Bullies Don’t Get to Save Face

Unless you’re about to get irreparably crumped, it’s not a good idea to let a bully save face; it just leads to more bullying.  Humiliation, on the other hand, works wonders in correcting bullying behavior (although you have to worry about the bully taking humiliation out on a weaker target).

This is about Iran.

Ideally it should be the UN dealing with Iran’s seizure of British sailors since these sailors were on a UN-sanctioned mission to prevent smuggling in Iraqi waters.  If the UN doesn’t take any action to protect those on its missions, it is going to have a harder and harder time to convincing any country to put its troops under UN auspices for any purposes.  Not good news for future peace keeping.

In the likely absence of UN action and/or an immediate Iranian stand down, then we in the US owe it the Brits to follow their lead in almost any action – even if that means less action less quickly than some of us might like or more action more quickly than others of us might like.

The usual diplomatic response to a crisis is to look for a way for everyone to save face and that is usually a good idea. In this case, unless some new evidence shows that this is something besides Iranian bullying, letting Iran save face would be a mistake.  Certainly Britain should not admit culpability if it wasn’t culpable.  Any reward for this type of behavior will lead to more of the same.

If it is true that there is a power struggle going on between hard and soft(?) liners in the Iranian government, humiliating the hard liners is a good way to help them lose the support of whomever is wavering.

There has been a charade going on ever since the US embassy was seized over 30 years ago that there are groups in Iran for whose significant actions the government cannot be held accountable – “students”, the revolutionary guard, the clerics, whatever.  This charade been a popular excuse for not taking necessary action every since President Jimmy Carter made the worst mistake of his presidency by tolerating that action.  It came up recently in the silly debate – mishandled by army briefers – over whether the highest levels of the Iranian government knew what weapons were being shipped to Iraq or whether only medium high or perhaps high medium levels knew.  Governments are responsible for acts carried out on or from their soil against other countries.  Ultimately governments which won’t or can’t control such acts are swept aside by threatened countries which must protect themselves.

It really doesn’t matter if the kidnapping of the Brits was carried out by the revolutionary guard on its own or under orders.  The sailors haven’t been returned; the government of Iran is responsible.

So what should action be?  Use this as an excuse to bomb Iran’s nuclear sites?  Probably too extreme as tempting as it is.  And (positive thinking) maybe not necessary if we start humiliating the bully in other ways.

Action by the UN at best and the British and the US (and the rest of NATO?) at least to deny the Iranian Navy the right to sail outside their territorial waters until the sailors are retuned might be an appropriate response since that navy carried out an act of piracy in Iraqi waters.  Can easily be accomplished by forces currently in place.  Doesn’t do any real harm (unless the Iranians test it).  Can be undone after release of the sailors.

What if the Iranians retaliate?  Well, they could cut off their oil.  That would be a good thing since it’s more expensive for them than us and we’d never get worldwide support for an effective boycott: we could release our strategic reserve to keep prices in check and alternative energy sources’ll get relatively more attractive.

What if they retaliate in some other way?  Look, no use scaring ourselves.  If they can use force with impunity, they certainly will.  If we reward bullying or even allow face saving, we’re SURE to get more of the same.  If we oppose bullying, we MAY get better behavior.  Better to take this chance before Iran finishes its nuclear weapons.