Friday, March 16, 2012

Six Questions About the Nuclear Crisis in the Middle East

?Probably insoluble.? You?re not supposed to say that! There?s always a solution once everyone sees reason, right? ?Solutionism? is a term I first saw used by Jeffrey Goldberg to describe the Pollyanna-like American predisposition to believe there?s a solution to every problem, including the ones in the Middle East. The mantra of the solutionists recently has been that even if Iran gets the bomb, it?s no big deal: The Iranians would be deterred or ?contained? by fear of retaliation, of ?obliteration? as Hillary Clinton put it, because it?s only rational to act that way. But this faith in rationality and self-preservation fails to take into account the frequent irrationality of faith. For example, an influential faction of the mullahs running the Iranian theocracy are reportedly adherents of the apocalyptic strain of Shiite theology which believes a world conflagration is a pre-condition for the return of the Hidden Imam and the salvific End of Days. Which means some Iranian leaders might in fact welcome nuclear chaos, even if it results in national martyrdom. Solutionists who believe in Cold War-style nuclear deterrence in the Middle East neglect the differences. Deterrence worked during the Cold War when there was a bipolar standoff between just two nuclear powers, both of whom were comparatively rational (or interested in self-preservation at least).

Source: http://feeds.slate.com/click.phdo?i=abc97f36d6b5bce959bc7693c3a26e38

the chronicle spinal stenosis the forgotten man mike jones just friends chronicle rampart

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.