I had a very short career as an NCAA athlete. I joined the diving team my freshman year of college. This was a mistake. I was never going to be a very good diver. In athletics, finesse has never been my strong suit. Strength and speed were the assets I relied on as a highschool wrestler and soccer and lacrosse player. Diving requires neither of these. In this short career as a diver, I hurt myself an awful lot. I had a very bad tendency to dive off the three meter board and forget to breakthrough the water with my hands instead of my face. This typically resulted in a bloody nose and a minor hazmat incident. My diving coach used to say, as he applied a large wad of cotton to my nose, “Rob, most people only piss on an electric fence once.” Of course, I was stupid and nineteen. Why the bush administration hasn’t learned this simple lesson cannot be blamed on age and inexperience.
In what can only be a public relations stunt, the administration has agreed to direct talks with Iran on its nuclear program. These are not one on one talks as Iran has requested, but in a multi-party dialogue with the so-called EU3 of France, Britain and Germany. We have been down this road before. We are in fact still going down this road with North Korea. Even more absurdely, we are once again insisting that the aleged violator of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty suspend its nuclear program before any talks begin. This gambit failed with North Korea. It will fail again with Iran.
The Bush administration treats talks with these countries like they are some sort of reward. US policy to not negotiate with terrorists has apparently morphed into a policy to not negotiate at all. “We’ll come to the table but only if you have already capitulated to our demands,” is the bottom line from Condi’s statement.
If stopping Iran from gaining a nuclear weapon is the primary goal, this strategy will not achieve it. If on the other hand, the primary goal is face-saving for the Bush administration, there is not much face to save. Yet this seems to be the priority. The Bush administration refuses to take any action which might indicate their previous approach had not worked. Thus, no bilateral talks and of course, suspending enrichment. These conditions are not likely to be accepted. They are also not likely to let the US regain ground as the moderate and reasonable party.
It is time for real negotiations. The Bush Administration must come up with what it is willing to give Iran in return for ending its nuclear ambitions. A truly grand bargain might include a security guarantee for Iran, the normalization of relations, ending all trade and currency embargoes, the return of funds frozen in the 1979 crisis, and support in joining the WTO. In addition to suspending its nuclear program, Iran should be required to recognize the state of Israel, pay remuneration to the victim families from the Khobar towers attack, and cease all support for insurgent groups operating in Iraq.
Negotiating such a deal would require a complete reversal on the part of the Bush Administration. It would be all but impossible to get Iran to meet these conditions and keep the US congress in line. To that I say, what do you think the Nobel Peace Prize is for? Certainly not the easy stuff.
In the May 25 issue of the Wall Street Journal, Randall Larsen, a homeland security expert and former air force colonel, takes aim at the notion now gaining popularity in Congress of requiring 100% inspection of containers entering the United States. To mix a few metaphors, Mr. Larsen’s argument is a house of cards built upon a foundation of sand. It can’t stand up to the wind blowing and if it could, the tide is quickly coming in.
Mr. Larsen’s argument shows he simply does not understand the first thing about scanning technology. As he writes, “Even if terrorists were to put a nuke in a container, don’t you suppose they’d also be smart enough to put lead around it? This makes a Hiroshima bomb virtually undetectable by screening.” The scanning technologies for nuclear weapons and dirty bombs work in two different ways. Passive systems detect radiation being emitted by the weapon. Active systems use different parts of the electro-magnetic spectrum to detect the density of objects being scanned. Used in concert, as they are in a highly successful prototype in Hong Kong, they can detect radiation being emmitted or lead being used to shield the source.
Mr. Larsen also suggests that in addition to the technology being ineffective, the cost would be prohibitive if all containers were scanned. Moreover, he argues this money should be spent elsewhere on more effective programs. This is based on the false assumption that the US government and American taxpayers would foot the bill. In the above mentioned Hong Kong pilot, it has been the shipping industry that has picked up the tab. The industry as a whole is willing to invest in the scanning technology and back endy systems to screen 100% of all containers bound for the US and send these images to US Customs and Border Protection to be analyzed. Such a system would allow a threat to be identified well before it reaches our shores. Under the current system, a nuclear weapon could be detonated in a major seaport well before Customs agents would have the opportunity to inspect it.
What the shippers are asking for in return is the so-called “green lane” — in exchange for this investment they want containers under the program to be given expedited entry once they reach US shores.
Instituting this program would cost the US a minimal amount. Doing it on a voluntary basis would avoid what Mr. Larsen and his ilk really fear, anything that looks like regulating security in the private sector.
Mr. Larsen’s 70-20-10 plan relies almost entirely (70% of it anyway) on investing in securing nuclear materials at the source. Unfortunately, this is easier said than done. Many sovereign states are not amenable to US efforts to control their nuclear stockpiles and programs. Russia, North Korea, Pakistan and Iran come to mind. On the other hand, we have willing partners in AP Moeller, Maersk and Hutchinson Wampoa, companies that together operate most of the ports in the world. In the end, Mr. Larsen is objecting to a program that would dramatically improve the level of security for one of our largest vulnerabilities at almost no cost to the US taxpayer.
I’m not a big fan of reality television, but I’m actually liking Rabbi Shmuley and his new show, Shalom in the Home. The TV show and the Rabbi are actually kind of intelligent. He takes these dysfunctional couples and dissects their problematic, twisted, and complicated psychologies with incisive points that tend to be dead on. Then he takes the couple on various bonding adventures that are meant to bring them closer together. The show ends with the happy couple gushing over how much closer they’ve gotten and how much they love each other. It is the perfect Hollywood formula, but it takes a little intelligence, a quirky rabbi, and some truly messed up couples to bring it all together.
The most recent show dealt with the issues of a Turkish woman, Tishan, and a formerly Jewish guy, Alli, who converted to Islam before they married. They are raising their family in Hershey, PA and they’ve totally disconnected with each other due to the stresses of work and raising kids. Minus the stark religious and cultural differences, it’s a situation pretty much anyone can identify with. In the beginning Alli says that it is the cultural differences that are driving them apart, but Shmuley immediately tells him that the cultural differences have very little to do with their issues. They loved each other before, enough for Alli to convert to Islam, and they are just using their cultural differences as an scapegoat for their frustrations.
Shmuley takes them on an exciting trip to a Pennsylvannia diary farm. I grew up in PA, so I can tell you that this is about as exciting as clipping your toenails. Anyway, massage lessons for Alli on Tishan prove to be much more stimulating.
Yeah, it is totally cheesy, but it’s something to see that you oherwise might have missed.