The Washington Post has an article up arguing that the latest NIE assessment “not only undercut the administration’s alarming rhetoric over Iran’s nuclear ambitions but could also throttle Bush’s effort to ratchet up international sanctions and take off the table the possibility of preemptive military action before the end of his presidency.” In other words: it’s a mighty blow to Bush’s Iran policy.

As the WaPo points out, “Iran had been shaping up as perhaps the dominant foreign policy issue of Bush’s remaining year in office and of the presidential campaign to succeed him. Now leaders at home and abroad will have to rethink what they thought they knew about Tehran’s intentions and capabilities.”

Bush’s critics immediately started criticizing Bush: “Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards called ‘George Bush and Dick Cheney’s rush to war with Iran.’ Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.), echoing other Democrats, called for ‘a diplomatic surge’ to resolve the dispute with Tehran. Jon Wolfsthal, a scholar at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, termed the revelation ‘a blockbuster development’ that ‘requires a wholesale reevaluation of U.S. policy’.”

What’s more, Democratic Senator and presidential candidate Joe Biden said that if Bush attacks Iran, he should be impeached.

Some wondered yesterday whether the White House had suppressed the report for months. Ed Morrissey says no.  Of course that may very well be true, but it seems to me that the Bush administration can’t just go on pursue the old policy now that the NIE contradicts many earlier assessments and expectations.

We’ve got, at the very least, until 2013. What’s more, Iran isn’t even working on nuclear weapons right now. In the run-up to the Iraq War the US government made the case that Saddam had WMDs and was working on a program. We now know that not to be so. Bush lost much credibility in the US and outside it once we all found out that Saddam wasn’t developing nuclear weapons. If the West wants to do the right thing – namely, to remove the Iranian threat – it has to do so based on facts and Bush et al. have to keep in mind that there are different ways to remove a threat. Force is just one of many possible solutions.

There’s time and room for diplomacy. I’m in favor of sanctions, if for nothing then because Iran supports terrorists across the Middle East. Iran shouldn’t just be prevented from developing WMDs, it should also stop supporting terrorists in Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine / Israel.

Should Bush change his policy? Absolutely. Should the West suddenly act as Iran isn’t a threat and will never be a threat? Absolutely not.

The right policy is the middle road.

That does mean that Bush has to break with his doctrine. Will he do so?