Iran is Not Cuba and Bush is not Kennedy Posted by Heather Hurlburt

So now David Ignatius has jumped on Graham Allison's "Iran is the Cuban missile crisis in slow motion" bandwagon.

I think this is a non-useful and maybe even dangerous comparison for several substantive and political reasons:

1) the core problem, Iran's move toward nuclear weapons, is progressing in such slow motion, if you believe experts outside the Administration, that we have years, not weeks or months, to work with.  This only becomes an immediate threat when we start rattling nuclear sabers -- but saying "Cuban missile crisis" reinforces the idea that the problem requires immediate and comprehensive fixing.  Instead it requires immediate management with an eye toward a long-term solution.  That's different.

2) Ratcheting up the fear level serves the interests of those who are talking nuclear or conventional strikes.  It makes it -- as Allison knows better than almost anyone from his study of the Cuban missile crisis -- harder to back down.

3)  Which brings us to the crucial point:  Bush is no Kennedy.  Rumsfeld is no McNamara.  We don't have even the level of understanding of the Iranian regime that we had of the Soviets (McNamara's account of the Cuban crisis highlights the role of the US Ambassador to the USSR, Tommy Thompson, who had actually lived with Khrushchev briefly.)

4)  An additional point:  I am reminded that, while for people over a certain age the phrase "Cuban missile crisis" evokes sheer terror, for young people it evokes nothing -- except "crisis."  And again, this is a very serious problem that doesn't have to be a Cuban-scale immediate crisis -- unless we choose to make it one.

Happy spring renewal holiday of your choice -- or just enjpy the nice weather.

nd

Comments

[Wil]

So now David Ignatius has jumped on Graham Allison's "Iran is the Cuban missile crisis in slow motion" bandwagon.

I think you should read his piece again.

[Dan Kervick]

Let's recall that Cuban missile crisis was not about Cuban missiles, but about Soviet missiles in Cuba. Thus the problem we faced was inextricably bound up with the hair-trigger regime of Cold War deterrence, and the need to prevent either side in that regime from developing a first-strike capability. in the logic of that system, the proximity of the missiles to their targets was a crucial factor. A first strike launched from Cuba had some potential to take out our national leadership and cripple our retaliatory force with little warning. It thus had the potential to give the Soviets the ability to shoot first and "win" in a nuclear war - or at least to give them the perception of this ability. Because of that, such a strike would not be deterrable in the standard way, and the positioning of missiles in Cuba was rightly seen as greatly destabilizing. It didn't really matter that the missiles were in a country called "Cuba", run by Fidel Castro. The problem would have been the same even if the Soviets had simply built a launch platform out in the Carribean, 90 miles from US shores.

It was also an essential part of the crisis that the adversary was a huge country, armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons. That adversary had repositioned its forces in a very dangerous and threatening way. Consider how different the situation would have been if there had been no Soviet Union, and no heavily armed nuclear adversary. Suppose Cuba itself had manufactured a handful of nuclear missiles, and had no nuclear patron to defend it in the event of a pre-emptive or retaliatory attack. Then the crisis would have been far less significant. Cuba could have been deterred from using its weapons by the threat of an overwhelming response. The threat would have been abundantly credible, because the Cubans would have known that it had no major nuclear ally exercising counter-deterrance against the US.

So return now to the situation we face with Iran. Eevn if Iran should develop a limited nuclear force in five years time, they are nowhere remotely near developing the kind of force that would give them a winnable first strike capability. And they are not at this time part of a larger enemy nuclear bloc that could defend them. So, if Iran develops a nuclear weapon, we only need to state very clearly to them that any nuclear missile assault on Isreal - or on the United States via terrorist proxies - would be met with an overwhelming retaliatory nuclear response from the US. That response is very credible, and should be sufficient to deter Iran.

The argument that this sort of deterrance would not work is based on the caricature of the "Mad Mullahs" - the notion that Iran is run by a cult of deranged suicide bombers who would comdemn their entire country to nuclear doom if that were the cost of launching a single glancing blow against the Great Satan. I think this perception of the Iranian state is far-fetched, to say the least.

The "slow motion" aspect of this problem is also very relevant here. These alleged Iranian threats are still a long way off, according to the experts. Iran sends frequent signals that it is looking for a grand deal on regional security issues; and making such a deal would probably be in our interest. We don't face a pressing crisis in which Iranians are about arm an arsenal of nuclear weapons and deploy them. There is ample time for pre-emption later, even if it should ever be required.

We also need to recognize the complicating factor that Iran, unlike Cuba, sits in the middle of a region that is vital to the entire world, but which appears close to the brink of regional conflagration, which an attack on Iran could easily ignite.

One thing that could wreck our opportunities, and change the strategic realities, would be if Iran and Russia were driven into a nuclear alliance. We should be doing everything we can, at the present time, to isolate Iran, and to strengthen ties with Russia. But instead we have allowed unreconstructed cold warriors and Western carpetbaggers to prey upon Russia and subvert its satellites, to work to undermine the Russian state, and to surround and threaten the Russians. It would not be entirely surprising in this situation if the Russians and Iranians are drawn into an open nuclear alliance. If that happens, it will be the major strategic blunder of our times - one of criminal proportions. It would amount to nothing less than snatching belated defeat from the jaws of a Cold War victory 50 years in the making.

And whatever happens in the current situation with Iran, we are going to face similar problems over and over unless we re-commit ourselves to a major global non-proliferation and counterproliferation effort, in which the major nuclear powers play a unified role.

[Craig]

Comparing Bush to Kennedy is a bit mind-boggling. It's been mentioned before but I'll mention it again. When Kennedy sent evidence to DeGaulle of the Russian installations on Cuba, DeGaulle said it wasn't necessary to see the evidence because Kennedy's word was good enough. Can anyone imagine offering Bush such a courtesy these days?

The proper comparison is to realize that there is no John Kennedy on the scene. But Kennedy had some advisers who strongly advocated nuclear retaliation without bothering to fully think through the consequences; these advisers were regarded as reckless. If my memory serves correctly, one of them was Curtis LeMay. That's who our president is: not Kennedy, but Curtis LeMay.

It's also good to remember that Kennedy learned from the Bay of Pigs fiasco; in fact, his learning curve took place over a matter of months. What has Bush learned over five years? Iran is a serious problem but the most serious problem facing America in the foreign policy arena is Bush, his advisers and a very broken process.

[Oz]

Surely the better analogy: Iraq as the Bay of Pigs times 100...

[seyid]

There are certain things in life related to smoking that simply cannot :)
parça kontör
parça kontör bayiliği
parça kontör bayilik

[cheap Final Fantasy XI Gold]

FF11 is very famous now. My friends like to play it and buy FFXI Gil. If you have money to buy FFXI gold, you will find it is very useful. Earning Final Fantasy XI gold is not so hard. Try your best and then you can get it. I buy FFXI Gil, just because I like it.

[potbs money]

Yesterday, my boyfriend gave me a lot of Pirates of the Burning Sea Gold

[12sky gold]

Once I played 12sky, I did not know how to get strong, someone told me that you must have twelve sky Gold. He gave me some 12sky gold.

[Sho gold]

You are a nice man like Sho Online gold, it is very good ting to Sho Online gold.

[shaiya gold]

Do you like playing the game where you need to use shaiya gold, when you do not have shaiya money,

[Bottega Veneta handbags]

Do you like playing the game where you need to use shaiya gold

[replica Gucci Earings]

Do you like playing the game where you need to use shaiya gold

[molded rubber products]

Plastic parts made by injection molding
printing in China
construction scaffolding

[الفيسبوك]

dirty bush is the worst thing that happen in this life

[Egitim]

thanks for sharing Sohbet many people are pay more attention to one's swearing than before, especially a watch.Chat.
Perhaps when you went to some place far away Sohbet you must borrow it from friends you can get everything you want in this game Chat money to invest in other industry which will return you good profit. Sohbet when you look at Chat
the surface of the watches viaload great any cool Exsohbet from the city you live in and thought you knew nobody there Egitim Fourth, there were various signs of political conflict among shia. If they split 3 ways or 4 ways, the sunnis and the kurds could often be the Sohbet swing votes in the politics. If they felt they had political clout out of proportion to their numbers, they could settle in Sohbet and do politics and not feel oppressed.

[backpack]

Its in reality a great post. I am sure that anyone would like to visit it again and again. After reading this post I got some very unique information which are in actual fact very helpful for anyone. This is a post having some crucial information. I wish that in future such posting should go on. backpack