Iran

Some very preliminary thoughts

Since we use present information to predict the probable outcomes of choices that we make, the nature of present information is critical when we risk human lives to bring about desired change.

There are two kinds of knowledge. The first is likely to be accurate, i.e. the actions that others will take in response to our actions. How accurate, however, will depend upon the kind of information that nations have about each other. Who is in control? What are the capabilities of the regime in power? What are their values, beliefs, and temperament (i.e. how risk adverse)?

The second kind of knowledge is far more uncertain. How will a society and its many diverse and interrelated parts be affected by our actions? In this case, we are considering not only the society of a “target” nation but are own and others.

We saw in Venezuela the apparent lack of societal change that occurs when the apparent leader of a regime is removed. In that case, the authority structures of the society remain intact. Societies are not “snakes.” They may have “heads,” but they don’t die, or change much, when the nominal head is “cut off.” In fact, nations have many “heads” (networks of power) at all times.

I am not in any way an expert on Iran. I like to think these days that I have become much more cautious about claiming expertise in general. Humility is a great gift for one’s spirit. And something of an obstacle for one’s choices. But then again I don’t have much power and my humility, such as it is, can do little harm.

I suggest we keep an eye on the world as a whole. Could we slide into a much larger war? What about China and Taiwan? How will European nations and Russia take into account potential U.S. action in the future. It could be, though, that our present actions in the Middle East will have little immediate effect. The world itself is a society and has the stability that any social whole has when change occurs on “the surface.” But in the longer run?

And Iran itself? Without a full-scale invasion? A snake, so to speak, with new heads? A less aggressive “snake?” A “better snake?” At what cost?

What I think is certain is that the world as a whole, in its various environmental conditions, is, if not fragile, relatively vulnerable to human induced change. We, all nations and peoples, ignore it as we will, have the responsibility of planetary management.

I am very skeptical that military action, of any kind, is likely to improve the chances for human life on this planet.

Let’s look at war for what it is. Many people killed and injured. Many lives and hopes upended, or just “ended.” Resources destroyed. Opportunities lost. And new configurations of elites in governing roles in different societies. Read at your leisure, “The Battle of Blenheim.”