Will Bush Bomb Iran Before The End Of His Term?

According to the Jerusalem Post, Israeli Army Radio quoted top Israeli politicians about Bush’s intent to bomb Iran in the next few months.

Army Radio had quoted a top official in Jerusalem claiming that a senior member in the entourage of President Bush, who concluded a trip to Israel last week, had said in a closed meeting here that Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney were of the opinion that military action against Iran was called for.

The official reportedly went on to say that “the hesitancy of Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice” was preventing the administration from deciding to launch such an attack on the Islamic Republic for the time being.

Apparently one of the reasons of Bush’s renewed militarism is Hezbollah’s latest coup in Beirut:

Bush, the official reportedly said, considered Hizbullah’s show of strength to constitute evidence of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s growing influence. In Bush’s view, the official said, “the disease must be treated – not its symptoms.”

The White House went on to strongly dismiss the report:

As the President has said, no president of the United States should ever take options off the table, but our preference and our actions for dealing with this matter remain through peaceful diplomatic means. Nothing has changed in that regard.”

Haggling Over The Election Law

Basing the electoral law on temporary alliances is ill advised and unsustainable.

There are rumors that the Lebanese parties in Doha are trying to carve a self-serving electoral law. It is being said for instance that Mr. Aoun is proposing Beirut divisions that allow the Shiaas to vote for the Christians and that Mr. Hariri would love to keep (Christian) Zgharta in the embrace of (Sunni) Tripoli.

That short-sightedness would be a big mistake, as it would be an admission that the Lebanese will never be able to manage things on their own. Every time new alliances emerge between the dominant players, a new Doha will have to be found to carve up a matching electoral law.

The arguments made in Doha should not be about politics. A fairer electoral division, even if it costs March 14 some seats, should not be portrayed as an attempt by the opposition to “harvest their military gains politically”, as Mr. Jumblatt is fond of saying. Mr Ghassan Tueni who embraced the draft law of the Lebanese commission for electoral reform should not feel pressured to follow March 14′s lead and should try to persuade them of the law’s long-term merits.

The electoral law they should be coming up with is one that can last at least another 50 years (where demographic changes could dictate some necessary tinkering and gerrymandering), a law that has enough moral clarity and weight to impose on politicians their electoral platforms. Anything else would be tantamount to treating cancer with an aspirin.