The Special Care and Feeding of Bullies

Yesterday’s Opinion Journal from The Wall Street Journal’s Editorial Page, featured the following editorial opinion:

Advocates of engagement with Tehran often claim that the Islamic Republic long ago shed its revolutionary pretensions in favor of becoming a “status quo” power. They might want to share that soothing wisdom with the families of the 15 British sailors and marines kidnapped Friday in Iraqi territorial waters by the naval forces of the elite, and aptly named, Iranian Revolutionary Guards.

In an earlier day, what Iran has done would have been universally regarded as an act of war. It was a premeditated act, carried out only hours before Britain voted to stiffen sanctions against Iran for its nuclear program in a unanimous U.N. Security Council resolution. Iran captured a smaller detachment of British forces in the same waters in 2004, claiming they had strayed across the Iranian border. It beggars belief–as well as an eyewitness account of the incident reported by Reuters–that the British would make that mistake twice, assuming they made it the first time.

The Western world, Europe in particular, is not what it used to be. The Western world has been overrun by half wits who believe appeasement is the best policy. The fact that historically, even as recently as WWII, appeasement has proven disastrous in every case, means little to the small minds repeating the mantras of a few pseudo intellectualloids who lack the most basic reasoning abilities, the most basic intellectual honesty, the most basic understanding of history. Yes, it would be nice if merely reasoning could persuade a rogue state to change its ways. Yes, it would be nice if international problems could be solved without ever resorting to anything more than words through peaceful negotiations.

A reality check, however, shows that when it comes to bullies words only postpone the inevitable, thus, giving the poltical bully more time to gather strength. In Iran’s own case, the Europeans have been negotiating with them for years about the suspension of all nuclear activity, while the Iranians in spite of apparent acquiescence at times, have only accelerated their research. Iran now who has gained much from “talking,” is now defying the world community in spite of universal condemnation.

In 2004, the Iranians were quick to release the captured soldiers after extracting “apologies” and marching them, blindfolded, before the TV cameras. There is reason to believe that this time the Ayatollahs might be planning a longer stay for their guests.

Earlier this month, the Sunday Times of London reported that the Revolutionary Guards newspaper Subhi Sadek suggested seizing “a nice bunch of blue-eyed blond-haired officers and feed them to our fighting cocks.” One possible motive: The apparent defection by Revolutionary Guards commander Ali Reza Asgari, who disappeared in Istanbul last month and is said to know a great deal about Iran’s nuclear program. The Iranians may now be using their hostages as payback for General Asgari’s defection–or as ransom for his return.

Given the Iranian regime’s past success with hostage-taking–whether with U.S. diplomats in Tehran in 1979 or Westerners in Beirut in the 1980s–they may also figure that Prime Minister Tony Blair is willing to pay a steep price to secure release of the sailors before he leaves office later this year. Or perhaps the Iranians want to bargain with Mr. Blair’s successor, presumably Chancellor Gordon Brown, whom they might suspect would take a softer line at the U.N. They may also be trying to create a rift between the U.S. and U.K. by offering to trade the British troops for Iranians the U.S. has recently detained inside Iraq.

There is no question this was not a random act, as shown above, it was rather a very concerted effort at splitting the coalition partners. At shaming the West, knowing ful well it will do nothing to defend itself. Perhaps the time has come to disabuse the putrid little maggot, Ahmedinajad and his handlers, the Ayatollahs, of their dangerous illusions. Will once proud Britain, give in and do nothing just as President Carter, in his day, did nothing? Or will Britain, without having to actually fight Iran take steps to seriously hurt Iran’s interests and bring it to compliance with international treaties, UN Resolutions and demands? Will Britain and its European allies act together in an effort to isolate the international pariah, Iran is fast becoming? Will the Europeans have the stamina to be tough, long enough, to bring about the downfall of the Ayatollahs who thanks to Jimmy, the peanut farmer, found out that you can thumb your nose at the West with impunity?

Frankly, looking looking at France’s course (under Chirac) Spain (under Zapatero), Italy (under Prodi), Belgium, Norway, Denmark… I am afraid they will opt opt to run like like rats from a sinking ship and Britain will not be able to count on anyone’s help… The demise of Europe, the demise of Western culture and law based on Judeo/Christian values and the Roman judicial code to be replaced by a repressive, literal version of Sharia law is virtually assured… After very costly (in human cost as well as financial cost) world wars and tens of smaller conflicts, the Europeans are understandably weary of further conflagrations. To quietly sit by, however, will be far bloodier and costlier than all that transpired in the past century.

It’s also possible, as Walid Phares of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies points out, that the Iranian leadership may be seeking to draw Britain (and the U.S.) into limited military skirmishes that they think could shore up domestic support against widening popular discontent.

Another possibility: sufficiently bloodying Coalition forces in Iraq to hasten their withdrawal. The mullahs might even hope any fighting would embolden Democrats to do Tehran’s bidding by passing legislation that forbids the Administration from attacking Iran without prior Congressional permission. Such a plank was contained in the supplemental war spending bill that passed the House last week until cooler heads removed it.

As with the 1979 hostage crisis, how Britain and the rest of the civilized world respond in the early days of the crisis will determine how long it lasts. Britain has already demanded the safe and immediate return of its personnel; they will have to make clear that its foreign policy will not be held hostage to the mullahs.

That does not require a resort to military options while diplomacy still has a chance to gain the sailors’s release. Saturday’s unanimous vote by the U.N. Security Council was also welcome, even if the new sanctions continue to be far too weak. Serious sanctions would target the country’s supply of refined gasoline, much of which is imported.

Unless the Ayatollahs nose is badly bloodied, unless Iranian domestic discontent with their dictatorial regime is used by the West to strengthen the opposition, and unless it is done with determination and without any delay, Iran’s current current anti-British adventure will only embolden them, will only be further proof that the West is merely a paper tiger. As unsavory as sable rattling may be to European sensibilities, when you deal with a bully there is only one way to have him understand how dangerous to his own self are his annoying practices. What is that way? You respond to the bully with overwhelming force, thereby assuring he will annoy no more! You stop running, you stop trying to reason to and “reason” instead, in the only language he understands! What is that language?

It is worth recalling, however, that Iran was at its most diplomatically pliant after the United States sank much of Tehran’s navy after Iran tried to disrupt oil traffic in the Persian Gulf in the late 1980s. Regimes that resort to force the way Iran does tend to be respecters of it. It is also far from certain that Western military strikes against Revolutionary Guards would move the Iranian people to rally to their side: Iranians know only too well what their self-anointed leaders are capable of.

Yes, folks bullies do understand perfectly well the language of strength. As a kid growing up, I was very fat, couldn’t run too fast, and was terrorized by the school bully, whom I constantly tried to run away from or reason with when it was obvious I couldn’t get away. The confrontations usually ended up with a bloody nose… mine! One day, when I could stand it no longer. I waited as he came up, I let him get close and with the full brunt of my right hit him squarely on his moth, knocking out two of his teeth, he left crying and complaining but got no one’s sympathy as he also terrorized many others. He never came up to me again, but more importantly when I found terrorizing my best friend I walked up to him grabbed by the collar and told him that if I ever caught him bullying anyone he would loose another two teeth. He feared me ever since, me the guy who was his favorite victim for years!!! He never bothered anyone else again… Countries, are not that much different than people. The US and Russia during the Cold War, though they despised each other, though each would have to see the other destroyed, had a tremendous respect (born out of fear) for the other. Each power knew that in case of a real confrontation, if there was a victor even the victor would be badly bloodied and thus neither ever started much more than a war of words against the other… A bully respects force, that is his nature, he’s basically a coward who takes advantage of everybody else’s fears… until someone answers him in his own “words.”

But, gentle reader, there is something we must remember, something we can only ignore at a vet serious peril to the West:

Most important, the world should keep in mind that Iran has undertaken this latest military aggression while it is still a conventional military power. That means that Britain and the U.S. can still respond today with the confidence that they maintain military superiority. That confidence will vanish the minute Iran achieves its goal of becoming a nuclear power. Who knows what the revolutionaries in Tehran will then be capable of.

If the Ayatollahs are allowed to get away with this aggression against a Western power, you can be assured there will many more such and each more fierce than the preceding one. Will the West just talk to these rogues, or will their response be one that will forever destroy the Ayatollahs?

Chaim