web analytics
April 19, 2015 / 30 Nisan, 5775
At a Glance
InDepth
Sponsored Post


The Iran Nuclear Agreement

There is no shortage of pundits who, in pointing out the negatives inherent in the deal the Obama administration struck with Iran over its pursuit of nuclear power, suggest the president and his secretary of state were hoodwinked by the Iranians.

We think there is something else in play and while the president and secretary of state would have liked to get a better deal, they proceeded roughly according to plan. What happened in Geneva fits in perfectly with the administration’s determination to adjust to what it sees as the new international reality of indigenous movements and insurgencies and the inadequacy of modern military power to address them.

The administration’s failures are not in the details but in its judgment that Third World challenges must be accommodated rather than confronted.

To be sure, the concessions seem astounding.

Despite being forced to the table by crippling sanctions, Iran was accorded the status not of a supplicant but of a full negotiating partner permitted to make demands. Iran’s not being required to commit to the immediate dismantling of its nuclear infrastructure essentially obliterated the red lines established in no fewer than six United Nations Security Council Resolutions spearheaded by the U.S. and other Western powers.

Granting Iran interim relief from some of the imposed sanctions as well as access to frozen bank accounts pending further negotiations on a full agreement not only lessens the pressure on the Iranians before a full agreement is reached, it enables Iran to continue its financial sponsorship of terror groups around the world and the murderous Assad regime in Syria.

In addition, the agreement cannot help but dampen the threat of a re-imposition of relaxed sanctions, never mind putting in place enhanced ones. Does anyone really think Russia and China will again cooperate as they did at the outset after much arm-twisting by the U.S.?

There is also little doubt that President Obama was not unaware that the deal would necessarily have a negative effect on America’s Mideast allies, such as Israel and Saudi Arabia, and several other Arab countries with more than a passing interest in the dangers posed by a nuclear Iran.

One does not have to believe that Mr. Obama seeks their harm to accept that he is dangerously indifferent to their plight.

Moreover, we find it hard to believe that even the Obama administration has any confidence in the efficacy of the various monitoring systems to verify that Iran will actually meet its commitments. It is almost as though the administration has accepted the probability that at some future date Iran will present the world a nuclear fait accompli. And the president’s unwillingness to consider a military option tells us he has no stomach for such a confrontation no matter how imminent Iran’s nuclear capacity looks to be.

In fact, Mr. Obama’s stance is traceable to his 2008 campaign pledge that he was prepared to stretch out a hand to America’s adversaries and speak to any foreign leader without preconditions. He is certainly implementing that commitment in his dealings with Iran.

We are encouraged by movement in the Senate and House of Representatives – including among members of the president’s own party – to pass legislation providing for the imposition of greater sanctions in order to bring Iran into compliance with international norms.

Not only does it seem logical to continue the policy that convinced Iran it had to address Western concerns, but such a policy, vigorously enforced, could ultimately result in regime change in Iran.

About the Author:


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

No Responses to “The Iran Nuclear Agreement”

Comments are closed.

Current Top Story
US has no problem with Egypt's bombing hundreds of homes of Gaza civilians but can't stand to see Israel destroy a terrorist's home.
Gaza: Egypt Responsible For Weapons Shortage
Latest Indepth Stories
US has no problem with Egypt's bombing hundreds of homes of Gaza civilians but can't stand to see Israel destroy a terrorist's home.

Egypt has been more effective against Gazan smuggling tunnels than Israel’s military operations

Mrs. Golda Katz a"h

She had many names and was many things to many people, but to me she was just Babineni.

ISIS terrorist carries the group's black flag.

Is ISIS in Gaza? “No, but there are ISIS loyalists here..we pray to God they unite under ISIS’ flag”

Cliff Rieders

Rabbi Portal was that great “inspirer,” changing people for the better, enriching the lives of all

Iran knows Obama, Putin, and the Europeans don’t have a Red Line beyond which they will go to war

There is no way to explain the Holocaust. I know survivors who are not on speaking terms with G-d. I know many who are the opposite. I have no right to go there…

When a whole side of your family perishes, friends become the extended family you do not have.

“We stand with Israel because of its values and its greatness and because its such a wonderful ally”

Mr. Obama himself inelegantly cautioned members of the Senate to be careful not to “screw up” the negotiations by seeking to have input into the future of the sanctions regime that has been imposed on Iran.

For our community, Mrs. Clinton’s foreign policy record will doubtless attract the most attention. And it is a most interesting one.

Mitchell Bard is nothing if not prolific. He has written and edited 23 books, including “The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Middle East” and “The Arab Lobby: The Invisible Alliance That Undermines America’s Interests in the Middle East.” Bard, who has a Ph.D. in political science from UCLA, is also the executive director of both the […]

Understanding the process described in Dayenu reveals deep relevance for us today.

For Rabbi Zvi Yehuda Kook, the tanks, planes, and uniforms of the IDF were implements of mitzvot

The only way to become humble is honesty about our experiences; it’s the only path to true humility

More Articles from Editorial Board

For our community, Mrs. Clinton’s foreign policy record will doubtless attract the most attention. And it is a most interesting one.

He went on to say that the United States would defend Israel if it were “attacked by any state.”

In their zechus may we all come to appreciate that life is a fleeting gift and resolve to spend every precious moment of it as if it were the last.

A worthy idea any way you look at it.

If nothing really changes in the hearts and minds of the Palestinians, is Israel obligated to provide them and its other adversaries launching pads for attacks?

The United States placed enormous pressure on Israel to relinquish its gains, which Prime Minister Ben-Gurion did with great reluctance.

The real issue is that in many respects the president has sought to recalibrate American values and our system of government.

Former Connecticut senator Joe Lieberman, writing in the Washington Post on Sunday, provided one of the clearest and most compelling analyses we’ve seen of the importance of the prime minister’s speech.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/editorial/the-iran-nuclear-agreement/2013/11/27/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: