Victorious tragedy

After the barbaric bombing of the Golden Dome Mosque in Samarra, the pundits prophesized that full-fledged civil war would immediately descend upon Iraq. Yet against the backdrop of fire and bloodshed that followed, a peculiar thing occurred: Iraq did not fall apart. An attack that could have destroyed this fragile nation was contained and neutralized within a few days, and things returned to a semblance of normalcy. Despite the tragic provocation of a murderous few, Iraqis defied the pessimists and instead brought their country back from the brink. American neglect of Iran and obsession with Dubai, however, may still turn this costly and remarkable victory into a Pyrrhic one.

To understand how an outwardly awful situation can actually be positive, we must look at the alternatives. After the shrine was destroyed, some sort of sectarian response was inevitable. Even in a secular democracy like the United States, violence results from highly symbolic incitement, such as the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. or the Rodney King beating. In a state with a fledgling government and greater tension, full-blown religious war with tens of thousands of dead was possible.

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and the fundamentalist Shiite militias tried very hard to have that war but failed. The most surprising aspect of this situation is not that it got so bad but that it didn't get any worse thanks to a strong military response combined with political compromise. With some notable exceptions in which troops passively assisted death squads, the vast majority of Iraq's army performed admirably and managed to keep Iraq from disintegrating. The Iraqi army performed better than European peacekeepers in the Balkans and prevented an Iraqi Srebrenica.

The forces of order contained the violence because our strategy in Iraq is slowly working. Sunni leaders who once shunned democracy now embrace it as the primary means to their ends. Sunni nationalists are increasingly working within the system instead of resorting to violence, which has led to a sharp drop in the incidence of suicide bombings. Once allies of Zarqawi, they now seek to cleanse the Anbar province of al Qaeda.

Even the anti-American insurgency is stalling. While it still is a serious problem, overall American casualties fell by 25 percent in 2005. More powerful bombs imported from Iran are killing a higher percentage of their victims but are exploding less frequently. In every month since last October, the number of Americans dying has fallen and is on track to fall again in March. This progress on the security front along with the nascent improvement in the political situation give reason for cautious optimism.

But regardless of whether Iraq emerges as an island of liberty surrounded by a sea of tyranny or not, the Middle East may be soon be lost to an atomic whirlwind. Iran is ruled by a lunatic who seeks nuclear weapons for the express purpose of launching a war of genocide and completing what Hitler began. This modern Haman seeks to do what his ancient Persian predecessor could not: achieve a final solution to the Jewish problem. As Jews celebrate Purim this week, it is especially important to recognize this threat.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took power for the explicit purpose of bringing about the apocalypse, and I take him at his word. There is no doubt that this sponsor of suicide terrorism would pay any price and bear any burden to destroy Israel or America. Unless we find a way to stop Iran's ambitions — and we should expect no substantive help from a Security Council deep in Iran's pockets — there will soon be nuclear war in the Middle East.

A forceful declaration by Europe and America that they will not accept a nuclear Iran and are willing to do whatever it takes to prevent Iran from acquiring the bomb, up to and including military strikes, is necessary. One beats a bully by standing up to him, and to succeed, Europe and the United States must make it clear that no matter what happens, they will not give in and will never give up.

So as Iraq stepped back from the brink and Iran rushed headlong towards oblivion, what did America's leaders squabble over? Control of port operations going from one foreign country to another. Politicians anxious for another term were seduced by the chance to score cheap political points so that in 10 years, they will stand up against tyranny only after the massacre is over. Barry Caro is a freshman from White Plains, New York. He can be reached at bcaro@princeton.edu.