web analytics
April 23, 2014 / 23 Nisan, 5774
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘National Security Council’

White House Picks Israel Foe for National Security Council

Wednesday, February 19th, 2014

The White House is hiring Robert Malley, whose past writings on the Middle East have stirred controversy, as a senior member of the National Security Council.

NSC officials confirmed Malley’s appointment on Tuesday to The New York Times. His area will be the Middle East.

Malley disassociated himself from the Obama campaign in 2008 because of controversy over his meetings with Hamas officials and over his writings, which assigned some blame to Israelis for the failure of peace talks.

Malley, who had been working as the International Crisis Group’s program director for the Middle East and North Africa, was an adviser to President Bill Clinton at the failed Camp David peace talks in 2000.

The Times quoted Obama administration officials as saying that they did not anticipate controversy.

“I can’t think of anybody outside government who has a stronger set of relationships with the Israelis, as well as with people throughout the region,” Tony Blinken, a deputy national security adviser, told the newspaper.

Dem Whip: WH Aide ‘Out of Line’ Calling Congress ‘Warmongers’

Thursday, January 16th, 2014

Last Thursday, a junior member of the White House administration publicly took an extremely impolitic swipe at certain members of Congress, including members of her boss’s own party.

She called them warmongers.

Bernadette Meehan is a spokeswoman for the National Security Council.  Meehan is someone who, until last month, showed up in Google searches more often for her role as a mentor to graduates of Boston College, her alma mater, than for her role as a policy spokesperson.

Less than two years ago, Meehan was writing a blog for the Boston College Career Center, telling BC students about her career as a Foreign Service Officer.

But last week Meehan blasted members of Congress who are actively supporting the Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act – more than a dozen of whom are Democrats – labeling them the equivalent of warmongers. She attacked them for daring to proceed towards enacting legislation that cannot trigger sanctions on Iran unless Iran defaults on the alleged commitments it has made with the United States and the rest of the P5+1 (The United Kingdom, Russia, China, France and Germany) in what is known as the Geneva Interim Agreement,  an attempt to ensure that Iran ceases to enrich materials which can be used to make nuclear weapons.

And then this week, Congress’s Democratic party Whip Steny Hoyer got into the act.

Hoyer was none too pleased to have members of the White House staff criticizing his home team.  The specific legislation Meehan attacked is in the Senate, but Hoyer took umbrage not only because members of his party were castigated, but also because the House already passed legislation many months ago which would increase sanctions on Iran.

On Tuesday, Jan. 15, Hoyer gave Meehan a tongue lashing, without naming any names, of course.

“There have been some that have suggested in the White House that those folks were more interested in war than they were in the resolution by peaceful means,” Hoyer said.

In addition to declaring such a position unequivocally false, Hoyer also referred to Meehan’s statement as “irresponsible” and said it should be “clarified and retracted” by those who made it.

Stating what should not have to be said out loud, but which was demanded by the situation, Hoyer flatly announced: “Nobody believes, as far as I know, that going to war with Iran is anything but a dangerous objective that none of us would seek.”

This is Meehan’s full statement about the Iran Nuclear Weapons Free Act, which was released on Thursday, Jan. 9. The language upon which most critics focused is underlined:

This bill is in direct contradiction to the Administration’s work to peacefully resolve the international community’s concerns with Iran’s nuclear program. We know that this proposed legislation would divide the international community, drive the Iranians to take a harder line, and possibly end negotiations. This bill would have a negative bearing on the sanctions regime too. Let us not forget: sanctions work because we convinced our partners to take the steps that we seek. If our partners no longer believe that we are serious about finding a negotiated solution, then our sanctions regime would suffer.

If Congress passes this bill, it will be proactively taking an action that will make diplomacy less likely to succeed. The American people have been clear that they prefer a peaceful resolution to this issue. If certain members of Congress want the United States to take military action, they should be up front with the American public and say so. Otherwise, it’s not clear why any member of Congress would support a bill that possibly closes the door on diplomacy and makes it more likely that the United States will have to choose between military options or allowing Iran’s nuclear program to proceed.

Bibi Is Not Crazy: White House Admits Final Deal Includes Enrichment

Wednesday, December 4th, 2013

A final deal with Iran could include a capacity for uranium enrichment, the White House said.

“Could” is what you say when you used to say “couldn’t” but then the other side insisted they would, and so you add a kind of implied “maybe” to the word by making it “could” instead of, say, “will zealously engage in producing weapons grade plutonium which is what they’d been meaning to do all along while we, here, at the White House were making fun of Netanyahu for being such a panicky sort.”

Here’s what Bernadette Meehan, the National Security Council spokeswoman actually said in a statement Tuesday to JTA, in response to their query based on a story first reported by the Washington Free Beacon.

“We are prepared to negotiate a strictly limited enrichment program in the end state, but only because the Iranians have indicated for the first time in a public document that they are prepared to accept rigorous monitoring and limits on level, scope, capacity, and stockpiles.”

This is so like the joke about Churchill who asks a lady if she’d sleep with him for a thousand pounds and she said yes, then he asked what about for five, and she said: Sir, what do you think I am, and he said We already established that, now we’re haggling over the price.

See, once the White House admits they lied all along, the part about monitoring day and night, with extra binoculars, the really good kind – that doesn’t really matter any longer. The fact remains, the president agreed to Iranian enrichment and lied to the Israelis and the Saudis and everybody else who’s shaking in their boots on account of they know the crazy monkeys in Tehran will happily go down in nuclear flames if they knew they were taking everybody else with them.

Saying now that you’ve only agreed to low level, not high level enrichment is exactly like low-balling the questionable lady from the apocryphal Churchill story.

Israel and the Saudis and, really, anyone with a healthy fear of Shiites, oppose any Iranian enrichment capacity, because Iran is led by madmen to whom Mutually Assured Destruction is martyrological panacea, not a threat.

“If we can reach an understanding on all of these strict constraints, then we can have an arrangement that includes a very modest amount of enrichment that is tied to Iran’s actual needs and that eliminates any near-term breakout capability,” Meehan told JTA. “If we can’t, then we’ll be right back to insisting on no enrichment.”

And a hearty good luck to you on that one, hope you’ll visit Yad Vashem II, the Iranian Holocaust Museum. By the time the U.S. gets around to do all that insisting, Iran’s economy will have started to blossom, anywhere from $50 to $300 billion will have been injected into their economy and they could do whatever they feel like, no matter what Obama is insisting on.

Folks, the first thing Obama did when he took office in 2009 was to betray the people who voted for him by compensating the bankers for their losses. He didn’t invest a trillion dollars in Main Street, like so many of us expected he would – he gave it all to his buddies on Wall Street. We didn’t know he had buddies on Wall Street – turns out he did.

This president will betray you just to pass a boring afternoon – of course he’ll betray his Israeli and Saudi allies. He has done it already, in fact. Listen to his spokeswoman, for heaven’s sake:

“Since the P5+1 would have to agree to the contours of a possible enrichment program, it is by definition not a ‘right’,” she said.

White House Presses Congress Not To Intensify Sanctions

Thursday, October 24th, 2013

The National Security Council has asked Congressmen at a White House briefing to delay passing new Iran sanctions, according to BuzzFeed.

The meeting with top staffers from congressional committees dealing with Iran sanctions was called after the Obama administration launched renewed talks this month with Iran in the wake of pledges from its newly elected president, Hassan Rouhani, to cooperate with major powers in making Iran’s nuclear program more transparent.

Administration officials have said sanctions will remain in place until Iran tangibly shows it is abiding by U.N. Security Council resolutions and suspending uranium enrichment, but some congressional leaders, in line with the policy advised by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, want to intensify existing sanctions as a means of increasing leverage over Iran.

War Games Predict Outcome of Iranian Nuclear Success

Tuesday, January 10th, 2012

Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies think tank has sent a report with possible national responses to a successful Iranian nuclear weapons test to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, according to Britain’s The Telegraph newspaper.

According to the report on the simulation, the US would create a defense treaty with Israel, but tell the Jewish state not to exercise military options against Iran.  To date, Israel has maintained that no options – including a targeted air strike – are off the table when it comes to Russia would enter its own agreement with the United States, while Saudi Arabia would likely begin developing its own nuclear weapons program.

The INSS scenario involves a successful Iranian nuclear weapons test in January 2013.  Given that possibility, the INSS believes Iran would attack the US Fifth Fleet and try to encroach on territories on its Iraqi border.  “The simulation showed that Iran will not forgo nuclear weapons, but will attempt to use them to reach an agreement with the major powers that will improve its position,” the report stated.

Dennis Ross, a two year advisor on US President Barack Obama’s National Security Council, and former advisor on Iran to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, said Monday that President Obama is prepared to use military force to keep Iran from creating atomic weapons.

The London Times reported that the war games were played out last week in Tel Aviv at the behest of former Israeli ambassadors, intelligence and military officials, including a former head of Israel’s National Security Council and two former members of the prime minister’s office.

US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey have confirmed that the US is preparing for the possibility of having to use military strength against Iran.

On Monday, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirmed that Iran continues enriching uranium at a heavily fortified underground facility in northern Iran.  IAEA officials say the uranium has been enriched up to 20 percent

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/war-games-predict-outcome-of-iranian-nuclear-success/2012/01/10/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: