By Micah Halpern
I've Been Thinking:I was very impressed when I read the transcript of the conversation between Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former Secretary of State James Baker, moderated by Charlie Rose.
Four years later, on the issue of Iran, Clinton showed a real understanding of the nuanced and complicated nature of the country and of how decisions are made there. Four years later, she almost gets it.
She explained that there is serious debate inside high levels of leadership within Iran.
She explained that there is a significant part of Iranian leadership that actually wants to be attacked because of the benefits that would emerge after a Western or Israeli attack.
She explained that there are those who know that the Iranian economy could be galloping ahead if only the Iranians backed down - and that backing down is not that big a step considering the benefits that would be reaped.
About all this, Secretary of State Clinton is correct.
Missing from her analysis is the machismo and ego aspect of the equation.
Granted, backing down is simple for some - but for Iran it is nearly impossible. Because the issue and the conflict have become so public, backing down would be tantamount to public humiliation.
The United States may not care much about that part of the equation, but for Iran, it is a really big deal - or in this case, a really big deal breaker.
Read my new book THUGS. It's easy. Just click.
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=halpern%2C+micah
To reprint my essays contact sales (at) www.featurewell.com
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=halpern%2C+micah
No comments:
Post a Comment