Lieberman lobbies for confrontation with Iran

Earlier this week, Joe Lieberman said, “Although no one desires a conflict with Iran, the fact is that the Iranian government by its actions has declared war on us.” Today, he elaborated on this idea in a Wall Street Journal op-ed.

As Lieberman describes it, Iran is not only evil, it’s busy. “Iran’s actions in Iraq fit a larger pattern of expansionist, extremist behavior across the Middle East today,” Lieberman argues. “In addition to sponsoring insurgents in Iraq, Tehran is training, funding and equipping radical Islamist groups in Lebanon, Palestine and Afghanistan — where the Taliban now appear to be receiving Iranian help in their war against the government of President Hamid Karzai and its NATO defenders.”

And, of course, Tehran is, according to Lieberman, also responsible for attacks on us.

America now has a solemn responsibility to utilize the instruments of our national power to convince Tehran to change its behavior, including the immediate cessation of its training and equipping extremists who are killing our troops. Most of this work must be done by our diplomats, military and intelligence operatives in the field. But Iran’s increasingly brazen behavior also presents a test of our political leadership here at home. When Congress reconvenes next week, all of us who are privileged to serve there should set aside whatever partisan or ideological differences divide us to send a clear, strong and unified message to Tehran that it must stop everything it is doing to bring about the death of American service members in Iraq. It is of course everyone’s hope that diplomacy alone can achieve this goal. Iran’s activities inside Iraq were the central issue raised by the U.S. ambassador to Iraq in his historic meeting with Iranian representatives in Baghdad this May. However, as Gen. Bergner said on Monday, “There does not seem to be any follow-through on the commitments that Iran has made to work with Iraq in addressing the destabilizing security issues here.” The fact is, any diplomacy with Iran is more likely to be effective if it is backed by a credible threat of force — credible in the dual sense that we mean it, and the Iranians believe it.

As Ezra put it, “So when Congress reconvenes next week, all members should set aside party and ideology to tell Iran that, if they don’t stop doing these things we can’t prove they’re doing, we will invade them. Spectacular plan.” Indeed, I can’t wait to hear Lieberman’s pitch for a) how the military is prepared for another war in the Middle East; and b) how we’ll assemble some kind of international support given the Bush/Cheney/Lieberman track record thus far.



And speaking of “thus far,” Lieberman manages to include his perspective on what a confrontation with Iran will mean for his beloved confrontation with Iraq.

I hope the new revelations about Iran’s behavior will also temper the enthusiasm of some of those in Congress who are advocating the immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. Iran’s purpose in sponsoring attacks on American soldiers, after all, is clear: It hopes to push the U.S. out of Iraq and Afghanistan, so that its proxies can then dominate these states. Tehran knows that an American retreat under fire would send an unmistakable message throughout the region that Iran is on the rise and America is on the run. That would be a disaster for the region and the U.S.

So, as Lieberman sees it, the United States needs to remain in Iraq indefinitely, no matter the cost, in order to deny Iran opportunities, which they wouldn’t have if we’d only force a military confrontation and get it over with.

As Matt Yglesias concluded, “I like that he’s managing to compress what should be a years-long transition from moderate Democrat to psychotic rightwinger into just a few months.”