Fat Chance!

In yet one more of his accustomed exercises in tough sounding but utterly meaningless rhetoric, President Obama punctuated his appearance at the G-8 meeting by telling reporters, "There have to be consequences for such irresponsible behavior on the international stage." The practitioners of "irresponsible behavior" to whom the always eloquent if not reality connected POTUS was referring are the North Koreans. More specifically the North Korean government.

The sinking of the South Korean corvette, Cheonan, was scarcely "irresponsible behavior." That term applies rather more fittingly to running one's pickup off a cliff while holding a half empty bottle of Jack Black in one hand. Or, being a church organist who moonlights as the piano player in the local bordello.

The sinking by torpedo of a warship falls properly in the category of calculated deliberate act. A calculated, deliberate act of war. To call it anything else is mendacious at best, purely stupid at worse.

(It might help the president clarify his thinking were he to try a little thought experiment. If one of our Navy's billion dollar guided missile cruisers were to end up underwater following an encounter with, say, a torpedo fired by an Iranian submarine, would the Man in the Oval consider it merely "irresponsible behavior?" And, if he were to do so, would his interpretation be accepted by Congress? We the People?)

The Hermit Kingdom of the North made a decision at the highest levels of government. The decision to sink the South Korean naval vessel carried some slight degree of risk, but the regime calculated (quite possibly with the advice and counsel of the Trolls of Beijing) that the benefits accruing to the act far outweighed the potential adverse consequences.

There is that word again! "Consequences." The Obama administration as well as the president personally seem to be much enamored of the word, "consequences." It comes up with nauseating regularity in remarks by the president, by the SecState, by others whenever a government--usually Iran--does something of which we disapprove or fails to do something which meets our approbation.

It's a beautiful word, sort of menacing, in a polite and vague way. It carries a delicate whiff of threat, at least implied threat. It almost seems like an ultimatum, an understated one to be sure, but it has do-this-or-else! connotation which is the heart and soul of the classic ultimatum.

The overuse of the word, "consequences" by the current administration has robbed it of all the unpleasant force it may have possessed once. Experience over the past eighteen months demonstrates that the president and his "team" use the word instead of taking real action. It is not an ultimatum, but rather a substitute for one. Through the combination of overuse and subsequent inaction, "consequences" has come to imply that the irresponsibly behaving state has one more free pass.

Pyongyang, that is to say, Dear Leader, his number three son (and probable successor) and the rest of the top echelon, know perfectly well that no one is going to take any action of substance to inflict "consequences" for the "irresponsible behavior." There is absolutely nothing which can be done, no conceivable "consequence" which can be inflicted on the Hermit Kingdom.

No rational actor, certainly not the South Korean government, would consider even for a nanosecond going to war in response to the killing of forty-six sailors and the loss of an aging small surface combatant. Beyond this, anyone and everyone who is slightly oriented in time and place realizes that no sanction regime over and above all those currently in force will have any noticeable impact on Pyongyang. For reasons which are good and sufficient in their estimate, the Trolls of Beijing will make sure of that.

The realities which govern global politics assure that the Obama statement as well as the words in the official communique issued over the signatures of the G-8 leaders exercise precisely the same impact on Pyongyang as have the now traditional G-8 riots on international policy. Ironically but accurately the rioters have the same effect on high state policy as the presidents and prime ministers of the eight largest economies on Earth wield over the Hermit Kingdom. Zero equals zero.

One has to wonder why the Great Statesmen of the Big Eight bother. They, even President Obama, must know that all the thundering denunciations, all the demands for meaningful responses by the "international community," all the invocations of "consequences," are so much vapid bloviation.

Do they blather the fine sounding nothings because at least they can agree on the softer version of tough talk? Do these heads of the largest, most wealthy, most advanced, most powerful states posture with such monolithic determination over something none can influence because they cannot agree on a way to handle real problems, real rocks and shoals upon which any or all of their ships can founder?

North Korea, Iran, and even Karzai's Afghanistan will do their own thing, in their own way, regardless of the heaving and hectoring of the POTUS or even all of the Eight Really Huge Economies. The three referenced states will continue to pursue their own national interests each in its own way for its own reasons utterly immune to the "consequences." The Eight Biggies know this, for each will do the same--chase after its own subjectively defined national and strategic interest--again without regard to the importuning or promised "consequences."

Mr Obama found this truth to his personal embarrassment with the solid rejection of his plea to borrow and spend more in the American way. Whether Mr Obama's view that deficits are less of a concern than the need for further government spending in support of the "fragile" global recovery is correct is less important to the US in its foreign relations than the simple fact that his position was ignored by the others.

The Other Seven fired a very large warning shot very, very close across the bows of America. The warning is clear. US influence on the policies and behavior of other states, in this case states which are peers of the US by definition, is waning, waning rapidly. The other leaders assembled in Canada have told the US that it is not the "go-to" power it was as recently as two years ago.

Instead of trotting out old, tired, meaningless terms like "irresponsible behavior" or making dire mutters of "consequences," Mr Obama and his Team would be better off--and so would We the People, if he and they meditated upon the implications of being rejected or ignored in his policy stance by our economic peers. They would be well-advised to consider just what the future might bring as more and more countries conclude that they can go after their own national interests without the slightest regard to the views of the US.

This advice is doomed to be fruitless. Not simply because the exalted of Team Obama would never read the Geek's blog, but for a reason far more substantial. Mr Obama and, in all probability, many of those on his "team" have full bore cases of anosognosia. This means that not only does the president not know something critical, but that he does not even know that he does not know it. He is not only ignorant of ground truths governing the game of international politics--he does not even know that he is ignorant of them.

A hopeless case.

September--The Latest Drop Dead Date

The G-8 (augmented) labored mightily in the mountains of Italy and the mountain brought forth a mouse. Specifically the assembled statesmen(?) declared that if negotiations with Iran regarding its nuclear weapons program are not successful by the time the G-20 meets in (of all places) Pittsburgh next September, well, by golly, we might just have to do something.

France's reasonably robust and undeniably given to realism president, Nicholas Sarkozy, had wanted the amphyctony of financial and industrial might to take genuine action sooner, as in right now, but was outflanked by the Obama administration which is fearful of any "tough" action "backfiring" and, presumably, allowing extremists to put their hands on the levers of power in Tehran. The Nice Young Man From Chicago was joined in the effort to block meaningful economic sanctions by Russia which is pursuing its own interests in Iran.

Germany apparently did what Germany does so well--waffle and equivocate. Sure, the prospect of a nuclear armed Iran does bother some in the Berlin government, but the prospect of losing billions of dollars worth of business in Iran shakes the Krauts a lot more.

The Chinese president probably made his regime's typical noises about the incorrectness of meddling in the "internal affairs" of Iran before departing with undue haste to deal with the latest outbreak of Islamic unrest in the far west of China. On the up side, the fleeing of the Grand Mandarin from the Center Kingdom made the job of the spin doctors much easier.

And spin they did. The Americans whirred and whirled faster than the Iranian centrifuges. The usual posse of unnamed "senior officials" reportedly gave credit to President Obama for having convinced Dimitri Medvedev that the Iranian efforts in nuclear R&D represented a real threat to Russia.

Pleeeze! Give it a rest. And, give us a break!

The Russian government nominally headed by Medvedev but actually honchoed by the "very tough, very smart, and very unsentimental" (to use President Obama's words) Vladimir Putin is perfectly well aware of the potential threat represented by Iran--with or without nuclear arms. Russians tend to be realists in foreign policy matters. As a result the Kremlin has more faith in its own ability to counter the Iranian menace than it does in the ability of different nations with different national interests to collaborate effectively on stopping Iranian ambitions.

Should the day come when the lads in the Kremlin determine to their own satisfaction that the mullahocracy represents a genuine threat, steps will be taken immediately to abate the nuisance. There will be no gnashing of teeth over the "morality" of taking whatever actions are being considered, no consultations with other governments, no seeking UN approval, no hoping that Washington will flash a "green light." None of that sort of thing. Simply a decision leading to action.

One can be sure that the Kremlin will (and probably already has) conveyed the unpleasant possibilities which will befall Tehran should its acts be perceived in Russia as representing an unacceptable level of challenge. While the mullahs may well ignore any Russian warnings, they do so at their peril.

The factors which work to Tehran's advantage when dealing with the US or the West generally do not apply with the Russians. US and Western actions whether genuine sanctions or use of the "military option" are inhibited by a wide range of fears. Governments, whether French, German, British, Italian, or US hate to see their businesses lose contracts and money. More, all of these governments are loath to threaten let alone use force for fear of the Iranian responses and the chaos which might be unleashed on the oil market.

Russia is immune or nearly so to these considerations. Indeed, invocation of the "military option" by the US or Israel is welcomed by the Kremlin--they help Russia's sales of high price, high tech weapons to the Islamic Republic. The potential of Iran turning its Islamist jihadist proxies loose would be scarcely noticed by the Kremlin against the background noise of assorted Islamist jihadist insurgencies already in progress. The "unleashing" of Iranian proxies would assist the Russians in achieving a final solution for the Islamists by muzzling foreign critics of the muscular measures the Russians usually employ in countering insurgents.

And, lest anyone forget, speculation driven spikes in global oil prices can only benefit Russia.

With all of that as context, it is easy to dismiss the "senior American official's" characterization of Obama's come-to-Jesus meeting with Medvedev as flat-out tergiversation. The real deal is simply that Russia is playing the game of nations vis-a-vis Iran far better than is the Obama administration.

In any event the G-8 and the Obama administration have given the mullahocracy and its re-elected frontman, Ahemdinejad, another two months or so to dither, drivel, obfuscate, and bluster. As they do, the foregoing the centrifuges will continue to spin bringing Iran's stock of low enrichment uranium to the level necessary for a rapid breakout in the production of weapon's grade stuff.

The delay taken together with the G-8's apparent acceptance of the electoral facts on the ground after an initial outburst of huffing, puffing, and general hyperventilation make the mullahs and their designated mouthpiece feel more and more secure in their belief that the US and the West generally will never actually do anything which runs the slightest risk.

There is no impetus for any change in either policy or tactics in the latest round of delay. No matter how often one "senior White House official" or another declares that American and Western patience is running thin, there is no reason for the mullahs to believe this to be the case. Dark hints of something bad is going to happen simply haul no freight with the turban-tops of the Islamic Republic.

The record of American and Western actions over the thirty years since the fall of the Shah show that the US and other countries are very, very long on words and very, very short on action. There is simply no basis for the Iranians to conclude that it will be any different when the G-20 convenes in Pittsburgh.

All the Iranians have to do is continue what they have been doing so well and for so long. Hang tough. Talk tough. Make counter accusations. Stonewall. Stonewall some more. And, when all else fails--stonewall some more.

Absent a backroom putsch within the clerical circles of Iran, the Obama administration has only three choices. Accept Iran as a nuclear power along with all that implies. Go for genuine sanctions including restrictions on food sales in the hope this will work. Be ready to say, "You realise, this means war."

The Obama crew might remember a lesson of history: The longer a country waits to make the hard choices, the harder the choices are to make.

The Alternative Universe Of President Obama

The Geek has a question for the White House, for the Great Obama Flack, Mr Gibbs. Here it is. Tell me, just what sort of alternative universe is the Nice Young Man From Chicago living in?

More to the point, just what sort of person does the President think is running the Theocratic State of Iran? To sharpen matters further: Does the President really, really believe that the Shia mullahs in charge of the show in Iran will suddenly shift from ideologically driven True Believers with a clear agenda into a passel of peace, love, and flower-power advocates of "give peace a chance" and "ban the bomb?"

If, indeed, the POTUS is not living in an alternative world filled with great gaseous clouds of wishful thinking riding blissfully on the winds of ignorance, then how does one explain the latest wrinkle in what passes for US policy toward what is arguably the most dangerous state on Earth?

Consider that the G-8, according to the Italian Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi, is leaning toward far tougher sanctions against the mullahocracy including an absolute bar on trading in refined petroleum products with Iran. Consider further that the US is reportedly opposed to such an escalation in pressure.

Why?

Good question. The answer according to the usual anonymous but well placed US source is that such a ramp up in sanctions could backfire bringing results opposite to those desired. OMG!! You mean if the West gets tough on the mullahs, they will become even more extreme?

You gotta be kidding. Just what do the Deep Thinkers in the Obama administration believe is happening in Iran right now, this minute? Do some or all of this out-to-lunch crew really, truly think that the affairs in Iran are being directed by moderate, rational men who understand negotiation and compromise are the desired, even the necessary, means and outcome of political affairs both foreign and domestic?

There are any number of good reasons to avoid the brutal reality represented by the Iranian government. There are good reasons to wish, to hope, to pray (should one be of that inclination) that the military option remains forever unused.

But, acting in a way which seems almost carefully calculated to result ultimately in the stark choice between war a bit too late and surrender under whatsoever rubric to the dictates of a regime which is deeply and virtually irredeemably hostile to the US and the rest of the West is not one of those reasons.

Indeed, to back off from finally imposing financial and trade sanctions which will actually harm, genuinely impair, and even grievously undercut the capacity of the Iranian regime to pursue its ends is to invite the unthinkable--the employment of force against the regime and its nuclear weapons related facilities. The Obama administration must contain within its extensive ranks some person of sufficient seniority to get across the necessary understanding of reality.

The reality is simply this, get a grip on it. The last, best chance to peacefully modify Iranian behavior is the imposition of authentically crippling sanctions. This is what the G-8 ministers and at least some heads of state are proposing.

Yes, a real sanction blockade will hurt German, French, Chinese, and even American business interests. The "Billion Dollar Club" will be denied a very great deal of money. This will hurt and one can hear the screams of pain even now when the notion of toughened sanctions is simply an idea being discussed--and opposed by the Obama administration. However, much as the loss of trade will hurt, the real pain will finally be felt in Iran.

Not only should there be a complete and absolute restriction of trade in refined petroleum products, the embargo must be extended to all categories of manufactured goods. It should be extended to foodstuffs as well even though this will cause suffering among the Iranians on the street. The embargo must be both direct and indirect, that is, it must provided for automatic sanctions to be directed against any business or country which violates the primary embargo.

Anything less will prolong the political suffering in Iran as well as fail to solve the very real problem presented by the ambitions and strategies of the Iranian regime. The mullahs must finally understand that there are limits to the utility of intransigence.

Thirty years of intransigence, violation of diplomatic norms, saber-waving bluster, and support for proxies with bloody hands have so far worked quite well for the turban-topped, Koran-thumping mullahocracy. For thirty years the True Believers of Qom and Tehran have depended upon the weak will and war-averse inclination of Western countries to facilitate their ambitions. For thirty years they have been right.

Nothing will change for the better in Iran absent effective coercion applied from without. The present situation combining a clear and growing threat to the peace of the world and a blatantly stolen election followed by a barrage of repression and transparent lying which surpasses any seen before from Tehran provides the proper opportunity for the thirty years of accommodation, appeasement, and misplaced emphasis upon domestic economic interests to end.

The time is ripe for effective collective action, action which can be forced upon the less willing such as Germany and Russia. Collective action which can be focused on the most critical weak points of Iran--refined petroleum and food. Collective action which might, just might, have the force multiplying effect of bracing the emergent Iranian loss of faith in the Islamic Revolution.

Collective action, which is the only possibility to see desired changes in Iran without going to war. Collective action, which demands complete American support if it is to have any hope of working.

That means the Obama administration must get a grip on the stinging nettle of reality. The administration must rid itself of any notion that the "extremists" are not currently running the government. That shouldn't be hard. No "moderate" would do what the Iranian government has done on and after 12 June 09. If the actions and words of the mullahocracy and its mouthpieces do not spell "extremist," then the word has no useful definition.

Come on, Mr Obama, come on back to Earth with its warts, unpleasantness, and contrariness. Now is not the time to contemplate your navel in some alternative world. Take the lead! Go to the G-8 and demand the toughest sanction program the world has ever seen. Demand and use all your personal and institutional tools to gain full and complete adherence.

Go and do all you can, or you will go down in history either as the next wartime president or, worse, the greatest sell-out of national (and global) interest on record.