- Iran: Eight Prisoners Hanged on Drug Charges
- Daughter of late Iranian president jailed for ‘spreading lies’ - IRAN: Annual report on the death penalty 2016 - Taheri Facing the Death Penalty Again - Dedicated team seeking return of missing agent in Iran - Iran Arrests 2, Seizes Bibles During Catholic Crackdown
- Trump to welcome Netanyahu as Palestinians fear U.S. shift
- Details of Iran nuclear deal still secret as US-Tehran relations unravel - Will Trump's Next Iran Sanctions Target China's Banks? - Don’t ‘tear up’ the Iran deal. Let it fail on its own. - Iran Has Changed, But For The Worse - Iran nuclear deal ‘on life support,’ Priebus says
- Female Activist Criticizes Rouhani’s Failure to Protect Citizens
- Iran’s 1st female bodybuilder tells her story - Iranian lady becomes a Dollar Millionaire on Valentine’s Day - Two women arrested after being filmed riding motorbike in Iran - 43,000 Cases of Child Marriage in Iran - Woman Investigating Clinton Foundation Child Trafficking KILLED!
- Senior Senators, ex-US officials urge firm policy on Iran
- In backing Syria's Assad, Russia looks to outdo Iran - Six out of 10 People in France ‘Don’t Feel Safe Anywhere’ - The liberal narrative is in denial about Iran - Netanyahu urges Putin to block Iranian power corridor - Iran Poses ‘Greatest Long Term Threat’ To Mid-East Security |
Thursday 24 March 2011Is Libya Really About Iran?
In recent days we've heard a variety of rationales for military intervention in Libya. One is the simple humanitarian impulse to save lives in imminent danger, which Obama officials insist is paramount. Beneath that are other unstated, or less-emphasized, motivations. One, as Massimo has explained, is the assertion of humanitarian intervention as an ideal in itself. Another is the principle of enforceable norms dictated by international bodies like the U.N. and the Arab League, as the president himself seemed to say yesterday. And there are some less noble theories, including the idea that the White House feared losing face if Ghaddafi were to survive after Obama called for his ouster, or the notion that once Sarkozy took the political lead (perhaps motivated by domestic political pressures), Obama couldn't afford not to participate. Today The Wall Street Journal's Jay Solomon throws another ingredient into the mix: Iran. White House concerns that Iran's hand is being strengthened by recent events in the Middle East is central to its response to the turmoil, say U.S., European, and Arab officials. President Barack Obama's decision last week to use military force against Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's forces was made in part by his administration's fear that Western inaction could further embolden Tehran, these officials say. It's not entirely clear from Solomon's story how Obama's Libyan intervention represents a challenge to Iran. But the idea seems to be that the U.S. is demonstrating that the world won't tolerate repressive tyrants like Ghaddfi (or, if you will, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad). It certainly complicates matters that the U.S. is are not more vigorously opposing the anti-democratic crackdowns in Yemen and Bahrain. But the explanation in those cases also comes back to Iran: Obama officials say they believe that Tehran is meddling in both those countries, coloring the popular movements there in Washington's view, and suggesting that the great Arab revolution of 2011 may be turning into something of a proxy struggle between the U.S. and Iran. Source: TIME.com |