Friday, October 26, 2007

Iran: should Brown really rule 'nothing' out?

Reports that at their Camp David meeting in July, Brown gave Bush the green light for US air strikes on Iran - possibly offering support from RAF bases and the British navy patrolling the Gulf - are deeply worrying. At PMQs this week Brown (in answer to a question about Iran from Michael Meacher) once again refused to rule anything out in terms of future action against Iran.

The only long-term solution to Iran's problems is democracy, but it cannot be dictated, Iraq-style, or it will backfire. It can only be encouraged, through dialogue and open economic activity - a fact that Brown has long understood (unlike many of his US counterparts).

Is it not now time for Brown to rule out any British involvement in any future US/Israel military action against Iran? The new round of economic sanctions are unlikely to have any real effect (Iran's biggest trading partner is China) and there will be increased pressure from hawkish Republicans for some kind of preemptive strike against Iran.

Britain cannot and must not be part of any US or Israeli led action. Brown must make this abundantly clear - and soon.

5 comments:

CityUnslicker said...

so you rule out all action whatever happens?

Do I take it from this that you would be happy to see a nuclear armed Iran able to threaten us at will?

Last week there was an explosion in Syria as a missile making factory; making sarin missiles, blew up.

North Koreans, Iranians and Syrians were amongst the dead; google it if you think I am making this up.

The first duty of any government it to protect the country and its people.

Lord Nazh© said...

I'd say from reading his posts that Mike would indeed be ok with a nuclear Iran (if not, correct me). As he says, no matter what...

Ian Appleby said...

CU, there are any number of countries that can already threaten us at will; some of them are openly or understood to be nuclear armed. Some of them are politically unstable, or governed by unfriendly regimes. What makes Iran so special that we need to ostentatiously reserve the right to bomb it?

Mike Ion said...

lord nazh

If the US or Israel seek to act then that is clearly a matter for them. I am arguing that we (UK) should play no part in any such action - can you explain to me why we should?

If the UN gets involved and there is a UN resolution for action then I would argue that the UK should play its part. Until then I strongly believe that we should NOT be part of any unilateral action against Iran.

Alex Bigham said...

"The only long-term solution to Iran's problems is democracy, but it cannot be dictated, Iraq-style, or it will backfire. It can only be encouraged, through dialogue and open economic activity"

Nice of you to agree with me Mike - you might use quotation marks next time!

http://fpc.org.uk/fsblob/768.pdf