Bush and Ahmadinejad: Mirror Images

In the spirit of putting myself in the shoes of others, I've often imagined that President Bush must sound to Iranians exactly as Ahmadinejad sounds to us. As Ahmadinejad speaks of a final solution to the Jewish question and makes thinly veiled statements about Iran's plans for Nuclear domination of South Asia, Bush makes it clear that we are headed to World War III, while Cheney states that non-military interventions for Iranian deterrence are nearing an end.

But the similarities don't end with simple rhetoric. Ahmadinejad and Bush are in very similar political positions-- free to say as they please, but heavily constrained from acting in any meaningful way.

Take the Iranian leader's position. However he sees the world, Ahamdinejad is answerable to the clerics who dominate Iran's legislative assembly; powerful people who at best see him as a useful idiot. He has raised the ire university students who take to the streets on a regular basis against him and his policy. As a nation of Shiites, Iran holds little religious clout for the 90% of Muslims who view that interpretation of early Islam (and hence their religious authority) as apostate. Beyond insurgencies in Iraq, and Hizbullah operations in Syria and Lebanon, Iran has no regional support or traction. A-jad's aggression towards to outside world, not to mention the cultural repression that is ubiquitous inside the country may be at the root of a growing backlash to the entire Iranian political structure.

Compare this to Bush's (and our) position. Bush and colleagues can view Iranian nuclear buildup and overtures towards dominance and destruction as an imminent threat, but their ability to act is at least as constrained as Ahmadinejad's, and for strikingly similar reasons. For better or worse, congress, state governments, and general political opinion challenges the administration at every turn. The Republican party's once unstoppable electoral momentum has been stopped cold by 7 years of Bush's leadership. Far beyond the intelligencia, Bush is a lame skunk. No power to act, but everybody wants him to go. In terms of foreign policy, the administration has little hope of building a useful diplomatic coalition for affecting change in Iran neither out of Nato allies, nor China or Russia. Militarily, the US is in no position for a unilateral invasion of a far more formidable adversary than Saddam Hussein ever was. The US is nearly as politically isolated as Iran.

None of this says whether Iran is indeed the threat that many claim. Neoconservatives use any statement proffered by Ahmadinejad as "proof" that Iran is an immediate threat to the US and our allies. They assume the man should be taken at face value, and that his words preceed action with certainty. The fact is that the Iranian threat grows even as either side has little room to maneuver. The US will not be able to wield any diplomatic or military leverage on Iran until Bush leaves office. Likewise, Iranian power is in no way consolidated under its president. Calling for the destruction of Israel and the eventual occupation of Iraq may sound good, but for now, Iran is in no position to do either.

For the time being and like it or not, the US is in a position of cautious waiting. It would be wise for intelligence to gather its strength, take the time to grow a group of cultural experts fluent in Farsi, Arabic, and the customs of the land. Our position in Iraq has many downsides, but it is a deterrent to Iran, placing the bulk of our massive combat readiness at their borders. The leaders Sarkozy, Merkel and Brown are all reliable allies who will be present and accountable if and when a true threat arises. Even Vladimir Putin has little stake in a large-scale (potentially nuclear) conflict to his immediate south.

We must not allow neoconservative hotheads to overplay our hand. This is a time for patience and quiet strategy, not one for open warfare. Ominous as it may be, there is nothing about the current situation with Iran that demands dire, immediate action. As necessary as history may one day prove, we have few rational moves to make in this game.