At
the onset of President Obama’s term in office, there seemed a desire to deal
with Iran. Throughout his presidency,
Mr. Obama has sought a deal with the totalitarian state to inhibit through
diplomacy its nuclear ambitions. This
might be seen as a continuation of the type of diplomacy that began under
President Nixon to limit our adversaries’ nuclear capabilities. However, previous agreements have been done
from a position of strength. The president,
so anxious to get any deal done, has created the opposite and the Iranians are
better for it.
For
the Iranians, the biggest hurdle to overcome is the elimination of
international sanctions that have been in place for so long that the Iranian economy’s
decline is in an inverse relationship with civil unrest. The Iranian leadership, exhibiting a
dictatorial nature that they once bemoaned personified in the Shah, is cracking
down on dissent while trying to turn the corner on their own Great
Depression.
Just
as the Iranian government was left grasping for answers, they received a bit of
salvation in a rather obliging deal with the U.S. The fact that the Iranians are praising the
deal while threatening to build nuclear weapons if anyone backs out should give
the powers that be pause. The Israelis
are particular concern because their relationship with Iran is not diplomatic
but pragmatic. It is they who stand to
face obliteration at the hands of a nuclear Iran. While the president opines rhetorically, the
Israelis are faced with a very real problem.
For Prime Minister Netanyahu, it is not a personal ambition but a
national one given the results of recent elections that returned him to power.
The
blithe sanguinity with which the president sees Iran’s compliance is thankfully
not shared by the Congress. The ball is
now in their court to put some teeth back into this deal or nix it
altogether. Still, while Congress can
frame the approach, it still lies with the president to act on it and Mr. Obama
does not seem keen to do so. With a naïveté
reminiscent of President Jimmy Carter with the Russians and President Woodrow
Wilson with the European Powers, President Obama is banking his entire approach
on the “will of good men” in Iran. Never
mind that Iran has done nothing to give the impression that such men exist
within its government, the president’s approach continues to hold the
faith.
I
must admit that I admired initially the president’s willingness to speak to
Iran. He is right that nothing can be
achieved without communication. However,
cock-eyed optimism is no way to deal with such an adversary. There must be iron in our words and a
willingness to lower the hammer if our interests are ignored. We have taken on the responsibility to
negotiate and the worst thing that we can do is to disregard our commitment to
friends and regional peace by settling for anything at any price. The president, in a way not unlike pre-World War II British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, has done just that.
No comments:
Post a Comment