The Case for Appeasement...

...is laid out by Joschka Fischer, Germany's Foreign Minister from '98-2005, in an essay in today's Washington Post called "The Case for Bargaining With Iran". It's all about giving Iran everything it wants, while promising the West will never interfere militarily, even should Iran break the treaty. OH, and it's also all the United States' fault, in case you didn't know:

In this crisis, the stakes are high, which is why Germany, Britain and France began negotiations with Iran two years ago with the goal of persuading it to abandon its efforts to close the nuclear fuel cycle. This initiative failed for two reasons. First, the European offer to open up technology and trade, including the peaceful use of nuclear technology, was disproportionate to Iran's fundamental fear of regime change on the one hand and its regional hegemonic aspirations and quest for global prestige on the other. Second, the disastrous U.S.-led war in Iraq has caused Iran's leaders to conclude that the leading Western power has been weakened to the point that it is dependent on Iran's goodwill and that high oil prices have made the West all the more wary of a serious confrontation.

Well, Joschka, we are actually winning that war pretty handily...maybe if you had told the truth instead of trying to paint it as a "disaster" at every turn it would not be perceived as such. And incidentally, could it be that America's abilty to overthrow Saddam in 15 minutes (something that Iran couldn't do even after eight years of warfare), has made the Iranians think, "Oh sh*t, we may be next", and have led them to act belligerent, hoping for the very European instinct of appeasement to help them take a tactical step forward?

It doesn't matter, the German F-minister makes excuses for Iranian nukes anyway:

There is no guarantee that attempts to destroy Iran's nuclear potential and thus its capability for a nuclear breakout would succeed. Moreover, as a victim of foreign aggression, Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions would be fully legitimized.

So Israel's nukes then should be fully justified, right, Joschka? Better not hear another word about it...

So here is his surrender offer to the nuclear Nazis of Tehran:

There remains a serious chance for a diplomatic solution if the United States, in cooperation with the Europeans and with the support of the U.N. Security Council and the non-aligned states of the Group of 77, offers Iran a "grand bargain." In exchange for long-term suspension of uranium enrichment, Iran and other states would gain access to research and technology within an internationally defined framework and under comprehensive supervision by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Full normalization of political and economic relations would follow, including binding security guarantees upon agreement of a regional security design.

And if Iran does not comply?

Should no agreement be reached, the West would do everything in its power to isolate Iran economically, financially, technologically and diplomatically...

No threat of military action, of course. Joschka is a coward to the end, finally throwing all the onus for his surrender plan onto the United States, of course:

...But such an initiative can succeed only if the American administration assumes leadership among the Western nations and sits down at the negotiating table with Iran.

So unless the US negotiates with Iran, all bets are off. Joschka needs America to crawl to the Iranian bargaining table in order to lend legitimacy to his apeasement agenda.

George Bush will not do it - but does Iran wait instead, perhaps stall for two years, knowing a Democratic president will kowtow to Euro-pressure? Don't be surprised...