Strike Iran Now

Shora Esmailian, one of Sweden’s loudmouthed pro-Islamists, argues in favour of Iran getting a nuclear bomb in an article published by Expressen today. Her main argument is the one we know from the Cold War, i.e. that the peace is preserved by both side having equal access to weapons of mass destruction in that no one will benefit from a first strike. To a far-left extremist like Ms Esmailian, there are no significant differences between the fascist Iran and the democratic West. To the rest of us, however, the differences are obvious.

In its latest issue, the British newspaper The Economist comments on the trouble ahead. An a leading article the paper oppose an American bombing raid against Iran’s nuclear facilities, but it also warns of the idea that Iran with nuclear weapons is harmless. On the contrary, the article stresses the great danger this poses to the world. I quote:

[I]n present circumstances it would be wrong for America to launch a military strike against Iran. But it would be the height of self-deception for anyone to jump to the conclusion that a nuclear-armed Iran would not be dangerous at all. It would be very dangerous indeed.

For a start, there is a danger that Iran’s nuclear efforts will provoke a pre-emptive strike by Israel, which is already a nuclear power, albeit an undeclared one. For Israelis, whose country Mr Ahmadinejad says he wants to wipe off the map, it is not all that reassuring to hear that Iran can ”probably” be deterred. Even if Israel were to decide against such a strike, Iran’s going nuclear could destroy what is left of the international non-proliferation regime. It has proved hard enough for Arab states such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia to live with Israel’s undeclared bomb; if their Iranian rival got one too, the race to copy might soon be on. On top of this is the danger that a nuclear Iran would feel safe to ramp up attempts to spread its revolution violently beyond its own borders.

I beg to differ. I think it would be a mistake not to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities while we still have the chance to do so. Now we have a unique opportunity to prevent a new ”cold war” by taking some heat after an armed strike. The Far Left and the Islamists will make life difficult for the United States, Israel, or whatever country carries out this task, but in the long run it will be worth it.

I can predict that two lines of criticism. Firstly, that it is wrong to let the end justify the means, and secondly, that it’s not a genuine libertarian approach to the problem. Normally, I would agree with both these objections, but in this case, Iran stroked first by arming Hezbollah, threaten Israel and the US, and then refusing to comply with the United Nation’s Resolution 1737, which calls for an end to the nuclear programme. The world is under attack from Iran’s Islamist regime and must defend itself.