The hatred of Israel by many in Iran and its government may be stronger than any negotiating power the United Nations puts onto the country to dissuade them from building nuclear weapons. This hatred is represented in stark virtual clarity in the latest video simulating a counter-attack by Iran following a hypothetical preemptive strike by Israel and the United States.
Who would’a thunk it? Of all of the nations at the negotiating table discussing easing sanctions on Iran, France would not have been my first guess to be the one that would derail the talks because the curbing of Iran’s nuclear program weren’t tough enough. They wouldn’t have been my second, third, or fourth choice, either.
They were, however, the ones who kept the United Nations 5+1 from bailing out and catering to the Iranians in an effort to be monumental. That’s what it would have been had the deal gone through – they just wanted to be part of something big and they were all willing to drop their pants for the sake of their own place in history. The only country with guts was France.
French foreign minister Laurent Fabius is officially my favorite European. He’s probably Israel’s favorite as well.
According to Fox News:
Fabius said there were “several points” in the initial deal with which his country is not satisfied and told France-Inter Radio France does not want to be part of a “con game.”
Read More: Fox News
It’s a simple answer to an extremely complex situation. The world in general wants Iran to come to the table and truly negotiate to rejoin the world and cease their pursuit of nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, it is extremely unlikely that this can really happen.
While President Hassan Rouhani is making positive overtures towards the west, even accepting a call from US President Barack Obama, the real seat of power lies with the Ayatollah Khamenei. The man that continues to call America the “great satan” and Israel the “little satan” has been hoping for all of his 24 years as Supreme Leader of Iran to have access to nuclear weapons. As close as he finally is to realizing his dream, it is hard to believe that this could possibly end well.
Even in light of the positives associated with the new president, the Ayatollah was still not pleased with the situation with America.
“We are pessimistic about Americans and have no trust in them. The American government is untrustworthy, disloyal, considers itself superior and breaks its promises,” he said.
The upcoming talks are a way to try to make just enough promises in order to have sanctions lifted. That’s it. Regardless of what is promised, they will not abandon their nuclear weapon project. They will just do what they can to make it harder to find. They know that the United States will not act in a military manner and they know that it will be hard for Israel to act alone. Knowing this, they have nothing to lose. The worst that they can perceive happening if they go back on whatever agreement they make concerning these weapons is that the sanctions will be imposed again.
Here’s my commentary on the situation:
This morning on Face the Nation, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had a lot to say about Iran and the potential for lifting sanctions without a firm agreement in place about nuclear weapons. That was standard an expected, but he did have one sound byte regarding the budget that’s worthy of discussion.
The concept is pretty simple:
“We introduced one change. If you don’t get a budget by the end of the year, an automatic budget goes into place, 1/12th each month of last year’s budget. If you don’t get a budget within six months, you go to elections. Guess what, Bob – we always get a budget.”
When American jobs are at stake, there are roadblocks, leveraging of positions, a mad blitz in the press, and petty bickering. When the politicians’ jobs are at stake, the situation would likely be remedied quickly. If the US government took a cue from our allies in the Middle East, perhaps there wouldn’t be hundreds of thousands of Americans not working, children not getting their clinical trials for cancer, and national parks closed.
Just a thought.
A Belgian business man has been arrested in Israel and accused of spying for Iran. Ali Mansouri is of Iranian descent and had pictures of the US Embassy amongst other photos on his camera.
Israel’s Shin Bet, the internal security agency similar to the FBI in America, claims the 55-year old was a recruit for Iran’s Qods Force, a special ops unit for the Revolutionary Guard.
The alleged spy was detained on Sept. 11 as he was attempting to leave Israel through Ben Gurion International Airport. The announcement of the arrest comes just two days before Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is scheduled to speak at the United Nations General Assembly, where he is expected to argue that the Iranians cannot be trusted and that stiff economic sanctions should remain in place until Iran agrees to curtail its nuclear program.
Read More: Washington Post
To date, President Barack Obama’s greatest foreign relations claims to fame are the killing of Osama bin Laden and winning the Nobel Peace Prize. The former was a great accomplishment, albeit a combined effort over the years by the intelligence communities of his and the former administration. The latter was earned before any action was actually taken by the president.
Since then, it has gone down hill. Gitmo is still around. Afghanistan is in worse shape than it was. Iraq is in worse shape than it was. Iran, North Korea, China, and Russia have relationships with the United States that are more strained than they’ve been in decades.
Syria was an opportunity for the President to leave a mark. It came at a time when the United States and the rest of the world is war-fatigued, making decisive action a challenge for the president who had drawn a red line. When that line was crossed, he was unable to react appropriately. The “appropriate” reaction is up for debate, but one thing is clear – his actions so far have been hesitant, have changed mercurially, and have yielded no results.
If he does attack, how will the world react? What will be the results in Syria? What will be the responses from Russia, Iran, and Syria itself?
If he does not attack, he will go down in history as drawing a line that a foreign country crossed, them backtracking on this line and failing to act decisively.
This is not a good situation for the president’s legacy, something that has been shown to be extremely important to him. His actions are those of a man that is trying to be more than just the first minority president. He wants to be remembered for being a great president. At the end of the, bin Laden and Obamacare may be his only claims to fame in a time when the administration has simply not been able to accomplish much at all.
With Obamacare on a trajectory course towards disaster, is it too early to say that this will be the worst two-term president in history? That’s always hard to say considering that we may have just had the worst one in the last administration, but Obama’s making a very convincing case.
Something needs to be done about Syria. Nobody disagrees with that. The points of contention being discussed by the five permanent members of the UN Security Council as well as the rest of the world centers around how the response should be delivered.
Is it a strong condemnation over the use of chemical weapons? Is it a demand to hand them all over and have them destroyed? Is it limited strikes, either from the United States or other members of the United Nations? Is it something completely different?
The opinions are wide-ranging and the debate is fierce. As a result, everyone is apparently being very careful with their proposals as well as the way they’re handling the situation as representatives of their own country.
According to CBS:
“We are not going line-by-line” through the draft resolution floated by the French and outlined by their foreign minister, Laurent Fabius, the diplomat said. “We were discussing concepts, because the fundamentals have been agreed to, but how and if we get there is still very shaky.”
This isn’t just about Syria. Countries like Iran and North Korea are testing the bounds by proxy, learning how the world will react to Syria, their actions, and the response of the rest of the world, to help determine how far they will be able to go in the future. The region could blow up at any moment. The world could be propelled into a war. Everyone is tense over the situation and rightfully so.
No other GOP candidate has the passion of supporters like Ron Paul. It’s to the point that the weather is considered a factor on Tuesday in Iowa; Ron Paul’s supporters would cut through the bitter cold to get to the polls while supporters for other candidates would not be as willing. The forecast for Des Moines on Tuesday is clear with a high of 36 degrees.
Many of his ideas ring true for conservatives. Others sound crazy. The sticking point that will be highlighted in every debate and interview going forward despite the results in Iowa center around his position on Iran.
“If we were prohibited from having imports into this country, we would consider it an act of war,” he said. “The best way to think about this is the golden rule. If we don’t want somebody to do it to us, we shouldn’t do it to them.”
Yesterday, Iran made two announcements that could be construed as nuclear innuendo. First, they declared that they had produced their first nuclear fuel rod, a feat many in the west did not expect so quickly. Then, they test-fired medium-range missiles in the hotspot of the Strait of Hormuz. Coincidence?
While no candidate would support a war with Iran over this or other stabs they’ve taken at the US or Israel in recent months, taking it off the table and removing our military presence in the Middle East is not something conservatives want to see. Even moderates and liberals would likely side with Rick Santorum or Mitt Romney in regards to Iran before they would go with Paul’s assertion of “The Golden Rule” in foreign policy. It’s not that they would want war or an increase in our Middle East presence, but pulling out completely and removing sanctions against a country whose leaders have called America the “Great Satan” is insane in light of their nuclear ambitions.
It’s one thing to be restrained and prudent about foreign policy even with those who have declared America and its allies as enemies. It’s another thing to be oblivious to the reality that a nuclear Iran poses a threat to the entire world if only based upon its proximity to Israel and strategic alliances. Ron Paul’s position is dangerous at best.