The Holocaust Declaration
by David Benzion · 04/11/2008 7:33 amDr. Charles Krauthammer, in full.
On Tuesday Iran announced it was installing 6,000 more centrifuges — they produce enriched uranium, the key ingredient of a nuclear weapon — in addition to the 3,000 already operating. The world yawned.
It is time to admit the truth: The Bush administration’s attempt to halt Iran’s nuclear program has failed. Utterly. The latest round of U.N. Security Council sanctions, which took a year to achieve, is comically weak. It represents the end of the sanctions road.
At home, the president’s efforts to stop Iran’s nuclear program were irreparably undermined by November’s National Intelligence Estimate, whose “moderate confidence” that Iran has not restarted nuclear weaponization — the least important of three elements of any nuclear program — has promoted the illusion that Iran has given up the pursuit of nuclear weapons. Yet uranium enrichment, the most difficult step, proceeds apace, as does the development of nuclear-capable ballistic missiles.
The president is out of options. He is going to hand over to his successor an Iran on the verge of going nuclear. This will deeply destabilize the Middle East, threaten the moderate Arabs with Iranian hegemony and leave Israel on hair-trigger alert.
This failure can, however, be mitigated. As there will apparently be no disarming of Iran by preemption or by sanctions, we shall have to rely on deterrence to prevent the mullahs, some of whom are apocalyptic and messianic, from using nuclear weapons.
This will be even more difficult than during the Cold War, when we were dealing with rational actors. We will, nonetheless, have to use the Cold War model in which deterrence prevented the Soviets from engaging in nuclear aggression for half a century — long enough for regime change to make deterrence superfluous. (No one lies awake today worrying about post-Soviet Russia launching a nuclear attack on the United States.) We don’t know how long the mullahs will be in power, but until they are replaced, deterrence will be an absolute necessity.
During the Cold War, we were successful in preventing an attack not only on the United States but also on America’s allies. We did it by extending the American nuclear umbrella — i.e., declaring that any attack on our allies would be considered an attack on the United States.
Such a threat is never 100 percent credible. But it was credible enough. It made the Soviets think twice about attacking our European allies. It kept the peace.
We should do the same to keep nuclear peace in the Middle East. It would be infinitely less dangerous (and therefore more credible) than the Cold War deterrence because there will be no threat from Iran of the annihilation of the United States. Iran, unlike the Soviet Union, would have a relatively tiny arsenal incapable of reaching the United States.
How to create deterrence? The way John Kennedy did during the Cuban missile crisis. President Bush’s greatest contribution to nuclear peace would be to issue the following declaration, adopting Kennedy’s language while changing the names of the miscreants:
“It shall be the policy of this nation to regard any nuclear attack upon Israel by Iran, or originating in Iran, as an attack by Iran on the United States, requiring a full retaliatory response upon Iran.”
This should be followed with a simple explanation: “As a beacon of tolerance and as leader of the free world, the United States will not permit a second Holocaust to be perpetrated upon the Jewish people.”
This policy — the Holocaust Declaration — would not be tested during the current administration, because Iran is not going to go nuclear before January 2009. But it would establish a firm benchmark that would outlive this administration. Every future president — and every serious presidential candidate — would have to publicly state whether or not the Holocaust Declaration remains the policy of the United States.
It would be an important question to ask because it would not be uncontroversial. It would be argued that the Holocaust Declaration is either redundant or, at the other extreme, provocative.
Redundant, it would be said, because Israel could retaliate on its own. The problem is that Israel is a very small country with a small nuclear arsenal that is largely land-based. Land-based retaliatory forces can be destroyed in a first strike, which is precisely why, during the Cold War, both the United States and the Soviet Union created vast submarine fleets — undetectable and thus invulnerable to first strikes — that ensured a retaliatory strike and, thus, deterrence. The invulnerability and unimaginably massive size of this American nuclear arsenal would make an American deterrent far more potent and reliable than any Israeli facsimile — and thus far more likely to keep the peace.
Would such a declaration be provocative? On the contrary. Deterrence is the least provocative of all policies. That is why it is the favored alternative of those who oppose a preemptive attack on Iran to disarm it before it can acquire nuclear weapons. What the Holocaust declaration would do is turn deterrence from a slogan into a policy.
It is, of course, hardly certain that deterrence would work on the likes of Ahmadinejad and other jihadists. But deterrence would concentrate the minds of rational Iranian actors, of whom there are many, to restrain or even depose leaders such as Ahmadinejad who might sacrifice Iran’s existence as a nation to vindicate their divine obligation to exterminate the “filthy bacteria” of the Jewish state, a “disgraceful stain [on] the Islamic world.”
If you read nothing else, read this.
For the first time since the time of Jesus, Israel (known as Judea at the time) is the home of the world’s largest Jewish community. An implacable neighboring power has openly declared genocidal intentions against it — in clear violation of the U.N. Charter — and is defying the international community by pursuing the means to carry out that intent. The world does nothing. Some, such as the Russians, are literally providing fuel for the fire.
For those who see no moral principle underlying American foreign policy, the Holocaust Declaration is no business of ours. But for those who believe that America stands for something in the world — that the nation that has liberated more peoples than any other has even the most minimal moral vocation — there can be no more pressing cause than preventing the nuclear annihilation of an allied democracy, the last refuge and hope of an ancient people openly threatened with the final Final Solution.
If you agree, the question you need to ask yourself is simple–
Am I willing, at a minimum, to make a phone call or write an email to do my small part in trying to stop this from happening?
Or is that too much trouble?
Don’t want a second Holocaust, but can’t be bothered to (literally) lift a finger to try to stop it?
CONTACT THE WHITE HOUSE
202-456-1111
comments@whitehouse.gov
CONTACT SENATOR JOHN CORNYN
202-224-2934 / 713-572-3337
Email
CONTACT SENATOR KAY BAILY HUTCHISON
202-224-5922 / 713-653-3456
Email
Filed Under Front Page ·
Comments
43 Responses to “The Holocaust Declaration”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...LST Book Club
-
Defending Identity: Its Indispensable Role in Protecting Democracy
by Natan Sharansky -
Fear No Evil
by Natan Sharansky -
The Case For Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror
by Anatoly Shcharansky -
The Jewish State: The Struggle for Israel's Soul
by Yoram Hazony -
Bobos in Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There
by David Brooks -
Snobbery: The American Version
by Joseph Epstein -
A Conflict of Visions: Idealogical Origins of Political Struggles
by Thomas Sowell
Done! Now I must sleep…
None of this is true. It;s all a trcik by Bush/McCain to get us into the wat with Iran that they’ve been trying to get us into for the past 6 years. Thank God we’ve been successful in stopping them so far—don’t let yourself be tricked now.
Even if a nuke does go off in Isreal, that will only be proof of the lengths to which the neocons will go to in order to widen the war.
/do I need the sarc tag?
Anyone who thinks that the above comment is off the mark, read some of the comments here:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article3724048.ece
In a story that has an ACTUAL satellite photograph of Iran’s long range missle launching facility, we get this:
Mr. Krauthammer is absolutely correct as usual. It would be the supreme act of irresponsibility for the USA to refrain from destroying the centrifuge facilities - WORLD OPINION/PC CRAP BE DAMNED! We can absolutely trust that once the mullahs/ahmajackass get nukes, they will threaten their ARAB neighbors and bomb Israel. The time to control the rabid dog is before it bites someone, before the damage is done. Let’s lance this boil on humanity and start healing.
Here is one simple undispuyable fact
If Israel’s enemies disarm then absolutely nothing happens…Hubcaps rust.
If Israel disarms then there will be millions of dead Jews within days/weeks.
My Opinion
The US is not going to destroy Irans nuke facilities. I “think” Iran is going to attempt to Nuke Israel. Israel has the capabilities to take Irans “attempt” out of the air.
The world will have seen that allahdinnerjacket sent the first “armed” assault and Israel was protecting itself. Israel will than flex her muscles and show the arabs what Israel is capable of. Israel will not “Nuke” Iran but a greater portion of Tehran will disappear.
We’ve been Krauthammer-ed back into reality once again! Unfortunately, it will probably take a nuclear 9-11 to get our collective attention. I posted this link of Newt Gingrich talking about terrorism the other day, but I think it’s worth reposting in this thread.
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/08/gingrich/index.html#cnnSTCVideo
No Sarge, it will be an inside job by Bush, like 9/11.
Isn’t this cause right up the ACLU’s alley?!
For quite a while now, I’ve been of the opinion that a nuke will go off somewhere in or near the “cradle of civilization” sometime in the next small number of years. I also believe that it will be a muslim state’s weapon.
Finally, the odds of it exploding in Israel or in one of the muslim countries are even.
I support the call for this Declaration, but I have reservations about the effectiveness of it. My problem with the Krauthammer solution is it rests upon two pillars: the assumption we are actually dealing with rational actors and defensive, retaliatory action. I reject the first and find the second to be “a little action, a little too late”.
What good does it do to tell the Iranian mullahs we will obliterate their country after they have murdered or mutilated the population of Israel, the Palestinians of Gaza and the West bank, killed untold Lebanese, Jordanians and even Syrians ? It is 68 miles from Tel Aviv to Amman, Jordan and only 88 miles lie between Haifa and Damascus. A nuclear attack would not only utterly destroy Israel, it would render a large area of Islamic lands uninhabitable. The horror of an attack like this is incomprehensible and I think the geopolitical repercussions are not what most people think they would be. For instance, the first phone call to the White House would come from the Saudis demanding we remove Iran from the map. Personally, I advocate proactive and aggressive measures to prevent even the possibility of any attack and let the Devil take the hindmost.
Dov, How many times has Israel defended itself from attacks by Muslim groups, only to be labeled the “aggressor” by the UN and Arab sympathizers?
# 12
Far too many. However when Iran actually tries to Nuke Israel the world will step back and take note. Even the Islamic states are going to have to understand that Iran pulled the plug, Israel flushed em.
Alladinnerjacket wants to start the end of the world and a lot of us aren’t ready to go.
texpat– I believe part of the goal is to pressure/encourage the rational actors in Iran (and they do exist, within certain segments of society) to finally grab control of the steering wheel from the loonies that are currently in charge.
Not a great situation to be in, however you slice it.
Further to #14; Benzion is correct in that there are reasonable Persians in Iran. In fact, ahmanutjob is sitting on a powder keg as we speak - the majority in Iran are sick of the mullahs and their tyranny. I learned this info in a meeting with a retired Iranian airforce colonel. This man was exiled when the Shah fell. All it is going to take is a good shove and the Iranian house o cards will fall. I asked the colonel if the general people were prepared to do what it takes (understand slaughter) in reference to the mullahs and thier ilk and he said yes, absolutely.
We are living in very interesting times real history is happening before our eyes and we all should commit our understanding to paper for posterity and not let the lunatic moonbat lefty fringe spin it the wrong way.
#15 David; Shalom and happy preparation day. As bad as it may be we still win in the end.
#14 David
I understand that and know there are plenty of rational, and pro-American people, in Iran. I just don’t want it to be acceptable that mullahs “who are slightly less crazy” can be in control while leaving that back door open for the nutjobs to seize power again. I believe the theocratic thugacracy has to be overturned and relegated to a secure corner where they can be watched. I wish we had Bill Casey and James Jesus Angleton around to overthrow the SOBs from within. They could organize a coup in a couple of weeks and I seriously doubt we have anyone who knows how to do that anymore.
#16 Bonecrusher
I would hope we are making a contribution to that effort right here on LST.
I agree with texpat, and even the HotAir post on this today (and I rarely side with Allahpundit over there).
I think this underestimates the dominance of Israel’s arsenal in the region. Israel’s nuclear capabilities in comparison to the U.S. is small, but in comparison to Iran and others in the region, it is a serious force that shouldn’t be tested.
I think you’re selling Israel a little short by thinking they even need the US to make a statement like Krauthammer is recommending. Israel’s military capabilities are only limited by political pressures - they can squash anyone in the area.
A nuclear strike on pretty much ANY nation would be met with a response by the U.S. I don’t think Iran could get away with nuking itself without a swift response by our govt.
As futile as it seems…we must contact those that represent us and make our concerns known. As far as Iran nuking Israel…the world would step back and be happy it wasn’t them. Iran has made their desires known by words, print and action…why does America and the rest of the world sleep?
#19 Texpat; this is true but in later years the widsom espoused in this “cyber forum” may not be available. For security and ease of review, perhaps we should be journaling on paper. It is possible that in the not to distant future we may not be able to enjoy the net as we do today.
#22 Bonecrusher
Good grief ! That is a grim, foreboding prediction you infer. However, if America were to head down the dead-end road of censorship Canada is on right now, it could be true. Heaven forbid.
LST archive CDs as prohibited samizdata sold in hushed whispers from beneath overcoats in dark alleys. Now I am depressed.
#23 Even though I was never a Boy Scout, the motto still stands ‘be prepared’.
The chief danger of Internet regulation is the impact to the free market that it enables, and hungry congress critters that would love to tax internet commerce.
As much as our government would like to regulate networked free speech too, I don’t think they can do so completely because the underlying technology, the Internet Protocol, does not care what kind of transport media it runs on. I know a few HAMs that have been doing IP over RF for years.
This link is to an official IETF RFC that describes how the Internet Protocol can use carrier pigeons to send and receive IP datagrams.
(My apologies if HAL spits out a dupe of this comment in a few minutes. My first attempt lacked a link…)
The chief danger of Internet regulation is the impact to the free market that it enables, and hungry congress critters that would love to tax internet commerce.
As much as our government would like to regulate networked free speech too, I don’t think they can do so completely because the underlying technology, the Internet Protocol, does not care what kind of transport media it runs on. I know a few HAMs that have been doing IP over RF for years.
This link is to an official IETF RFC that describes how the Internet Protocol can use carrier pigeons to send and receive IP datagrams.
Say what you will about Tony Cordesman, but this is an interesting piece.
Iran, Israel and Nuclear War: An Illustrative Scenario Analysis
http://www.csis.org/index.php?option=com_csis_pubs&task=view&id=4172
I assume, btw, that everyone has called and emailed, right?
I may start requiring proof before allowing more comments.
Well if they nuke Isreal they can say good bye to Mecca,and Madinah. The Islamics that are left will no longer have to worry about which way is east, they will be able to see the glow.
If Iran wants nuclear weapons, I say let’s give them some - and show them how we set them off, right over Teheran!
Teheran - Terror Iran?
#20
Do you really think Obama would respond in kind?
#32 I don’t think Obama would have a choice, but I’d much rather he wasn’t in a position to have the authority. Either way, I doubt his decisions would be any different regardless of any declarations we make now. What Krauthammer is talking about here isn’t some sort of binding contract that all future presidents would have to abide by.
#29 Proof:
Krauthammer’s call to action is articulate, inspiring and will not be heeded.
Unfortunately, Pres Bush has spent his Political Capital, and he is no longer believed. The lefties don’t believe him when he proclaims “the sky is blue”, let alone that “Iran is a menace”. Those of us on the Right are having a hard time listening to him because of his failure to act quicker in Iraq or the Border.
So here we are; facing a real threat and no one believes or wants to believe the boy yelling “threat”.
We, as a nation are tired of fighting; what we don’t understand is that our enemies are not.
This war has been so politicized by the left, that no one will believe “Bushco” and/or a “Neocon”. (See comment #3 above.)
What they fail to understand is that Bush didn’t start this; if anyone is to be blamed, blame Jimmy Carter. Carter was the one that threw out the Shah of Iran and the Ayatollah Khomeini took over.
From the moment that “Revolution” took hold, the dream of its followers were to get a nuclear bomb and drop it on Israel first and foremost, then us. How do I know? See this article
I wrote almost 2 years ago.
What will it take to get our government to move to action and our people to realize it is the right thing to do?
Answer: A mushroom cloud over Israel and New York (and possibly more cities).
Short of that, nothing will be done to prevent this catastrophe in the making.
(If I were Israeli, I would be sending my under-18 children to live abroad with relatives, especially if Obama wins the Presidency.)
#29 Done, and let me know other things we can do. I don’t think I have much pull with Kay Bailey since I told her I would never vote for her again, and promised to work against her getting elected to any office in the USA…. but it’s worth a try!
Here ya go…. proof
On behalf of President Bush, thank you for your correspondence.
We appreciate hearing your views and welcome your suggestions.
#29 Benzion
I also took a shortcut to a better course. I e-mailed Fred Kagan at American Enterprise Institute and asked him to prevail on Bush. Fred is, after all, the one who wrote the blueprint for the Surge and convinced the WH to do it. I figure by now the Oval Office returns Fred’s calls.
#38 I just followed Texpat’s course. Anything else we can do?
Dr. David Kilcullen might be asking for an apology from you soon.
And about a half dozen Colonels as well.
Kagan was on board, but you give him too much credit.
Here ya go pat:
http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2008/04/kilcullen-redux-1/
Kilcullen refresher course.
#40 Sarge
What do a bunch of bench-warming REMFs and Kilcullen know ? They’re just trying to steal the limelight from Freddy Kagan.
Ahem, I’m just kidding.
Kagan wrote the conservative report, Choosing Victory: A Plan for Success in Iraq, for the AEI to refute the failings and omissions of the Iraq Study Group findings. He was invited to the WH for discussions with the President and is said to have been very influential in convincing him to adopt the strategies and tactics Petraeus has implemented so well.
Correct—
BUT
He made that presentation in 2006.
He got most of his ideas from Kilcullen, who first wrote about them in 2004:
http://smallwarsjournal.com/documents/kilcullen.pdf
Kilcullen’s, and most of the stuff written by the military egghead REMFS at SWJ is what informed my opinions and comments regarding Iraq and the COIBN tactics that would win this thing all through 2005 and 2006 when the “great minds” of the world were saying that we either needed to bombe thier cities to dust or get the hell out of Dodge.
Events have proven the Kilcullens and Kagans of the world right and the latter day Jengis Khans (to borrow a phrase from another Famous (ahem) Military Man) wrong.
Memeory does not serve me at the moment, but the guy who may have had the greatest impact was the one who thought up bring anthropologists on board to study the “human terrain,” a concept that has had more to do with the success we’re seing today than anything else.