A Reminder 12.10.2005

ElBaradei's IAEA: Not the Enemy
Charles Johnson over at the indispensible Little Green Footballs posts today regarding Mohamed ElBaradei's upcoming acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize and labels him a "blind, toothless nuclear watchdog."

While I certainly agree that ElBaradei's IAEA has not done as good a job with regard to Iran as I might wish, I cannot agree with Charles' characterization in this regard. Given the state of world opinion on this issue, which is largely negative thanks to our now completely discredited intelligence record in connection with weapons of mass distruction, and given that the IAEA serves many masters, most of whom do not share the United States' view of the Iranian situation, I am actually surprised that ElBaradei has been able to keep his eye on the ball as much as he has.

The only thing that I can conclude about the IAEA's continued hawkishness on the Iranian issue is that there exists--behind the scenes--a widely shared view among the world's power about the dangerousness of an Iranian bomb. This is very good news for the U.S., for Israel and for the world.

Of course, these other powers (who one suspects includes the U.K., Germany, France, Italy, India and, probably, China) are more than willing to let the U.S. stand alone out front since they have calculated that, given our national interest in the matter, we can do no less. So, once again, the U.S. carries water for the "international community" As has by now become depressingly customary, we will be expected to act and take all the blame for acting and will all the while be the target of intense criticism by those counting on us to save the day.

I would like to thank the post on New Sisyphus that reminded me that often there is a major difference between outer appearance, especially when it comes to politics, and the behind the scenes actions. It's clear, for example, that the World--just like the Democrats--have calculated the fact that the United States (and Republicans in the United States) believe it is in the best interest of the United States to carry the water on Iraq. So they nip at our feet publically, knowing full well that their criticisms won't deflect the course of the United States in an action that privately they support. On the other hand, the believe that it is in their best interest to feign criticism so that, once the war is over, all that is remembered is the ankle biting, which will put them in the position to reach ascendency.

The public form, however, is quite irritating--because despite what ElBaradei's IAEA may be doing in private, the public face for the public masters in the public dance is disgustingly hypocritical.

posted by William Woody at 11:40 PM

Post a Comment Home

A moderate conservative living in the left coast, surrounded by the sureal, wonders if there is a sane life living amongst those who have lost touch with reality.

View Profile
Recent Items:

A new look and feel.
nuclear arms should be taboo? what's a taboo?
a good point
if they'll edit bab's letter to change it's conten...
the difference between liberals and conservatives,...
the insanity of the left
five questions
remember, kiddies, iraq had no wmds
in media war, kurdistan strikes back

Powered by Blogger