Joschka Fischer was in Abu Dhabi and told a group of journalists, policy makers and political scientists that bombing Iran would be a "recipe for disaster" and result in a worse conflagration than the current Iraq debacle. I cannot find a transcript of Fischer's speech (which was in English) and so need to rely on the Spiegel report. Evidently Fischer believes that economic sanctions would be effective in preventing Iran from moving forward with its nuclear program:
"Die Regierenden haben große Angst vor einer Isolation. Deshalb sollten wir weiter nach vorne gehen und Druck ausüben."
Michael Young, writing in Reason, sees some problems with Fischer's position on Iran:
But there are two problems in Fischer's analysis and that of other administration critics. First, Iran is plainly intending to build a nuclear device, and in the face of this the international community has repeatedly vacillated. Fischer's anxieties, which he wears on his sleeve, create a sense that he would prefer to let Iran have an atomic weapon than allow the U.S. to prevent this from happening. Part of the problem is that his argument is all carrots and no sticks. Fischer accepts that brinkmanship can produce good results, by paving the way toward serious negotiations; but he so undermines the argument in favor of using force, that that psychological merits of employing brinkmanship come to nothing.
Meanwhile, one of Joschka's old comrades reminisces about the good old days.
Comments