The Devil We Know

I just read a very interesting book by Robert Baer about Iran.

http://www.amazon.com/Devil-We-Know-Dealing-Superpower/dp/0307408647/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1226123565&sr=8-1

Baer was the author of See No Evil, and Sleeping With the Devil that were the inspiration for Syriana, and he himself, as an ex-CIA operative was teh basis for Clooney's character.

While in the CIA, Baer spent quite a bit of time trying to link Iran to various terrorist acts and kidnappings, especially of the CIA station chief in Beirut, which makes it all the more interesting that in his new book, he is basically calling for the US to get over our past with Iran and move into making them more responsible for the goings on in the Middle East. As he puts it, they are already expanding their empire from Lebanon through Syria, Kurdistan, and southern Iraq. This is not so different from Thomas P.M. Barnett's suggestion in his book Blueprint for Action, which a central theme is bringing regional powers to the global table and forcing them to be responsible for controling their areas. I think the detente with Iran is probably one of the things that has kept Barnett's second book from being as successful as his first, but for Iran, Baer I think lays out a good starting point with a 10 point plan for engagement and quid pro quo with Iran. (I will list them if anyone wants, or you can read the book!)

I also got my October edition of Imprimus from Hillsdale College this week with a speech by Michael Ledeen who essentially comes up with a lot of similar points to Baer, but is more interested in taking it to them now and making them submit to US power.

http://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis.asp

Baer thinks such a move is unsustainable, while Ledeen probably would call Baer's idea surrender to Iran. I don't know that Baer would characterize it that way, but it is interesting to think that if there in no way to win a war, maybe the best idea is to negotiate a most best arrangement. The other difference in these two opinions, is that Baer claims that Iran has given up on terrorism, is/has transformed Hezbollah into a military force to operating against the Israeli military, and has essentially become what could be considered a rational actor. Problem I see is that Baer maybe one of the few people able to read these tea leaves.