OVBIAGELE: Military inaction best way to deal with Iran

EmilLike it or not, Iran is going to go nuclear.

It is an assured prophesy the world has no choice but to accept.

Taking the fool’s bait of attacking Iran would be another judgment flaw for the United States or Israel.

There have been a few murmurs from the West for a more pragmatic military approach to halt Iran’s nuclear weaponry program — calls I deem absolutely irrational.

Iran’s leaders left the world gaping when they recently wrote a letter to the International Atomic Energy Agency revealing the existence of a nuclear enrichment facility near the city of Qom.

Although the Islamic republic claims the nuclear facilities are for peaceful purposes like medical research, the United States and the West fear it’s a smokescreen for a nuclear weaponry program. But you can’t fool the West.

After its bold declaration, Iran showcased a series of conflicting actions.

It accepted IAEA requests for inspections and gave extra glimmers of hope by agreeing to meet with world powers at Geneva in October.

But a few days before talks, Iran test-fired short-range missiles capable of hitting objectives in Israel, most Arab countries and southern Europe.

So what should the West do to tame this arrogant behavior from “bad boy” Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?

The West has to realize that military inaction is its best option for dealing with Iran.

The fear of an American or Israeli military strike is just as effective as actually striking.

In reality, military action would do little to stop Iran’s nuclear program — in fact, it might be the much-needed justification for Iranian leaders to cajole their people into agreement.

The sad truth of the matter is that it would be beyond foolish for the United States to get involved in a third war or even for Israel to get involved.

War against Iran would lead the Iranian people to do the unthinkable but necessary: allying itself with a government it clearly hates so much right now.

On Sept. 10, 2001, President’s Bush’s approval ratings were below 50 percent. A few weeks after the 9/11 attacks, his approval rating stood at more than 80 percent.

In time of war or catastrophe, a sense of nationalism arises. And guess who the villain would be? The United States and its allies.

A war in Iran initiated by the U.S. or any of its allies would put a huge dent in America’s efforts to regain the trust of the Muslim world — take out the “r” in friend.

Considering the fact that Iran is one of the world’s largest exporters of crude oil, it would also cause oil prices to skyrocket around the globe — things we have to do for the love of black gold.

The U.S. cannot afford to risk the lives of its citizens and waste resources on an issue that can be managed with little or no cost.

Come to think of it, let’s be fair and face reality: Iran and Israel share a mutual feeling of contempt for each other — true.

Israel has stockpiles of nuclear weapons and Iran doesn’t yet — true.

Israel neither disclosed its nuclear weapons nor signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which could require Israel to give up its estimated several hundred nuclear bombs.

The U.S continues to keep its lips sealed on this 4-decade-old secret.

What would you think the rational response would be if you were placed in Iran’s shoes?

I’ll let you decide — be fair.

On the other hand, even if Iran goes nuclear (which it definitely will), do you think its leadership would be stupid enough as to use it, knowing the abundance of the United States’ and Israel’s nuclear arsenals?

Trust me, it is much cheaper and safer to be at peace with a nuclear Iran than be at war with another Islamic nation.

Food For Thought: At times, some of the boldest and most effective actions are actually inactions.