Today, I have a
feature article on the main site which rejects the notion
advanced by General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff amongst others that Iran is a rational actor.
Normally, I would not draw attention to the comments left.
However, this one caught my eye. It was written by Col. David
Lapan. Assuming this is the Colonel Lapan in question, he is a
Pentagon spokesman who takes issue with my article. He
writes:
It is not the case that General Dempsey believes Iran is a
“rational actor” based on “his opinion on the notion that Iran has
not yet decided whether it will develop nuclear weapons.”
Colonel Lapan then provides a link to an
exchange which took place between General Dempsey and New
Hampshire Republican Senator Kelly Ayotte when Dempsey testified
before the Senate Budget Committee on February 28, 2012. I will get
to that exchange shortly.
But first let’s examine what General Dempsey told Fareed Zakaria
in the first place back on February 19th:
Zakaria: When you observe Iranian behavior does
it strike you as highly irrational? Does it strike you as sort of
unpredictable? Or do they seem to follow their national interest in
a fairly calculating way?
General Dempsey: That is a great question and
I’ll tell you I’ve been confronting that question since I commanded
Central Command in 2008. And we are of the opinion that the Iranian
regime is a rational actor and is for that reason I think that we
think the current path we’re on is the most prudent path at this
point.
So if General Dempsey’s stated belief that Iran has not made
a decision as to whether or not to weaponize its nuclear
program is a factor in concluding that Iran is a rational actor
then what are his criteria for making that assessment? General
Dempsey’s reply to Senator Ayotte raises more questions than it
does answers:
Look I agree that Iran is a regime that is dangerously
misguided. Look at its behavior. It protects itself; it loathes its
neighbors;it interferes with its neighbors; threatens its neighbors
and it disregards its own citizens. So none of that is acceptable
to us. So to our way of thinking and our way of being rational. But
it does fit their pattern of thinking in a 30-year history of
conduct. So my view of this is that we can’t afford to
underestimate our potential adversaries by writing them off as
irrational. That’s kind of the juxtaposition of the phrase and I
personally don’t mistake Iran’s rhetoric for a lack of reason.
With all due respect to General Dempsey, this response strikes
me as disingenuous. First, Iran’s behavior fitting certain pattern
might make it predictable, it certainly doesn’t make it rational.
Secondly, Israel certainly isn’t underestimating Iran and it
certainly isn’t writing them off. Why else would Israel give
serious consideration to the possibility of a military strike
against Iran? Because the Israeli government believes that if Iran
acquires a nuclear weapon it would use it against its people. If
anyone is underestimating Iran it is the Obama Administration.
General Dempsey told Zakaria point blank that the Obama
Administration does not believe Iran presents an existential threat
to Israel. So long as this daylight between the United States and
Israel exists, the Iranian matter will never be resolved in a
satisfactory manner.
General Dempsey later told Senator Ayotte, “As we seek to
influence their behavior we have to understand their way of
thinking.” But I am not convinced General Dempsey (much less the
rest of the Obama Administration) does understand Iran’s way of
thinking at all. I fear that General Dempsey is simply
rationalizing Iran’s irrationality.
Case in point. In December 2003, a major earthquake hit the city
of Bam in southeastern Iran which resulted in the deaths of over
25,000 people. Israel immediately offered aid to the victims of the
earthquake only to have Iran
refuse the assistance. Let us remember that this took place
when a supposedly moderate regime led by Mohammed Khatami was in
power. How many lives might have been saved had Iran accepted
Israel’s generosity? We will never know. What we do know is that
the Iranian regime would rather have its own people die than be
helped by the Jewish people Israel. If this an act of a
rational actor then what does it take to make a nation an
irrational actor? If Iran has that little regard for its own people
then I shudder at the thought of what they are prepared to do to
Israel.
