Iranian press has reported that Iranian forces have intercepted a cargo vessel—which they erroneously claim to be American—and directed it to Bandar Abbas, Iran’s main port in the Persian Gulf. There are reports that up to 34 Americans may be onboard, but that too isn’t yet certain, and the Pentagon is denying any American citizens are on board. Regardless, a few thoughts:
- It would be wrong to believe that this action was undertaken by rogue elements. After all, according to Article 110 of the Iranian constitution, the Supreme Leader is “Supreme commander of the armed forces” with power to appoint and dismiss the Chief of the General Staff, IRGC commanders, and supreme commanders of the army, navy, and air force. If Ayatollah Ali Khamenei really disapproved of his officers’ actions, he would fire them immediately.
- Inevitably, the US intelligence community will be tasked with determining the complicity of top officials. And, to do this, they will scour communications intercepts. But the absence of a direct order in the signals intelligence should not suggest exculpation. After all, the Iranian hierarchy is designed to enable plausible deniability. The Supreme Leader is a dictator by veto power. He gives orders not about what to do, but about what not to do. Anything he doesn’t forbid is okay. This is what happened against the backdrop of the seizure of the British sailors in 2007, and this is likely what happened today. To understand Iranian decision-making, see this essay.
- The Iranian government often plays good cop-bad cop. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) at no time bought in to the current nuclear negotiations. That Secretary of State John Kerry did not insist on proof that the IRGC would subordinate itself to the process is an American failure. The same sort of episode (albeit on a smaller scale) occurred against the backdrop of German Foreign Minister Klaus Kinkel’s 1992 call for “Critical Engagement,” and also in 1998, when a busload of American businessmen were attacked in Tehran against the backdrop of Iranian President Mohammad Khatami’s “Dialogue of Civilizations.” More on IRGC “rogue behavior” here, and more in this monograph on the history of Iranian vigilantism.
- Regardless, let’s be clear although in a world where common sense prevailed in Washington, the following statements would be unnecessary: The problem is not that President Obama hasn’t apologized enough. Nor is the problem that the West hasn’t given Iran enough incentives. Rather, the issue is the character of the regime and its reluctance to abide by the norms of international behavior. This is why the Clinton administration characterized it as a rogue regime, and this is why the history and lessons of US diplomacy with rogue regimes still apply.
Follow AEIdeas on Twitter at @AEIdeas.
from AEI » Latest Content http://ift.tt/1doJO6u
0 التعليقات:
Post a Comment