In an article published in USA Today December 22, Palin took pot shots at the Obama Administration and complained it wasn’t doing enough—but she didn’t propose anything that Obama has opposed.
She called for “crippling” sanctions, a term once used by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Palin then listed the “crippling” sanctions she would like to see extended by the United Nations. The Obama Administration would probably have no problem with any of Palin’s sanctions. The problem is how to get the UN Security Council to adopt those sanctions—and Palin gave no hint how she would do that.
Most surprisingly, however, Palin did not propose the one truly crippling sanction—that the world refuse to buy any Iranian oil or gas. She simply ignored that.
As for military action, Palin said “the West”—not the United States—must be willing to use force “if necessary if that is the only alternative.” That effectively ruled out unilateral American military action, a surprising step back for someone from the political right.
Palin devoted the largest part of her article, however, to giving support to the Iranian opposition—something both the left and the right seem to agree on when it comes to Iran.
She called for supporting the Iranian people “with diplomacy and things such as radio broadcasting.” Actually, the United States has gone well beyond radio broadcasting and now sends television broadcasts into Iran and is very focused on technical assistance to help Iranians break through Iran’s Internet censorship.
Palin cited seven specific sanctions she wanted to see the UN impose on Iran. They are:
• Ban insurance for shipments to Iran (All the major international insurers have already ended such business with Iran);
• Ban all military sales to Iran (The UN resolution of last June bans most but not all military sales to Iran);
• End all trade credits (Most countries that offer trade credits have severely limited their availability for trade with Iran);
• Bar all financial dealings with Iranian banks (The US Treasury campaign has severely cramped Iran’s access to international banking services already);
• Limit Iran’s access to international capital markets (EU and US sanctions keep Iran out the European and American capital markets);
• Close international air space and waters to Iranian air and shipping lines (This has been discussed but not anywhere);
• End Iran’s ability to import refined petroleum (Iran is believed to have stopped all imports of gasoline on its own since September).
Palin wrote that it was time “to get tough with Iran.” She said, “Our credibility and reputation would suffer a serious blow if Iran succeeds in producing its own nuclear weapons after we’ve been claiming for years that such an event could not and would not be tolerated. A nuclear-armed and violently anti-American Iran would be an enormous threat to us and to our allies.”
She raised the specter that Iran would automatically attack the United States if it got missiles and nuclear weapons. “Once these missiles are armed with nuclear warheads, nothing could stop the mullahs from launching a second Holocaust. It’s only a matter of time before Iran develops missiles that could reach US territory.”
She denounced Obama, stating that he “once said a nuclear-armed Iran would be ‘unacceptable.’ Yet, Iran’s nuclear progress still continues unchecked.” And she charged that “Russia continues to support Iran’s Bushehr nuclear reactors,” although the Bush Administration said publicly that it had no problem with that.
Turning to the issue of supporting the opposition within Iran, here is what Palin wrote:
“We also need to encourage a positive vision for Iran. Iran is not condemned to live under the totalitarian inheritance of the Ayatollah Khomeini forever. There is an alternative — an Iran where human rights are respected, where women are not subjugated, where terrorist groups are not supported and neighbors are not threatened. A peaceful, democratic Iran should be everyone’s goal. There are many hopeful signs inside Iran that reveal the Iranian people’s desire for this peaceful, democratic future. We must encourage their voices.
“When the brave people of Iran take to the streets in defiance of their unelected dictatorship, they must know that we in the free world stand with them. When the women of Iran rise up to demand their rights, they must know that we women of the free world who enjoy the rights won for us by our suffragist foremothers stand with our sisters there. When Iranians demand freedom of religion, freedom of conscience and freedom to simply live their lives as they choose without persecution, we in the free world must stand with them.
“We can start by supporting them with diplomacy and things such as radio broadcasting, just as we did with those who suffered under the former Soviet Empire. Most of all, we should support them with confidence in the rightness of the ideals of liberty and justice.”
