IRANAMOK:

A Little Theoretical Game (Christopher Badeaux, September 09, 2002, Lord Mage of Good)

[L]et's try a little theoretical game. Assume for the sake of argument that Iran really is about to come crashing down -- the system is too wobbly to sustain itself, the center cannot hold, etc. Assume also, for the sake of our little game, that the folks in charge of Iran are desperately trying to procure nuclear weapons. Continue the game: Those same fellows are paranoid theocrats, some significant percentage of whom believe paradise (and seventy-two white raisins) lie just the other side of massive explosions. Final assumption: The odds are dead-even, fifty-fifty, that if we do nothing about all of this, that nothing will happen, Iran will tumble into a brief chaos followed by a wonderful, charming, secular, Western-style democracy, and everyone will have a fuzzy pink bunny to cuddle. The other fifty percent is allocated to this idea: As Iran crumbles, the paranoid theocrats, who weren't altogether rational actors to begin with, knowing that they're doomed if they don't do something (and likely even if they do), ship a nuclear warhead to Kansas City, via ICBM or some guy named Mohammed.

Now stop playing and assume this is very real. The problem with the Cal Coolidge approach to foreign policy (if you see ten barrels rolling down the hill toward you, and you don't do anything, nine will skip off to the side and leave you unharmed) is that it's way too easy to miss that tenth barrel. The only catch is, in this case, the barrel is toting a few pounds of weapons-grade plutonium and an advanced plastique shell.

One would first point out that what Iran did last week was "successfully tested a new ballistic missile, apparently of North Korean vintage." Now, nuclear weapons should be taken somewhat seriously just because of their destructive power, though I'm not inclined to fetishize them as the anti-nuke folks of the '80s did, nor as the anti-Arabists of the '00s do today. But I just have trouble getting too worked up about the lethal threat of North Korean ballistic technology. Yes the world would be a safer place if Pakistan didn't have nuclear weapons and we're better off with Iraq and Iran not having them, but one suspects that the populations that are truly threatened by such weapons are their own.
Posted by Orrin Judd at September 9, 2002 6:35 PM