Friday, October 16, 2015
BLIND AND STUBBORN IDEOLOGY
Almost two years of "negotiations," the final "deal" appears as a total surrender of the Obama government to all the demands of the Ayatollahs who boasted that all their red lines have been met . The deal will put them on the path to become a nuclear power, not as a pariah but legitimized by the US and Europe; they will continue to enrich uranium and to develop their ICBM program ; the lifting of the sanctions will give them 150 billion dollars to improve their economy and their military capabilities which include, of course, strengthening Hizbollah, Hamas, and other purveyors of terror in the troubled Middle-East.
The bazaar merchants have trounced the feeble and naïve negotiators led by the team Obama-Kerry. You would think they have defeated America militarily and are now dictating their terms, as the allies in Versailles with Germany or McArthur in Japan. Years ago, Obama asked the Iranian mullahs to "unclench their fists " and normalize relations with America. They didn't but he did; he opened his hands, he raised his hands and said "Don't shoot ! We give you what you want."
The flaws in the preliminaries:
Some observers think that the original sin was not to limit the negotiators to US vs Iran but to include what is called P5+1 with Russia and China a sort of fifth column siding with Iran. This was, indeed, a flaw, but a deliberate one, not a mistake. I think the Obama team knew in advance that they wanted a deal at any price, and intentionally enlarged the forum so that they could use the "other partners" as excuses for the multiple concessions they knew they had to make . How many times we heard Kerry say, apologetically, that "we are not alone;we had no choice if we wanted to keep our partners..."
Another flaw was pointed out by James Jeffrey , former ambassador to Iraq, who said after the "Interim agreement:" Those who studied the art of negotiating found two big mistakes that should be avoided :never show that you are desperate to obtain a deal and never take off the table a credible threat of use of military force if the talks collapse." The shrewd Iranians knew that Obama was desperate for a deal and swore off the use of force, and they ratched up their demands.
Rather than set a time limit, the negotiations continued on and off indefinitely. The give-and-take which is the essence of any negotiation, was a one-way activity : we gave and they took, slowly but surely, extension after extension, concession after concession, red line after red line crossed. That is a huge flaw, for what is in discussion here? Obama started with bombastic declarations, often repeated, that "we will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon...I don't mean to only contain ..." It was a very simple proposition: First Iran should dismantle her nuclear paraphernalia,( as did Qaddafi of Libya after America attacked Iraq,) and then discuss the modalities and the compensations. But Iran never said it would dismantle the nuclear facilities, above and underground, known and secret, in Natanz, Fordow, Parchin and other places. So they negotiated the "time line," when and how it will be permitted to acquire the bomb.
The dirty trick and the foul arithmetic:
Obama and Kerry didn't show one ounce of shrewdness vis-à-vis the Mullahs; they reserved all their malice and trickery for the US Congress and the American people. We can only admire their political dexterity when they dealt with Congress. First, they said there was no need for Congressional involvement. We remember Kelly's astonishing statement that "the deal with Iran was not legally binding...that it was unenforceable." But with pressure mounting from their own Democrats, they conceded a role to the Congress, both houses, and made the nuclear deal with Iran appear like any regular legislation where the president proposes, both houses vote, and the president reserves the right to veto. Thus, only 34 votes in the Senate will sustain the presidential veto because the remaining 66 are not enough to override the veto. But this is a monumental act of deceit because an agreement signed by seven countries (even two are enough), an agreement of such magnitude that took 18 months to negotiate and involves hundred of billions of dollars and millions of human lives, is an INTERNATIONAL TREATY ! and, as such, per the US Constitution, requires ratification by the US Senate whose prerogative is to "advise, consent, concur, and ratify." And the arithmetic is different: Two-thirds of the Senate are required to ratify an international treaty, i.e. 67 votes are needed . In other words, 34 Senators are enough to reject the treaty. And the Republicans alone can do that.
This dirty trick is tantamount to the nullification of the Constitution. Apparently, Mitch Mc Connell and his fellow Republicans were asleep when they allowed themselves to be hoodwinked by the sly politicos of the Democrats. But it is not too late. They may still invoke the Constitution and reverse course, even go to the Supreme Court and demand to call this agreement an "INTERNATIONAL TREATY." Or they can pass legislation --or "It is the sense of the Senate-- that this agreement is an INTERNATIONAL TREATY that requires ratification by the Senate with a two-third majority, OR any other action.
The diplomatic strip-tease that led to capitulation:
From concession to concession by the so-called P5+1, nothing was left to concede.Then, and only then, the totalitarian theocracy deigned to sign-up on the "deal." Its leaders boasted that all their red-lines had been met. There was jubilation in Tehran, and an atmosphere of mourning and a feeling of betrayal in Israel and the Sunni Arab countries where "the shoe really pinches." To appease the unappeasable, Obama and his acolytes caved and caved again and practically gave away the store, in a crescendo of incredible and dangerous stupidity:
1. Even if Iran docilely signed up on a total dismantling of their nuclear apparatus, as did Qaddafi after the American invasion of Iraq, and as Obama himself repeatedly demanded, it would still not be trusted because its past performance --it has violated 20 international agreements. The Iranian mullahs cheat as a matter of course with a straight face and a clear "conscience" because they obey, as they say, a higher religious authority in accordance with the precept of "taqiya" that requires them to lie to protect Islam or a Muslim.
2. Knowing that, Obama team and the others boasted that they were following Reagan's slogan of "Trust and verify!" and Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz, Ben Rhodes from the White House,and others talked of "an unfettered 24/7 regimen of inspections anytime, anywhere..." (which Kerry, after the surrender, denied they ever said that, even when the TV screen was showing the persons saying just that.) The final agreement allows 24 days of advance notice to the Iranians before any inspection could take place, and the inspectors must apply to a UN committee on which sits, of course, the Iranian delegate who may appeal and delay and stall --experts estimate that it will take 50 days-- more than enough time to cheat, to hide, to move and remove, to destroy evidence of any suspect activity.
Moreover, Obama dropped the original demands to inspect military sites, to shut down the centrifuges, the plutonium facility in Arak, the underground nuclear facility in Fordow, and many other installations that are not needed for peaceful civilian purposes.
3. Having given up on everything, the negotiators adopted a consoling attitude : "Don't worry, repeated Obama publicly, if they cheat, we will snap back the sanctions." Really? After his partners, the Russians, the Chinese, and even the Europeans heaved a sigh of relief after getting rid of those pesky sanctions and starting to fill their coffers with some of the 150 billion" reward" that Iran could spend. They can now buy Iranian oil and sell them weapons and machinery? How delusional can a president be! Once the genie is out of the bottle, it cannot be put back. Iran will certainly use the money to "continue helping their allies," as the Supreme Leader himself proclaimed, allies like Hizbollah, Hamas, the Yemenite rebels and others, and inflame the region and beyond.
4) And here is the most outrageous part of the deal, apparently added at the last moment as an extra-bonus ( it was not in the "interim agreement.") : " The West will train the Iranians, through courses and workshops,to prevent, protect, and respond to nuclear security threats to their nuclear facilities and systems and to thwart any acts of sabotage..."
Unbelievable! America and its partners lift the sanctions, won't inspect, allow 150 billion, keep the nuclear apparatus intact, and now ,from " stupid benefactors" they become "dumb protectors and defenders" of the worst sponsor of terrorism in the world. And protectors from whom? It is so transparent as a warning to Israel, of course, whose secret partnership with Obama's government in a project of "sabotage" called Stuxnet became publicly known via American leaks.
Secretary Kerry was grilled in the Senate by Senator Rubio who asked if that meant that America would defend Iran against an Israeli attack, to which Kerry responded that the US could assist in the protection of Iran against an Israeli attack. It boggles the mind to imagine such arrogant depravity : to protect and defend those who continue to yell "Death to America" and to sacrifice their only real ally in the Middle-East and the only democracy in the region.
5) And to top it all, it has just been reported that the UN signed with the Iranians two --maybe more--" secret side deals" which were not only not shared with the US Congress --in itself a violation-- but that even Obama and Kerry are not aware of,or so they say. Time will tell if they are lying again and if, in fact, they are partners in the secret. The American public heard of the secret deals, not from the government but thanks to the diligent efforts of two Republican senators who traveled to the source and inquired. As to the substance of the secrets, it was reported that the UN --i.e. the P5+1 including the US-- " allowed Iran to collect their own samples for inspection, " that is to investigate themselves. The tragedy is now a farce. Maybe we will hear that they allowed them to appoint their own inspectors !
The surrender of the Obama-Kerry team puts to shame Neville Chamberlain's appeasement of Hitler: Chamberlain capitulated to Hitler at Munich, but he didn't fill the the Nazi dictator 's banks with billions of sterling pounds, and he didn't pledge to protect and defend Germany against a French attack.
How can we explain the strange and dangerous actions of Obama and Kerry?
The word "legacy" was invoked by some commentators, and often repeated, to explain the deal. According to this theory, Obama, in his way out, wanted to ensure his place in the history books; this is why he passed "Obamacare," the American Dream in favor of millions of illegal aliens, and now this nuclear deal with Iran. I don't subscribe to this explanation for the simple reason that all these "accomplishments" may prove, even before Obama leaves office, to be striking failures, and then, adieu to the "legacy." Some say that they are naïve, inexperienced, incompetent. That may be true, but they had armies of experts advising them, and the "negotiations" took a long time during which they heard a lot of criticism from foe and friend including their own generals and the Pentagon which they overruled. They know what they are doing, they know the risks to America and its allies, and they don't care.
I believe the forces that impelled both Obama and Kerry to act as they did are internal, anchored in a rigid ideology and a belief system that is an indelible part of their political DNA. In his two books, and subsequent discourses and actions as president, Obama never hid his views against American imperialism, warmongering, racist behavior, and exploitation of other countries. Five days before his first election, he promised to "transform America," and when elected, he toured the world "apologizing for America's bad past." He praised Islam for contributing to the development of America, and he repeatedly refused to condemn the extremist "radical jihadists," even to the point of forbidding the use of this appellation. He hastened the fall of Mubarak in Egypt, supported his follower Morsi and his "Muslim Brotherhood," and opposed Sisi who deposed Morsi ,and still does. He showed contempt for the PM of Israel and scolded him for allowing the building of an extra-room in a Jewish neighborhood while allowing ,and aiding Iran's nuclear project. The list can fill pages.
As expected, Obama's appointees share his warped leftist ideology that brooks no compromise. If he facts do not conform to it, so much the worst for the facts. His arrogant narcissism is no longer in doubt; he feels he, and only he, knows the Truth, and he mocks and demonizes those who disagree with him. Kerry, as his Secretary of State, matches his boss in his views of America. He met in Paris, illegally during the Vietnam conflict, with the representatives of the Vietcong who were fighting America, and later in Washington D.C., he attacked US soldiers, his comrades-in-arms, and accused them, falsely, of being " rapists and murderers reminiscent of Genghis Khan." (How can we forget that picture on TV?)
Even before the negotiations for the "nuclear deal," he lobbied to have the sanctions against Iran removed; he took political contributions from Iranian-Americans connected with Tehran; and even on the personal side,his daughter married an Iranian and the best man was no other than the son of the Iranian foreign minister with whom he later negotiated the (in)famous deal. And the two negotiators met a decade ago at the house of George Soros, another anti-American and anti-Israel extreme leftist.
It looks as if the president and his secretary of state are on a mission to praise, protect and defend their enemies, to despise and punish their allies, and to diminish America.
How they could get away with it?