Given the recent wave of anti-Semitic incidents around the world, it is of some concern that President Obama used some dangerously loose language at a meeting last week with Democratic U.S. senators intent on passing legislation to increase economic sanctions against Iran.
Mr. Obama is adamantly opposed to any increase in sanctions unless and until the current scheduled negotiations with Iran end unsuccessfully. In the course of the discussions, Mr. Obama suggested that “donors” were using financial leverage to promote Israel’s position on the nuclear issue by urging the senators to enact legislation increasing sanctions against Iran.
As things turned out, the lead sponsor of the legislation, Democratic Senator Robert Menendez of New Jersey, went ballistic at the notion that he would act in any way contrary to the interests of the United States. But the incident provides a disturbing window into the president’s cavalier attitude on such an incendiary issue.
Though no transcript of the meeting has surfaced as yet, Michael D. Shear reported in the New York Times:
President Obama and Senator Robert Menendez traded sharp words…over whether Congress should vote to impose new sanctions on Iran while the administration is negotiating with Tehran about its nuclear program, according totwo people who witnessed the exchange….
According to one of the senators and another person who was present, the president urged lawmakers to stop pursuing sanctions, saying such a move would undermine his authority and could derail the talks. Mr. Obama also said that such a provocative action could lead international observers to blame the Americans, rather than the Iranians, if the talks collapsed before the June 30 deadline.
The president said he understood the pressures that senators face from donors and others, but he urged the lawmakers to take the long view rather than make a move for short-term political gain, according to the senator. Mr. Menendez, who was seated at a table in front of the podium, stood up and said he took “personal offense.”
Mr. Menendez told the president that he had worked more than 20 years to curbIran’s nuclear ambitions and had always been focused on the long-term implications. Mr. Menendez also warned the president that sanctions could not be imposed quickly if Congress waited to act and the talks failed, according to two people who were present.
Mr. Obama’s inappropriate formulation brings to mind the all too familiar charges of the nefarious influence of the “Israel lobby” on U.S. foreign policy voiced by academics and pundits ranging from Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer to New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman (who in 2011 famously wrote that a rousing ovation Congress gave Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “was bought and paid for by the Israel lobby”).
While we recognize the Republican Jewish Coalition is hardly a non-partisan outfit, a snippet from a statement the group released is worthy of note:
What exactly was President Obama suggesting when he said opposition to his Iran policy is due to “donors”? No one would say opposition to his Russia policy is due to “donors,” or his Cuba policy is due to “donors,” or his general foreign policy is due to “donors.” So why did President Obama single out those who seek tougher sanctions on Iran and say their viewpoints are based on “donors”?
And the last time we checked, a number of Arab countries were just as concerned as Israel about the prospect of a nuclear Iran. President Obama should issue a clarification. It matters not that he made those remarks in a non-public setting. The story is out and the damage must be mitigated.
