Brzezinski on Iran
by TRNN
In 1979, when the Irian revolution overthrew the American
allied Shah, Zbigniew Brzezinski was National Security advisor to
President Jimmy Carter. Thirty years later, Iran is still a central
challenge facing US geo-political strategy.
In the third
segment of my interview with Dr. Brzezinski, I asked him about
Israel's threat to bomb Iranian Nuclear facilities and the American
strategy towards Iran.
Bio
Zbigniew Brzezinski
Zbigniew Brzezinski is a CSIS counselor and trustee and cochairs the
CSIS Advisory Board. He is also the Robert E. Osgood Professor of
American Foreign Policy at the School of Advanced International Studies,
Johns Hopkins University, in Washington, D.C. He is cochair of the
American Committee for Peace in the Caucasus and is a former chairman of
the American-Ukrainian Advisory Committee. He is also a member of the
International Advisory Board of the Atlantic Council.
He was a member of
the Policy Planning Council of the Department of State from 1966 to
1968; chairman of the Humphrey Foreign Policy Task Force in the 1968
presidential campaign; director of the Trilateral Commission from 1973
to 1976; and principal foreign policy adviser to Jimmy Carter in the
1976 presidential campaign. From 1977 to 1981, Dr. Brzezinski was
national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter.
In 1981, he was
awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his role in the
normalization of U.S.-China relations and for his contributions to the
human rights and national security policies of the United States. He was
also a member of the President’s Chemical Warfare Commission (1985),
the National Security Council–Defense Department Commission on
Integrated Long-Term Strategy (1987–1988), and the President’s Foreign
Intelligence Advisory Board (1987–1989).
In 1988, he was cochairman of
the Bush National Security Advisory Task Force, and in 2004, he was
cochairman of a Council on Foreign Relations task force that issued the
report Iran: Time for a New Approach. Dr. Brzezinski received a B.A. and
M.A. from McGill University (1949, 1950) and Ph.D. from Harvard
University (1953). He was a member of the faculties of Columbia
University (1960–1989) and Harvard University (1953–1960).
Dr.
Brzezinski holds honorary degrees from Georgetown University, Williams
College, Fordham University, College of the Holy Cross, Alliance
College, the Catholic University of Lublin, Warsaw University, and
Vilnius University. He is the recipient of numerous honors and awards.
His many books include America and the World: Conversations on the
Future of American Foreign Policy (Basic Books, 2008), coauthored with
Brent Scowcroft and David Ignatius; Second Chance: Three Presidents and
the Crisis of American Superpower (Basic Books, 2007); The Choice:
Global Domination or Global Leadership (Basic Books, 2004); The
Geostrategic Triad: Living with China, Europe, and Russia (CSIS, 2001);
The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives
(Basic Books, 1997); and The Grand Failure: The Birth and Death of
Communism in the 20th Century (Scribners, 1989).
TRANSCRIPTZbigniew Brzezinski Interview Part 3
PAUL
JAY (Intro): In 1979, when the Irian revolution overthrew the American
allied Shah, Zbigniew Brzezinski was National Security advisor to
President Jimmy Carter. Thirty years later, Iran is still a central
challenge facing US geo-political strategy. In the third
segment of my interview with Dr. Brzezinski, I asked him about
Israel's threat to bomb Iranian Nuclear facilities and the American
strategy towards Iran.
I started by asking Dr. Brzezinski
about an interview he gave last September to the website the daily
beast. In that interview, Dr. Brzezinski was asked: How
aggressive can Obama be in insisting to the Israelis that a military
strike might be in America�s worst interest? HE answered: "We are not
exactly impotent little babies. They have to fly over our airspace in
Iraq. Are we just going to sit there and watch?He was then
asked: "What if they fly over anyway? Well, we have to be serious about
denying them that right. That means a denial where you aren't just
saying it. If they fly over, you go up and confront them. They have the
choice of turning back or not.I sat down with Dr. Brzezinski at the Center for Strategic Studies in Washington DC. where he is a counselor and trustee.
JAY:
Talk about American strategy towards Iran. And it's fairly well known
you had a bit of a falling-out with President Obama on this. You were
talking about opposing any potential Israeli attack on Iran. You weren't
the only [inaudible]
BRZEZINSKI: No, I wasn't saying
"opposing". I was saying that we should not let them use our airspace
without our permission, because no matter what, we would be held as
complicit, and we will be paying the price for it. So our view is that
this is not desirable; we should not allow our airspace to be used. If
we want it to be used, fine, but let's be clear about it: it's not a
good idea to stumble into a war regarding which you're ambivalent. That
decision has to be made with open eyes. But my view on Iran is that we
have to be patient, and that deterrence can work. We don't need to
increase the scale of the conflict in the region that we have been
discussing, because an increase in that conflict involving the Iranians
in a collision with us would make our task in Afghanistan absolutely
impossible. It would probably reignite the conflict in Iraq, would set
the Persian Gulf ablaze, would increase the price of oil twofold,
threefold, fourfold, and Americans will be paying five, six dollars a
gallon at the gas stations. Europe will become even more dependent on
the Soviet Union for energy. So what is the benefit to us?
JAY:
The people advocating this more militaristic approach, I have to ask,
do you think they mean it? Or is this good cop, bad cop?
BRZEZINSKI: I'm not a mind reader. I don't know.
JAY: [inaudible] Pandora's box this would open boggles the mind.
BRZEZINSKI:
Well, I would think any reasonable person would conclude that, and I
think the United States is not in favor of the war, and that's why we're
doing what we can in Geneva.
JAY: Is Israel serious in these threats?
BRZEZINSKI:
I have no idea. I have no idea. All I know is, as an analyst of
international politics, that this would be a disaster. And, frankly, I
think that it'll be a disaster for us more than for Israel�more than
for Israel in the short run, and a fundamental disaster for Israel in
the long run, because if the consequence of that is that in the end we
are forced out of the region, as we might be because almost sort of
dynamic hatred that develops; and have no illusions about it, the
conflict spreads, we're going to be alone.
The Russians are not going to
be with us. They're not suckers. The Europeans are not going to be with
us. They don't like to be in the forefront of conflict for historic
reasons. We are going to be engaged. And if we are finally driven out,
how much would you bet on the survival of Israel for more than five to
ten years after all that has happened? So, you know, some people who
criticize me for being straightforward on this think this is an
anti-Israeli point of view. You know, they're entitled to their
demagogy. But my view is it'll be a geopolitical disaster for us in the
short run, and to the extent that Israelis are concerned about it, for
themselves.
JAY: The pressure that's being put on Iran is pushing Iran closer to Russia and China.
BRZEZINSKI:
No, it's not pushing them close to Russia or China. We're pushing the
Chinese and the Russians to engage in a more direct conflict with the
Iranians, but they're reluctant because they have a different view on
the situation. And in a different way, each has different interests.
JAY:
But Russia and China are both getting much more involved in the Iranian
economy [inaudible] Shanghai Cooperation Agreement meetings.
BRZEZINSKI:
No, no, no, no. Wait a second. Wait a second. The Chinese are getting
more involved in Iranian economy 'cause they need energy, and they're
not going to be particularly grateful if we produce a conflict in the
region. And that will also affect them. And what consequences that might
have for the world economy is hard to predict. All I'm saying is don't
trifle with the silly notion, oh, we'll just bomb them and the problem
is solved. It's a false analogy, and historically it's one fundamental
lesson we shouldn't forget: Stalin and the Soviet Union was more of a
threat than Iran ever will be, and yet we deterred it. Mao Zedong talked
of a nuclear war which might kill 300 million people, and so what
[inaudible] we didn't have a war with the Chinese. Why should we act
like crazies in dealing with Iran?
JAY: Thanks very much.
BRZEZINSKI: Thank you very much.
JAY: Thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.
|
