Letters to the Editor
-
Iran is not 1938 Germany
As I understand things (which could be wrong -- I'm no WII expert) at the end of WWI, Germany agreed that it would not attempt to annex either Austria or the German speaking part of Chechoslovakia. In early 1938, in violation of the treaty that ended WWI, Germany annexed Austria. Germany then moved toward annexing the German speaking part of Checkoslovakia. Consequently, by the time of the Munich Agreement, Hitler's ambition to actually take over other countries in violation of the treaty that ended WWI should have been clear. Also, it could be argued, that the French and British appeased Hitler in 1938 out of an underestimation of their military strength and an overestimation of Germany's.
The first Gulf War (in 1992), addressed a situation that could legitimately be compared to 1938 Germany (although, in my view, the comparison would be deeply flawed). Iraq had instigated a long and bloody war with neighoboring Iran and when that concluded, had invaded another neighobor, Kuwait. Consequently, Iraq, at that time, had clearly shown its ambition to take over the territory of other countries. A good argument exists that military containment of Iraq at that point made a good deal of sense.
However, like Iraq in 2003, Iran in 2007 bears no relationship or resembelence to 1938 Germany. Iran has not invaded or annexed another country. It has not exhibited a desire to increase its territory beyond its current boarders. It, like many other countries adverse to the US, can be contained through diplomacy, sanctions, etc.
I note one other difference between today and 1938 -- no nuclear weapons existed in 1938. One can only speculate as to how the existence of nuclear weapons would have impacted the diplomatic efforts prior to WWII or the course of WWII itself. However, to compare a situation in the nuclear free world of 1938 to the nuclear world of today, seems foolish in the extreme.