Ted Koppel on Nuclear Brinkmanship

Ted Koppel in an op-ed at the New York Times (which appears here from the International Herald Tribune) gave his thoughts on how the United States should

What, then, can the United States do to prevent Iran from developing nuclear technology? Little or nothing. Washington should instead bow to the inevitable.

"You insist on having nuclear weapons," we should say. "Go ahead. It's a terrible idea, but we can't stop you. We would, however, like your leaders to view the enclosed DVD of 'The Godfather.' Please pay particular attention to the scene in which Don Corleone makes grudging peace with a man - the head of a rival crime family - who ordered the killing of his oldest son."

In that scene, Don Corleone says, "I forgo my vengeance for my dead son, for the common good. But I have selfish reasons." The welfare of his youngest son, Michael, is on his mind.

"I am a superstitious man," he continues. "And so if some unlucky accident should befall my youngest son, if some police officer should accidentally shoot him, or if he should hang himself in his cell, or if my son is struck by a bolt of lightening, then I will blame some of the people here. That I could never forgive."

If Iran is bound and determined to have nuclear weapons, let it.

The elimination of American opposition on this issue would open the way to genuine normalization between our two nations. It might even convince the Iranians that their country can flourish without nuclear weapons.

But this should also be made clear to Tehran: If a dirty bomb explodes in Milwaukee, or some other nuclear device detonates in Baltimore or Wichita, if Israel or Egypt or Saudi Arabia should fall victim to a nuclear "accident," Iran should understand that the U.S. government will not search around for the perpetrator. The return address will be predetermined, and it will be somewhere in Iran.

There are more than a few problems with this uber realpolitk not the least of which is that while Jacksonian Nationalism and Wilsonian Internationalism may be out of style I see no reason to be gathering foreign policy chestnuts from "Mario Puzo as told by Francis Coppola"

Problem #1: If a nuclear device detonates in Baltimore or Wichita who's to say it was Iran who was the perpetrator. What about Al Qaeda ? North Korea ? What if it turns out to be Hezbollah ? Do we assume Iran gave it to them or do we take out Lebanon just to be careful ? Do we rely on the CIA to make the pick ?

Problem #2: What about Israel ? Are they covered in a blanket reprisal strategy ?

Problem #3 Do we really believe that Europeans or the UN will acquiesce in a policy that kills millions of Iranian civilians ? Will the Democrats support it for more than a week?

Problem #4 Baltimore

Problem #5 Wichita