Rejecting the policy that won Cold War

Our policy in Iraq has been just the opposite. And Iran could be the next mistake. Mr. McCain says Tehran cannot be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons - which implies he would go to war to prevent it, no matter what the price in blood or treasure.

The claim is that the Iranians are too crazy to be deterred from using nukes against Israel or giving them to terrorist groups to use against us. One common trait of governments and their leaders is an overriding desire to survive. If Iranian nukes are ever used for aggression, the regime can be sure Iran will be, as Sen. Hillary Clinton so vividly put it, "obliterated."

Mr. Shapiro told me he sees no evidence that Mrs. Clinton or Sen. Barack Obama would return to containment. But the challenges we face are likely to push them toward it. Those dilemmas, after all, have prompted reconsideration by none other than President Bush.

One member of the "axis of evil," North Korea, has acquired a nuclear arsenal. Instead of launching a pre-emptive strike, the Bush administration has chosen to 1) live with it if we have to, 2) negotiate with Pyongyang to give it up, and 3) maintain strong defenses in South Korea.

That route is plainly the least bad option toward North Korea. But don't dare call it containment. And don't get the idea it could ever work anywhere else.

Steve Chapman is a columnist for the Chicago Tribune. His column appears regularly in The Sun. His e-mail is [e-mail].