Pumping Up the Anxiety

"Defence Secretary Robert Gates is strongly opposed. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is also opposed.

"Some analysts believe that in the first Bush administration Cheney won all such arguments, whereas in the second administration Rice is dominant. They take this to mean Bush won't strike.

"I don't think it's that simple. It is true that Bush has ceded an enormous amount of national security power to Rice. However, the Bush administration is better seen as having two personalities, the psychology of which rose out of Bush's peculiar historical circumstances.

"Bush understands that he is unpopular across the world and, as a result to some extent, so is the US. Therefore, on every issue where it's possible, from Africa to North Korea, he presents a kindly, moderate, multilateral face. And that face is Rice.

"However, Bush also knows that history will judge him on the outcome in Iraq. So he does absolutely everything he can to win in Iraq. And this means mostly following Cheney's advice. Remember that for all of Rice's undoubted sway, she opposed the troop surge in Iraq, as did Gates. The surge went ahead anyway, and was successful.

"So at this moment, in the second half of 2008, does the Rice side of Bush or the Cheney side win the argument on Iran?

"I think anyone who pronounces dogmatically on that question doesn't know what they're talking about. For a start, if the Iranians are caught doing something stupid, the calculations change dramatically."

Not So Fast

But maybe attacking Iran wouldn't be such a great idea -- says Navy Admiral Michael G. Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Peter Spiegel writes for the Los Angeles Times: "The U.S. military's top officer warned Wednesday that an Israeli airstrike against Iran would make the Middle East more unstable and could add to the stress on overworked American forces in the region. . . .

"Bush long has pointedly left open the option of military action by the U.S. or Israel, and administration officials have said they will not interfere with Israel's right to respond to what it sees as a looming threat. But American military officials are concerned that U.S. forces, stationed nearby in Iraq and Afghanistan, could become entangled in any conflict that would result. . . .

"'Opening up a third front right now would be extremely stressful for us,' he said, referring to the prospect of a direct clash with Iran while fighting continues in Iraq and Afghanistan. 'This is a very unstable part of the world, and I don't need it to be more unstable.'"

The Bottom Line

The National Security Network, a liberal group of defense and foreign policy specialists, has a new report concluding that Bush's saber-rattling is hitting Americans where it hurts: "Respected industry experts have long drawn the connection between global instability, failed Bush Administration foreign policies, and the price of oil -- which they call the 'security premium. . . .