contend with.

The US may need to oppose Iran. Alone.