How Do You Solve Problems Like Syria and Iran?

In which we trot out the age-old sanctions vs. intervention debate and, well, hope for the best.

A recent report on the state of Iran's nuclear capabilities has led to another round of international condemnation, threats of sanctions, and even hints of military intervention against the Islamic Republic. The deepening crisis in Syria also continues to get more hawkish types to wonder if the UN and NATO ought to do what they did in Libya and enforce the (now muddled) "responsibility to protect." In some quarters, such as the Toronto Star's editorial board, the Canadian government's pledge to "work with its like-minded allies to take the necessary action for Iran to abandon its nuclear program," and Defence Minister Peter Mackay's refusal to rule out military action in Syria, smacks too much of sabre-rattling. "The Conservatives should cool their jets," the board offers. "We have just joined our American and British allies in cranking up political and economic sanctions on both regimes, to get them to curb their worst tendencies. The sanctions need time to bite." While the efficacy of sanctions is always a matter of debate in international relations, the Star is quite right in urging the government to cut down on the gung-ho rhetoric. Iran's dependence on exporting oil to keep its economy afloat means that the regime could indeed react positively to European threats to stop buying from Tehran. Goading Tehran with veiled hints of bombing only stands to make them less likely to play nice.

The National Post offers one concrete measure that the Canadian government and its allies ought to consider in dealing with Iran. The Post suggests that the Tories add Iran's Revolutionary Guards Corps Qods Force, "which does the Iranian regime's dirty work, from moving money to spreading terrorism to killing dissidents," to the list of banned terrorist organizations. Why it isn't there already is a question for a different day, seeing as how the IRGC-QF has helped fund, train, and organize everything from Hezbollah to Hamas to the Pakistani Taliban. "Adding the IRGC-QF to the list of terrorist entities would allow Canadian prosecutors and police to target IRGC financiers and procurement cells under the Criminal Code, while simultaneously sending a clear message: A terrorist group that uses an official-sounding government acronym is still a terrorist group." If you're not convinced that Canada is a haven for IRGC-QF sympathizers, look no further than the Star, in which Payam Akhavan demonstrates just how important this country is to Iran's extra-territorial ambitions. (Spoiler alert: A fair bit.)

Paul Heinbecker, a former Canadian ambassador to the UN, urges in The Globe and Mail for the government to take the long view when considering intervening beyond the level of sanctions in either Syria or Iran. "The world is unlikely to just move on after a strike and an Iranian response," observes Heinbecker. "Unless an attack is authorized by the United Nations Security Council, a distant prospect at best, it would almost certainly plunge the Middle East deeper into turmoil, roil Western relations with the Muslim world, refuel Islamist extremism, disrupt the Arab awakening, damage the international oil market and weaken the precarious international economy." So basically a repeat of the Iraq war, albeit with a tougher (and possibly nuclear-armed) military and a country with a much larger population, economy, and its own significant oil reserves. Suffice it to say, these are not exactly desirable circumstances upon which to wage war, even a limited one. Heinbecker says the recent tensions only go to show that Canadians need to find a way to "protect our interests and project our values in the Middle East before we find ourselves drifting into war." After all, once a laser-guided bomb is dropped, it's awfully difficult to put it back where it was before.

And finally, from the editorial brain trust of The Mark: Even a cursory understanding of international relations suggests that Canada's tough talk isn't likely to matter to power brokers in any capital, Tehran and Damascus included. It's all fun and games to pose as the warrior at home (and if recent election results are any indication, it's a game that plays pretty well here), but Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has far bigger problems to worry about than the (extremely competent) Canadian Forces. The utterances of Mackay et al. are little more than white noise.