Will the Iran Negotiations Be Too Big to Fail?
On February 29, Secretary of State Clinton assured the House Foreign Affairs Committee — in absolute terms, three separate times – the Obama administration’s policy was not simply to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, but a nuclear weapons capability. She assured Howard Berman (D-CA) “it’s absolutely clear that the president’s policy is to prevent Iran from having nuclear weapons capability.” She reiterated the policy to Eliot Engel (D-NY), and reiterated it again to Gary Ackerman (D-NY).
The “absolutely clear” policy lasted until the White House could get a hold of the New York Times. On March 2, unnamed “administration officials” told the New York Times that Clinton had “misspoken.”
The same day as the Times report, the Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg posted the transcript of his interview with the president, in which Obama repeatedly phrased his policy as preventing Iran from “getting a nuclear weapon.” At AIPAC, Obama used the same formulation: “obtaining a nuclear weapon.” At various times in the past, Obama has phrased his position as preventing Iran from “getting,” “obtaining,” “acquiring,” or “deploying” a nuclear weapon. Each verb connotes a policy that makes actual acquisition the red line, rather than a nuclear weapons capability.
The significance of the “capability” versus “acquisition” issue is that it impacts the timing of a U.S. military response. The administration argues that Iran is “rational” (in Gen. Dempsey’s view) and “self-interested” (as Obama told Goldberg), and that sanctions will thus eventually work. On the other hand, Israel believes Iran is already approaching a nuclear weapons capability, and building underground facilities impervious to Israeli attack, fundamentally changing the strategic and security situation even if the bomb is not manufactured until later. In Israel’s view, even if sanctions might arguably work — which is speculative — the time for them to work is running out.
Thus Israel believes the U.S. red line has been set at a point that will not be reached until it is too late for Israel to act. That would leave Israel dependent on a future decision by a U.S. president to go to war — based on a pledge to use “all options” that is (as Secretary Clinton would say) “unenforceable.” According to the Washington Post, a “senior administration official” said after the Obama-Netanyahu meeting, “Our red line is a nuclear weapon, and we didn’t change our policy” — which means the administration did not change its timing, leaving the U.S. red line at a point beyond Israel’s ability to strike.
The Wall Street Journal reported that U.S. officials said a red line of nuclear weapons “capability” would be too ambiguous. But the difference between (1) a red line set far down the field (indeed right next to the goal line), and (2) an ambiguous red line set at an earlier point, is that the former effectively incentivizes Iran to continue marching down the field, whereas the latter would make Iran nervous now, rather than later.
If faced only with the first alternative, a rational and self-interested Iran will likely decide to continue its present course, perhaps negotiating a “framework agreement” or a “joint statement” of principles that will later break down, and eventually present the U.S. with a fait accompli – which is exactly what happened with respect to North Korea.
Israel is readying to act. Anyone with eyes in their head, and brain matter too, knows this is the case.
Regardless of what the leaderships states to Washington they will do what they must to save us from another Holocaust.Even though our leadership leaves much to be desired, this issue is existential.They understand it very well.
In any case, the only thing that most of here want is for Obama to do two things-get the hell out of the way while we strike, and then supply us with what we need if requests are made.
NO ONE is asking a single American troop to fight on our behalf. This contention is a bold faced lie, one that anti-semites make over again, repeatedly stating that Israel sacrifices American soldiers in their wars. Hogwash.Israel always fights its own battles, as it should. Besides, how many American soldiers have died protecting Arabs/Muslims? Too many, and for what?
Whereas the US supplies anti-American forces with much of their firepower, suffice it to say, by re-arming us they are saving their own skins.
In other words, IF Iran manages to destroy Israel, then Washington is not far behind. Count on it.
Well said Adina.
Yes it is painful what our American leaders have done. All of that sacrifice to liberate Iraq for this:
“Iraqi activists sounded the bell over the killing of dozens of teenagers by religious police for having “emo” haircuts.
Activists told the Cairo-based al-Akhbar daily that at least 90 Iraqi teenagers with “emo” appearances have been stoned to death by the Moral Police in the country in the past month. The violent crackdown against “emo” Iraqi teenagers came after the Iraqi interior ministry declared them as “devil worshippers.”
“The ‘Emo phenomenon’ or devil worshiping is being probed by the Moral Police who have the approval to eliminate it as soon as possible since it’s detrimentally affecting the society and becoming a danger,” a statement by the Interior Ministry said.
“They wear strange, tight clothes that have pictures on them such as skulls and use stationery that are shaped as skulls. They also wear rings on their noses and tongues, and do other strange activities,” the statement added.”
(from Elder of Ziyon)
I sense that Israeli leaders have already decided on a course of action as well.
We need to remember that Reagan was furious when Israel took out Saddam’s reactor and joined the UN in condemnation. Bush did not want them to bomb the Syrian reactor but they did it anyway. I think we can all agree in retrospect that not only Israel but the world, is a much safer place because of those actions.
All will be OK.
When my sons (as well as others)don their IDF uniforms they know they are fighting for our collective Jewish survival.Not for the survival of this or that despot to remain standing, (propping up Karzai or the Iranian backed Iraqi leadership!)but for the survival of the Jewish people.
And, THAT’S a highly motivating factor.The point being, IF our leaders unshackle our forces-all of them-Iran won’t have a chance.
They weren’t born to walk on water
They weren’t born to sack and slaughter
But on their soul, they weren’t born
To stoop and knuckle under
They can again learn to steal some thunder
They can again learn to work some wonder
And when the gauntlet’s down,
It’s time to rise and climb the sky
And soon the moon will smoulder
And the winds will drive
Yes, Israel grows older but it’s soul remains alive
All those tremulous stars still glitter
They will survive
Let their hearts grow colder and as bitter as a falcon in the dive
There was a dream, a dying ember
There was a dream, they may not yet remember
But they will resurrect that dream
Though rivers stream and hills grow steeper
For in the Middle East where life gets cheaper
Oh, here in this Hell the blood runs deeper
And when the final duel is near
They will lift their spear and fly
Piercing into the sky and higher
And the strong will thrive
Yes, the weak will cower while the fittest will survive
If they wait for the darkest hour
Till they spring alive
Then with claws of fire, they will devour like a falcon in the dive!
He fooled me with his campaign wishes
He plotted and he schemed
Heaven knows how he lied to me
He’s not at all the way he seemed
I thought I was in for hope and change heaven
But I was sure in for a surprise
Heaven help me, I didn’t see
The al-taqiyya in his eyes
He may speak like a dhimmi, act like a dhimmi, and bow like a dhimmi
But I got wise
Obama’s the Twelfth Imam in disguise
Oh yes he is
He’s the Twelfth Imam in disguise!
How exactly do you prevent a country that wants a nuclear weapon from getting one?
You pretty much invade them and overthrow the government. Do you really think we should have started another Korean war? The first one didn’t turn out so hot.
Same thing here – Iran’s program is far too entrenched for a strike to have much effect other than delay. It’s either an invasion, occupation, or Iran will eventually get a nuclear weapon.
And the American people will not stand for another invasion of a Middle Eastern country, with two costly failures in the last decade.
If we can live with Pakistan having nukes (remember them? The ones helping the Taliban? The ones that hid Bin Laden?) then we can live with Iran having them. Israel has nuclear armed subs, they have a second strike capability. If India and Pakistan can stat at peace based on MAD, so can Iran and Israel.
You missed the point entirely.
A rogue nation with a nuclear deterrent can then engage in state-sponsored terrorism with impunity.
Iran is a terrorist state. Hezbollah is a terrorist organization. But we couldn’t force Iran to stop supporting terrorism once they had nukes to retaliate with.
Jeremy, with respect, the same exact thing was said (by many many intelligent people inducing Reagan) regarding the Iraq nuclear Plant.
Hmmmm, what happened there. Well, in short it’s called the law of untended consequences, or not a single one of us can tell the future, even one measly year in advance. THUS, like Iraq, which, mind you, from recently released documents, the Begin government thought they would have to strike, and re-strike even 3 or so year ad infinitum, irrespective of the “international opprobrium.”
Yet what happened? Wowy Gazowy. Only one single strike was necessary as (gasp) other Geo-political forces which no one could possibly have guessed, took over in such a way that Israel was relieved of striking again as Saddam Hussein did not continue to pursue nuclear weapons. IMAGINE THAT!
And now, I’d say that even if the international sanction are SO BAD, that Israel will (gasp) have to live like the paupers they were in the 1950′s —
A T____L E A S T____T H E Y____W I L L____B E____A L I V E____!!!
And I guarantee you, that even if Israel needed to strike again, the3y’d survive yet again. Furthermore, I have direct connections to an entire network of Iranians living IN IRAN right now who are all literally, ON THE EDGE waiting desperately for an Israeli strike as that will be the “crack” in the armor of which they will then attempt exploit by pouncing immediately. I cannot say whether they will be successful, but I can say, with absolute certainty that every single columnist who has said that “Iranians as a whole support their Nuclear Weapons program and will all “unite behind any attack on it” — IS UNMITIGATED PURE HOGWASH. The fact is, straight from Iranian mouths — from the mouths of current Iranian National Guard Members (and others whose identities must obviously be kept secret): I can tell you what THEY say. And that is: that there is NOTHING more those Iranians want than for either Israel OR the USA to take out Iran’s Nuclear Weapons AND (critically) to also, if at all possible, take out the government centers — they are all desperate for a crack in the regime which they might be able to exploit, and furious that the US, that Obama, did nothing when their closest chance was delivered to them during the last major election, what now 2 years ago.
Unfortunately Israel (and they know this well) doesn’t have the kind of non-nuclear might to do the latter in the way in which the USA could. That is unfortunate since all one has to do is listen to a single Iranian with actual friends IN either the IRGC, the Al Quds, The Basij, or other Governmental foundations, and if you can convince them to speak without fear of retribution, they will ALL, I repeat that: A L L tell you that they desperately want this regime to end AND they would be happy for “any shake up” that a military strike on the nuclear weapons facilities would bring (it would bring many things, the list of which I will not get into now: but the important thing is that it will cause a crack which the anti-regime forces might… just might be able to exploit.
So I’m sorry sir, both the tone of your post, and its entire content are simply far off base. They are spoken as the classic “armchair intellectual” who seemingly knows nothing about the real people who inhabit Iran, and the real forces, motivating both Iran and Israel.
Do you, Jeremy, even know the difference between the say the IRGC, the Al Quds Brigade(?) how about the Basij? How about which one has the critical relationship with Hezbollah? Do you even know where Hezbollah is? The name of its leader? The name of Iran’s two leaders, their titles, and which one is now clearly stronger politically than the other?
These are (in effect) “Middle East 101 class midterm questions” if you can’t get past them, you really should try to avoid making sweeping statements like you did and invoking MAD, which BY DEFINITION, requires an enemy who VALUES their OWN lives MORE than so-called “suicide-bombers” value “martyrdom.” Russia has/had no notion of “Martyrdom” seekers whilst Iran does. That puts something of a “wrinkle,” would you not say(?) in the entire edifice of “M.A.D.”
I humbly suggest (yes, the first humble thing I’ve said all throughout this post) that it makes, oh, a smidgen of a difference whether your enemy desires death (Martyrdom) or life (e.g. the USSR) when contemplating whether you want to bet the ENTIRE POPULATION OF YOUR COUNTRY on “MAD!” Indeed, it would be MAD not to make such an analysis.
Sincerely,
– FF
Frumious Falafel, (always loved your moniker)IF I knew you were going to write so eloquently, and with a complete knowledge base too, I would not have bothered to post.
To wit, only those who know their Middle East history/geo-politics (or, at least live in the cross hairs)should be mouthing off. The rest should have the good sense to – SHUT THE HELL UP!!
Would anybody rely on Obama for anything? He bowed to the Saudi king. He’s stooped low to demonstrate his subservient position. Israel can’t depend on him and neither can we.
The farce that is “the Israel-Palestine peace process” is too big to fail also.
How long have these “negotiations” been ongoing now? Thirty years?
If I were POTUS, I would announce:
“We really can’t be an honest broker because we’re known to be allied with Israel. So we’re going to end our participation in this ‘peace process’ forthwith. I suggest that Israel and the Palestinians shop around for some other honest broker. Try Switzerland–Geneva is nice this time of year.”
“Thus Israel believes the U.S. red line has been set at a point that will not be reached until it is too late for Israel to act. That would leave Israel dependent on a future decision by a U.S. president to go to war — based on a pledge to use “all options” that is (as Secretary Clinton would say) “unenforceable.”
And that’s how people like Obama like to keep it. Keep stalling with the Iranians until it’s too late, then force the Israelies to have to depend on whatever crumbs we decide to give them. But in this case, if we’re wrong and the mullahs actually mean what they say, then there won’t be much of Israel to save after a nuclear attack. Swell foreign policy, right? And, with Obama in office, do you realy think he would EVER attack Iran, risking another war in the Middle East, especially before an election? Get real. Obama is going to sit on Israel, preventing it from doing anything and allowing Iran to get its bomb. Then, after the fact, Israel will be unable to do anything, just hoping that Iran will not use this new weapon. Israel will have to hope that a bunch of lunatics in Iran, who made it their mission in life to destroy the Israelis, will not use a nuclear bomb. If you were an Israeli, what would you do?
It’s a wonder we have ANY allies left in the world with Obama as president.
I sorta suspect “our allies” are making plans that that do not include the US, as they would be very wise to do.
Liberty — you hit the NAIL directly on the head in that post Sir! Well done, well done.
– FF
There is evidence that Iran already is in possession of and has already tested nuclear weapons. All these discussions about red lines are red herrings!
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=260534
The interesting thing about this information is that it appeared in the pages of the prestigious journal, Nature. Under normal circumstances, that would be sufficient to change the conversation, but it has not. When truth has no value in determining action, the outcome is likely to be poor.
For once, I believe Obama is speaking the whole, unabridged truth.
The article notes “Obama has phrased his position as preventing Iran from “getting,” “obtaining,” “acquiring,” or “deploying” a nuclear weapon. Each verb connotes a policy that makes actual acquisition the red line, rather than a nuclear weapons capability.”
But that analysis focuses on the verb. The correct analysis is: “Obama has phrased his position as preventing Iran from “getting,” “obtaining,” “acquiring,” or “deploying” a nuclear weapon.”
Obama’s policy leads to Iran having many nuclear weapons. And that’s the slippery slope that leads to paying blackmail. If a nation only has one nuclear weapon then it’s not much use, it’s a one trick pony that will get them annihilated. Multiple weapons, on the other hand, can be anywhere in the world just waiting to be detonated. Welcome to the Brave New World of Barack “The Destroyer” Obama. How’s that Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, that Iran signed, working for you? .
If I may, a very loose translation of the Administrations position is “PEACE In Our Time!”.
All that is missing is the “And here is the paper signed by …”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmH5A6QsqRY
z
Affirmative racial negro action in the white house – too big to fail.
You aren’t even trying any more, Throbbin Yobbin.
Time is overdue to let fall the mask of BHO , in this case the pseudo-neogociations where there is exactly nothing to negotiate : The nazis ayatollahs want many nuclear toys and they are about to get them and on the other hand BHO and Hilarious Clinton are posing as tough negotiators.The whole comedy is more than ridiculous , it is tragic and Netanyahu has perfectly stated that this the reality , and Israel therefore must acts on its OWN , meaning without the pseudo-ally named USA.
Since Israel does not have the conventionnal armament to destroy the whole nuclear program of Iran, then it can only prove to do a limited strike wich will in no way neutralize once for all the criminal intentions of Iran.
Please note that BHO-Panetta have refused to sell to Israel the conventional armament to perform a conventionnal strike .( BHO has refused to sell to his ” ally ” (Israel?) the bunkers-busters bombs of the last generation the GBU 57 able to pierce 60 meters of reinforced concrete – BHO has refused to sell the
air refueling tankers ).
Thanks to BHO arms embargo , Israel is left with a tragic choice : use their nuclear arsenal to neutralize totally the iranian threat . The consequences will be that the Teheran regime will crumble, the Assad regime will not stand on the fence and may use its poisonous gas missiles to hurt Israel , and finally the whole mideast will be in flames and oil will reach 6$ a gallon. For the next 4-5 ears Israel will be safe. The blame game on Israel will reach delirious proportions and BHO will lose his reelection , having openly betrayed Israel.
What an inglorious result but that’s exactly where BHO cowardice and lies brings us. Actually the Iran-Israel conflict is the ” deus ex machina ” of the BHO comedy which has been going since 2008. When you link the dots of all the blunders BHO orchestrated in the Mideast from helping the muslim brotherhood to seize power in Egypt-Lybia to the abstention of intervention in Syria and the neutral attitude BHO keeps in front of the ever-expanding Iran aggression against the arab oil-rich sunni kingdoms ( Saudi Arabia Koweit Bahrein UAE ) you realize that this is the work a very malignant person who has seized the mideast for raising the worst anti-western threat that has ever come true.BHO is a marxist-muslim-mole .
What seems to be ‘too big to fail’ is the mentality of most here that we, as a TOTALLY BANKRUPT country living off the equivalent of Pay Day Loans from China and Europe can simply get another loan to start another Middle Eastern war, with a worn out military and expect it to go swimmingly and without major consequence for us, all because we have glorious techno war gadgets (also bought with borrowed money) that go “SWOOSH!” “BOOM!” and “PEW! PEW! PEW!”
The military interventionist priapism on display here is sad. None of the posturing and drum beating to attack Iran is based on ANYTHING that even comes CLOSE to Just War theory, so I can never support it.
There will be consequences for this, people.
You have employed several times the word ” borrowed ” to justify your cowardice; so lets go to the next step: Your cowardice – based on so-called economic weakness _ will not spare you of the consequences of your morally weak posture; As Winston Churchill said of Chamberlain after the Munich 1938 ” peace ” accord : you had the choice between war and dishonor, you choosed dishonor and you will have war “. So if I have to observe in your posture one grain of truth Mr Mick ;it is that you are living on borrowed time, and the refunding of this loaned time willbe very costly to you , to your country and to the western world.
I actually happen think that being bankrupt is a GREAT reason not to do certain things, as it means you have no means to pay for them. Perhaps you are one of those Americans that has been living off of rolling credit cards, equity loans on an over-leveraged house and two car payments on the SUVs in your driveway and not yet met the brick wall that is waiting for you around the corner, so this concept may be foreign to you, I’ll admit.
I also notice that you argue like typical left-wing liberal: Instead of answering the objections (zero money, worn out military, unacknowledged consequences of intervention, lack of even trying to meet Just War standards) you instead resort to ad hominem attacks. This is very typical.
I make no show of trying to be a manly-man by advocating war in various countries. I don’t see how this qualifies as cowardice or courage as I am not one of the ones that will be doing the dirty work on the ground.
“willbe very costly to you , to your country”
- Your unspoken premise here is that war with Iran will NOT be costly to you or your country. That is rather shortsighted. Perhaps your idea of what war entails comes from playing Call of Duty. You don’t recognize any cost for going to war which includes pornographic levels of spending (money we don’t have), more cancer-like growth of Federal government and corresponding decrease of Freedom in this country.
Until a possible war with Iran meets Just War standards, I will never be in favor of it.
You totally miss the point : Being bankrupted financially does not equal with being a coward quite the contrary .
2nd: I am not a high-class american living on borrowed money as you try figure out who I am , and neither I am a left-wing liberal;
I am a french , european, westerner, conservative; so quite far from your wrong guess.
3rd: My opposition to your mental elucubration is not ad hominem ,but against your ” cowardice advocacy ” I do not know you personnally, but your ideas are just repulsive to me.
4th: Your ideas belongs to the ” not in my backyard ” camp ; Yes you consume elctricity but you refuse the high voltage pylon in your neighbourhood.Pretty myopic vision, and the same applies to policy, strategy, econmics; this is a global world do you know ?
5th: You are either blind or just suffering from ADD ( attention deficit disorder ) since you did not read or understood my warning ( this war is gonna cost a lot to your country, AND to the Western World ).6th: You do not have to run to the call of duty : the consequences of a nuclear armed Iran will come straight to your door ( inflated heating bill) and to your car ( 6$ a gallon ) : You won’t have to dress your camo pants; you will soon have no pants.
“Being bankrupted financially does not equal with being a coward quite the contrary .”
- The contrary being that if you are well off you are a coward? If you are bankrupt you are brave? What is the point?
“My opposition to your mental elucubration is not ad hominem”
- Actually, yes it is. To quote you: “You have employed several times the word ” borrowed ” to justify your cowardice” Seems logic is not your forte.
“Your ideas belongs to the ” not in my backyard ” camp”
- No, they don’t. My ideas belong in the ‘Starting a war that could lead to tens of thousands dead, particularly civilians, needs to be shown to be valid on moral grounds’ camp.
I certainly do know this is a global world (whatever that means). This plays in very much when it comes to the global consequences of war, which it seems you have not considered either.
I do understand your ‘warning’. There are consequences for every act. Just like the consequences of war with Iran will come to our door as well. Your frightfully silly position seems to include the idea that not attacking Iran will cause skyrocketing fuel costs, but somehow you think that igniting a war in another oil producing nation will someone how have zero effect on it.
“You won’t have to dress your camo pants; you will soon have no pants.”
- Well, I will certainly be on the lookout for terrorist Iranians who are looking to steal my pants. Perhaps they’re already here and they are the ones that have been disappearing with my socks… But, like I have said again and again, and have been ignored again and again, until it meets the Just War criteria, I will not favor starting a war on a sovereign nation. Period.
All this yakking and parsing going on over words like “capability” versus “acquisition” suits liberals perfectly.
The intellecktewals have reduced Iran’s existential threat to Israel to delicately balanced thought clouds. They love doing that, just like trying to substitute overseas contingency operations and man caused disasters for terrorism.
We can talk forever ! Even Ayatollah Khamenei has announced himself up for some more yakking, while laughing into his sleeve. (BUT, he says, Iran’s nuclear program is off the table as a subject for discussion ! )
All the “sanctions” on the planet aren’t going to stop Iran from seeking a deliverable nuclear weapon. Such has been their singleminded pursuit since Saddam invaded Iran in 1980. They have friends (not to mention trading partners) in high places, like China and Russia thwarting anything with teeth happening to them.
(Speaking of words, and their vapidity, last year our sec’y of state referenced the guy currently slaughtering his citizens willy nilly in Syria as a “reformer”.)
I don’t think Bibi is waiting for Barak. All the above posts are good and educational. The bottom line is whether Netanyahu and the Cabinet/security people will be foolish enough to trust the United States. We’re past that point.
Someone please educate Obama and also all of our “so called” world leaders that our war with the Islamic Regime should not be based on its nuclear armament path, but on its 33 long years of terrorist activities with no slowing down throughout the globe, most recent ones in Gaza strip, New Delhi, Thailand, Malaysia and even Georgia, then going back all over the place from America, to Canada, Germany, France, Britain, Mexico, Australia, and the list goes on.. Do they honestly think that if they can force this evil regime to stop its nuke program, they will also stop their massive integrated web like program of terrorist activities throughout the world?
The point should not be the “nuke program” itself but it is the WHO that controls the button on the nuke that should be the issue.
A terrorist regime is just that, a terrorist regime with nukes and without. You cannot negotiate with that, nor settle with that.
This regime must be brought down by supporting the Iranian people in its totality and there is no other way.
Now someone please educate Obama, our so called analysts, politicians and our dumbo world leaders please!
Freedom for all!