Question
If Russia and China are the main obstruction to further UN sanctions against Iran, how would they feel about an attack on Iran?
At first blush, you'd think they'd be against it, but walk through the post bombing scenario from their side.
With sanctions in place from everyone else, the Russians and Chinese get the reconstruction contracts. The Russians get the critical military reconstruction which would likely keep several of their manufacturers above water, while the Chinese get increased access to Iranian oil.
Although many of the Sunni governments will silently support the US action, the broader centerpoint of world opinion will likely move against the US, and with the likely Iranian reaction, the US's crusade/overstretch into the region is likely to be exacerbated.
Yes, the US is doing the work for the Saudi and Sunni governments, but after another US attack on a Muslim country, how much support could they offer?
I could be wrong, just thinking out loud, but it seems to me that beyond the short term disruptions, Russia and China win the "bomb Iran" scenario.
Thoughts?
(You could certainly argue that the US loses in a "nuclear Iran" scenario, too, but let's remember that the Russians are the ones who offered cover as Iran started on the nuclear road.)
Also, what's the US deal with the Saudis on nukes? You know the Saudis and Egyptians will not accept Iran having nukes while they don't, so, what's the back room deal? Protection under the US umbrella, or an offer to flood nuke technology later if they hold off now? Do you give it at all?
At first blush, you'd think they'd be against it, but walk through the post bombing scenario from their side.
With sanctions in place from everyone else, the Russians and Chinese get the reconstruction contracts. The Russians get the critical military reconstruction which would likely keep several of their manufacturers above water, while the Chinese get increased access to Iranian oil.
Although many of the Sunni governments will silently support the US action, the broader centerpoint of world opinion will likely move against the US, and with the likely Iranian reaction, the US's crusade/overstretch into the region is likely to be exacerbated.
Yes, the US is doing the work for the Saudi and Sunni governments, but after another US attack on a Muslim country, how much support could they offer?
I could be wrong, just thinking out loud, but it seems to me that beyond the short term disruptions, Russia and China win the "bomb Iran" scenario.
Thoughts?
(You could certainly argue that the US loses in a "nuclear Iran" scenario, too, but let's remember that the Russians are the ones who offered cover as Iran started on the nuclear road.)
Also, what's the US deal with the Saudis on nukes? You know the Saudis and Egyptians will not accept Iran having nukes while they don't, so, what's the back room deal? Protection under the US umbrella, or an offer to flood nuke technology later if they hold off now? Do you give it at all?
posted by mikevotes at
7:47 AM
4 Comments:
You are right in that China and Russia win in an economic sense in a bomb Iran scenario, but it is not without risks.
Bombing Iran will reinforce the power of the most militant players in Iran's diffused leadership structure. This could make cooperation with Iran much more difficult in the future. What we haven't seen yet is the Russians rushing to aid Iran with their crippled oil infrastructure. Why? Because it is too costly and risky to boot. Who will pay for it?
Despite the U.S's overstretch, they do have the power to keep Iran crippled. The only way to pay for reconstruction projects is to first pay for improving Iran's oil infrastructure, and that is a long-term investment. There is no short term money to pay for it. So investment in Iran is dependent on at least a modicum of stability that would allow the oil to flow.
There is no guarantee of that now, and after a U.S. bombing, I would guess there would be even less.
The Saudi/Egypt nuclear question is a trickier one. I can't imagine that anyone in that area of the world isn't already under a U.S./Israeli nuclear umbrella. If Iran launched a an ICBM (which they don't have) with a nuclear warhead (which again...) in the direction of Egypt (which makes little sense) the Israelis would likely react.
I think the fact that Iran would be annihilated if they launched their non-existent weapons is a fact that the administration keeps under their hat because it lends credibility to the argument that we can live with a nuclear Iran.
By
Praguetwin, at 3:00 AM
I'm glad someone took this seriously.
Let me wake up a little and I;ll respond.
By
mikevotes, at 7:10 AM
That's an interesting point regarding oil.
It's my understanding that its the Chinese who have been working with Iranian oil, that they're a primary destination.
But even so, that only reinforces your point as China's oil supplies are fairly fragile and disruptions would hit them quite hard amplifying some of the own economic unrest.
Good thought.
And, I'm sure the Saudis have already been assured they're under the umbrella in a broad sense, but is that enough?
It makes them a true client state,and they have the money, connections and people to make their own nuke program.
I would think they'd want the bomb for regional balance purposes. A guarantee that it would not be used on them doesn't help them in the regional balance the same way an indigenous program would.
Thus far in modern history, nukes (thankfully) are more about posturing than use. Think of India Pakistan. Would either of them accept the umbrella guarantee?
By
mikevotes, at 7:27 AM
I do know that China is a big customer, but I don't know that they are investing much in Iran's infrastructure. I'm certainly not an expert in this field.
Iran needs oil infrastructure, but even more desperately they need refining capacity. Only Russia or a western country has the resources to provide the money and the technology that Iran so desperately needs. Thus far, due to the political situation, no one is investing. Fears of war, or nationalization of the industry top the list of concerns. Ironically, Iran's acquisition of a bomb could be seen as a factor that would deter an American invasion (or a more likely bombing campaign aimed at infrastructure, i.e. that new refinery) and thus help them in their quest to find an investor.
As to the Saudi position, I see your point clearly. Despite being under the umbrella, they will want their own bomb if Iran has one: plain and simple.
By
Praguetwin, at 11:35 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home