Over at Democracy Aresenal, Pat Barry responds to former Dick Cheney aide John Hannah’s argument that the only way to halt Iran’s nuclear ambitions includes either military coercion or regime change. Pat makes several good points in demonstrating the specific strategies Hannah outlines aren’t particularly viable, but I think he gives Hannah’s argument too much credit. That is, whether or not military coercion is viable given 2009′s decidedely different geopolitical landscape, the point is that that threats of regime change or military coercion from the west play a significant role in driving Iran’s nuclear program. So long as an Iranian state — no matter who is at the helm — feels threatened from the west and its allies, it’s going to seek to to defend itself.
