Last night I attended a talk by Kenneth Timmerman entitled "The Coming Nuclear Crisis with Iran" and sponsored by The David Project, CJP and the local JCRC. Timmerman's most recent book is Countdown to Crisis : The Coming Nuclear Showdown with Iran.

Timmerman writes frequent columns on Iran and has been following the situation for years.

He gave a fairly detailed history of the Iranian quest for nukes to the approximately 100 person audience. One of his favorite targets is the feckless IAEA -- with Hans Blix or without him, but especially with him -- although he does believe there are some very competent people on the tech side. In fact, Timmerman doesn't think much of most of the "establishment" groups tasked with dealing with Iran -- whether it be IAEA, the UN, State, the CIA or Europe generally -- and he makes a good case of it.

He certainly paints a bleak picture. One, he believes there is no difference between "moderates" like Rafsanjani and "nuts" (my word) like Ahmadinejad -- one is simply more overt about his goals. From that perspective, in fact, Ahmadinejad is a better person to have in power, since he makes denial far more difficult to indulge in. Timmerman believes that Iran is close enough that they will stage some sort of demonstration of their capabilities within the next few months -- possibly up to and including a test explosion.

In his view, and it seems a relatively noncontroversial point to me, the problem is not the weapons, it's the nature of the regime -- otherwise we'd be worried about Britain, for instance. All efforts must be on regime change. Military force is the last, worst, option (Although he believes, due to certain "extra-rational" beliefs on the part of the current regime, we'll be getting war one way or another within the next two years unless other efforts are successful.).

His suggestions: 1) Empower the Iranian people. 2) Delegitamize the regime. 3) Work with non-violent foes of the regime. He was quite adamant that the groups be non-violent so that that will be the nature of the regime we help put in power -- very wise advice in my view. 4) Isolate the regime politically. 5) Cripple them economically. 6) Drive a wedge between the government and the people.

We will need to go through "the kabuki dance" of the UN, but if the UN can't deal with this "clear and present danger"...then maybe the UN has no reason to exist.

To these ends, the US should be doing much, much more to support dissident Iranian groups. Right now the amount of money we spend is a joke, and even hundreds of millions would be short money compared to an invasion. Those who say that doing too much to help the pro-democracy groups would jeopardize their credibility in the eyes of Iranians are just making the same excuses people always make in order to do nothing, and he advises everyone to contact their Representatives to support the Iran Freedom Support Act -- H.R. 282 and S. 333.

What do I think? I think that Timmerman is a bit alarmist in his predictions for Iran's course during the next few months. He obviously knows more than I, but that's my impression.

I do not believe that Israel is going to bomb anything (this is a general observation now, not anything that Timmerman suggested would happen). This is not a matter of destroying a facility or two. Even if they had the capability, they would need complete cooperation with us, and we are not going to invade or do the requisite destruction from the air that it would require to ensure that Iran could not go nuclear, if such a thing is even possible, which I doubt. I do not foresee any sort of invasion of Iran. The only way that would happen would be with complete cooperation in the UN. That isn't going to happen.

So that leaves Timmerman's approach -- backing opposition groups -- and I agree that that's our only serious hope. Sadly, I'm not sanguine about our chances there, either. With all respect to our friends in the Iranian opposition, and I sincerely hope I'm wrong, but I think we're simply going to be living in a world of Ayatollahs with bombs.

The only thing I can say for certain is that we'll be watching what happens...

Audio of the talk, including fine introductory remarks by Charles Jacobs of The David Project is here. The quality is a bit muffled for the first few minutes while I had the recorder in my pocket, and then a little bit soft during Timmerman's talk, but you can give it a try. Please right click and save as (Give it a try before downloading the whole thing though)...