In an interview of Al Jazeera former Speaker of the House, and potential Republican presidential candidate, Newt Gingrich announced his plan to topple the regime in Iran by sabotaging the nation’s oil refineries to create a gas crisis. Wouldn’t it be easier to pass legislation banning the selling of gasoline to Iran?
Here is the video courtesy of Think Progress:
Gingrich said, “I’ve called for sabotage not bombing…What I have said is you should use covert operations because they only have one refinery that produces gasoline for the entire country, and they have to import all the rest of their gasoline… The only purpose of sabotaging them would be to create a gasoline-led crisis to try to replace the regime. I’m against using tactics that don’t have any strategic meaning. I think we have a vested interest – the world has a vested interest – in a responsible Iranian government.”
The neo-con point of view is alive and well within the GOP. It makes no sense to engage in sabotage in Iran, if the same thing, cutting off the supply of gasoline to the nation, could be achieved without engaging in covert activities. Why would Gingrich want to undercut the domestic movement against the regime in Iran by engaging in such a reckless and foolish plan?
Newt Gingrich’s idea is zany and not based in reality. Believe it or not this is a man who is considered one of the intellectual voices of the GOP. How many times can the Republicans call for regime change, without recognizing the failure of that policy? The Obama approach is working, so why mess with it?
If the United States did as Gingrich suggested, they would strengthen the regime in Iran, possibly provoke a war, and demolish any homegrown democratic movement. This is the worst possible policy option to advocate. I realize that Gingrich is trying to position himself as tough on Iran for 2012, but his idea would lead to disaster.