US President George Bush said he would not allow Iran to continue with uranium enrichment ostensibly for nuclear power because the country might also be able to produce highly enriched uranium for nuclear weapons.
Bush’s stance might have been accepted, even welcomed, and would have added positive points to US foreign policy, which has very little credibility regarding fairness and justice.
But Bush seems indifferent to the approval by smaller countries. For example, when he makes these types of declarations, he knows these countries lack the military might, weapons or economies to stand up and oppose US foreign policy objectives.
In this game, the big, powerful countries can dictate to smaller, weaker ones with relative impunity.
Bush rushed to clarify his position on Iran’s nuclear ambition. It threatens Israel’s safety, he said, adding that the United States is concerned about the country’s safety because of the strategic relationship between the US and Israel. America, he says, will not allow Israel’s safety to be threatened or jeopardized.
Never mind the fact that the prospect of Iran becoming another nuclear power in the region is a threat to the region as a whole. This isn’t so much of a concern for the president.
In fact, I argue that if it weren’t for the security of Israel alone, America would accept Iran’s nuclear ambitions, or even provide American expertise and material support.
With this double standard and unitary concern for Israel’s security, America’s unfair policies are generating its own opposition in countries in the region as well as in other parts of the world.
And the US doesn’t appear to have the wherewithal to reconsider or adjust its foreign policy objectives in the light of the global opposition. US foreign policy is clearly stoking the fire of terrorism.
Perhaps a worthier cause for Bush would be to discourage the existing nuclear powers of the region, rather than coddle and nurture them.
As Bush orders Iran to stand down on its unregulated nuclear programs, he should also be encouraging Israel to give up its nukes.
If the president took a strict position on nuclear weapons on both Israel and Iran, he would give the world a lesson in fairness. But since this is not the case, America continues to be burdened with a perception of being an unfair but self-proclaimed judge and enforcer, which seek only to go to its own allies for consensus when it feels its hands are full.
Maybe it’s time for Bush to consider these points to adjust his policies that many view as a threat to an unforeseeable future.
