Sunday, April 12, 2015

Is This Really a Good Deal?

In their 4/8/15 op-ed, former Secretaries of State Kissinger and Shultz pointed out that "Iran's centrifuges have multiplied from about 100 at the beginning of the negotiation to almost 20,000 today." One would think this fact alone would give pause and make one question Iran's intentions.

The two former Secretaries go on: "Under the new approach, Iran permanently gives up none of its equipment, facilities or fissile product to achieve the proposed constraints." You have to hand it to the State Department though. In rebuttal, Marie Harf, State Department spokeswoman, actually said this: "I didn't hear a lot of alternatives...I heard a lot of sort of big words and big thoughts in that piece..." You have no idea how much I wish I could say that I was kidding about what Ms. Harf said.

One issue that Obama felt should not be included in these talks was Israel's right to exist. Said one Iranian commander: "The destruction of Israel is non-negotiable." In reply, Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said: "The survival of Israel is non-negotiable. Israel will not accept an agreement which allows a country that vows to annihilate us to develop nuclear weapons." On this issue there is no disagreement within Israel.

The liberal Zionist Union Party (formerly the Labor Party) headed by Isaac Herzog and Tzipi Livni issued a joint statement regarding Iran. They argue that Israel should enter into a comprehensive deal with the US that will give Israel "the unrestricted ability to act against threats and violations both of the deal and against our regional enemies that are supported by Iran." Sounds to me like they want a green light to attack Iran if necessary. Would Obama ever agree to that?

When asked if the US would agree to a deal with Iran that requires Iran to recognize Israel's right to exist, Marie Harf tersely said: "This is an agreement that is only about the nuclear issue." If that is the case, there is no meaningful deal. Not requiring any change in behavior from Iran means they will get their nuclear weapons, and continue to support terrorism and extend their reach even further throughout the Middle East.

Obama stated that requiring Iran to recognize Israel would be a "fundamental misjudgement." In an interview with Thomas Friedman of the New York Times, Obama said how hard it was for him to hear criticisms that he has not done all he could to protect Israel. "This has been as hard as anything I do because of the deep affinities that I feel for the Israeli people and for the Jewish people." Yes, Mr. President, we can certainly see your affinity for the sole Jewish state in the world by the way you have treated its leader.

In their 4/8/15 editorial, the New York Times criticizes Israel's Minister of Intelligence and Strategic Affairs for insisting that Iran end all research end development of advanced centrifuges, reduce the number of centrifuges at Natanz beyond what the "framework" allows Iran to keep, completely close its underground facility at Fordo, allow inspectors anytime and anywhere, ship its existing stockpile of enriched uranium out of the country, and disclose past nuclear related activities having potential military use. Now that sounds like the makings of a good deal.

Yet, Obama and his State Department continue to insist that no alternatives have been proposed to Obama's deal. They continue to insist that Israel says the only option to Obama's deal is war with Iran. This writer suggested years ago that Bush should have taken out Iran's existing nuclear facilities at the time. They were fewer in number and less spread out. I argued that Bush should have sought an alliance for an aerial assault with Britain, France and Germany. I further argued that, absent a willingness to do so, Bush should have given the green light to Israel. But Bush refused to allow safe passage of Israeli planes over Iraq after we had toppled Saddam Hussein.

The result of this deal will be that Iran gets nuclear weapons, setting off a Middle East arms race as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey and others will want to obtain their own nuclear weapons. All the while Obama will tell us he has made the world safer. "If you like your doctor..."

No comments:

Post a Comment