A strategy or a suggestion?

In December 2002, the United States put forth its National Strategy To Combat Weapons Of Mass Destruction. (It can be read here, in PDF).

There were three main points in the strategy.

* Counterproliferation to Combat WMD Use

* Strengthened Nonproliferation to Combat WMD Proliferation

* Consequence Management to Respond to WMD Use

The strategy described a "Active Nonproliferation Diplomacy." Under this doctrine,

We must dissuade supplier states from cooperating with proliferant states and induce proliferant states to end their WMD and missile programs. We will hold countries responsible for complying with their commitments. In addition, we will continue to build coalitions to support our efforts, as well as to seek their increased support for nonproliferation and threat reduction cooperation programs. However, should our wide-ranging nonproliferation efforts fail, we must have available the full range of operational capabilities necessary to defend against the possible employment of WMD.

Certainly the run-up to the invasion of Iraq played a role in this document. I don't know if this document was written as a justification for that invasion, given the Bush Administration's focus on Iraq's WMD program.

However, there has not been a lot of public discussion lately on how this strategy might apply to Iran.

I'm always a little leery of such strategies. I don't know if they are just academic exercises, or if they do change practice and policy.

Perhaps the Bush Administration would like to coveniently forget they ever talked about the "full range of operational capabilities necessary to defend against the possible employment of WMD."

I hope someone dusts off this document and reads it again, for the closing paragraph is quite appropriate for the Iran situation.

Our National Strategy to Combat WMD requires much of all of us—the Executive Branch, the Congress, state and local governments, the American people, and our friends and allies. The requirements to prevent, deter, defend against, and respond to today’s WMD threats are complex and challenging. But they are not daunting. We can and will succeed in the tasks laid out in this strategy; we have no other choice.