Blog-Iran over at Activist Chat posted some commentary regarding an article by Saul Singer:

Singer had this to say about Bush’s policy toward Iran:

“Branding Iran, Iraq, and North Korea as the “axis of evil” was the right thing to do. But saying that and then not having a policy, much less implementing it, toward Iran is worse than not having said it in the first place. Since then it seems that Bush has learned not to set such bold markers. That’s the wrong lesson; we need more markers and more follow-up.”

I agree with the first part of Singer’s statement and disagree with the latter. Describing the three countries as an “Axis of Evil” was, by far, the boldest statement of U.S. foreign policy since the end of the Cold War. Acting on it, however powerful a symbolic act it may be, is not as easy. Immediate action would not be the best strategic route to take with Iran at this time.

You all know how much I want the spread of free, open societies and how I want them to spread like wildfire. But with the current war in Iraq, it simply is not possible. Iran is a much more sophisticated country compared to Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and is resident to almost three times as many people (a little over 69 million).

Currently, the Bush administration is already pursuing one of the Axis countries: Iraq. This country will be integral to the political and military pressure placed on Iran in the future, but that cannot be accomplished until Iraq is stable and developed. I know Blog-Iran and Activist Chat mean well; they are updated brilliantly with exclusive news out of Iran, but in effect it is an interest group that wants its pet project worked on first. My suggestion: it will take time. Be patient. The big picture has to come together in order to follow through to the next step. Iran will come soon enough.

Just about everything else in Singer’s article relating to how to deal with Iran I agree with.

Yet invasion or bust is not America’s real choice. Bush has plenty of underutilized and underestimated levers. Imagine if the US started talking about democracy in Saudi Arabia. Or if Bush held a press conference with Iranian dissidents. Or if the US proposed sanctions against Iran and Syria in the UN Security Council.

Agreed, but 2004 was definitely not a year of lying low. It was a year of consolidation for the next move. This war cannot be looked at a perspective of year by year, but accomplishment by accomplishment and opportunity by opportunity. Both taken or wasted.

Funny, that being in the Jerusalem Post, Singer does not mention Israel’s probably role in the bringing down of the Iranian regime. With the U.S. in Iraq and its staunch ally of Israel so close by (and so well funded), Israel could easily launch a major military offensive in conjunction with the United States. In fact, I have no doubt in my mind that is what will happen when the time comes.