Nuclear Peace With Iran in Our Time: Is This Our Chamberlain Moment?

November 12, 2013 4:35 pm 15 comments

Saudi FM Saud al-Faisal greets John Kerry, November 3rd, 2013. Photo: State Department.

The deal that has been offered to Iran—to soften some sanctions in return for a promise by the mullahs to preserve the status quo with regard to their nuclear program—does not serve the interest of peace.  This is not to discourage further diplomacy and negotiation, but it is to underline what Secretary of State John Kerry has said:  namely that a bad deal is worse than no deal.  This is a very bad deal for America, its allies and peace.

Diplomacy is better than war but bad diplomacy can cause bad wars. The US is leading the noble efforts, stalled for the moment, to achieve a diplomatic breakthrough in our determination to prevent Iran from developing, or having the capacity to develop, nuclear weapons. There is little dispute about this essential goal: virtually everyone agrees that a nuclear armed Iran would pose unacceptably grave dangers to the United States and its allies.

Nor is there much controversy over the preference for “jaw jaw” over “war war” as Winston Churchill once put it. But the understandable concern, expressed by Israeli, French, Saudi and some other leaders, is that the Iranian leadership is playing for time—that they want to make insignificant concessions in exchange for significant reductions in the sanctions that are crippling their economy. Their goal is to have their yellow cake and eat good food at the same time. These leaders, and many experienced nuclear and diplomatic experts, fear that a bad deal, such as the one that secretary Kerry seemed ready to accept, would allow the Iranians to inch closer to nuclear weapons capacity while strengthening their faltering economy. The net result would be a more powerful Iran with the ability to deploy a nuclear arsenal quickly and surreptitiously.

Were this to occur, we would be witnessing a recurrence of the failed efforts to prevent a nuclear North Korea but in a far more volatile and dangerous neighborhood of the globe. Were Iran to use the current diplomatic efforts as a cover to buy time to make a preventive military attack unrealistic, this would indeed be our “Chamberlain moment”, a replication of the time ¾ of a century ago, when the idealistic but naive British prime minister made a bad deal with the Nazis in a desperate but futile effort to avoid deploying the military option against Hitler’s growing power.

Winston Churchill, despite his preference for jaw, railed against Chamberlain’s concession, describing it as a defeat without a war.  The war, of course, soon came and the allies were in a weaker position, having ceded the industrially and militarily critical Sudetenland to Germany while at the same time giving it more time to enhance its military power. The result was tens of millions of deaths that might have been avoided if the British and French had engaged in a preventive war instead of giving dangerous concessions to the Nazis when they were still weak.

The immediate choice for the world today is not between diplomacy and preventive war, as it may have been in 1938. We have a third option: to maintain or even increase the sanctions while keeping the military option on the table. It was this powerful combination that brought a weakened and frightened Iran to the bargaining table in the first place. It is this combination that will pressure them to abandon their unnecessary quest for nuclear weapons, if anything will. To weaken the sanctions regime now, in exchange for a promise to maintain the status quo, would be bad diplomacy, poor negotiation and a show of weakness precisely when a show of strength is called for.

The leadership of the pro-Israel community, both in the United States and Israel, have shown rare unity around the issue of not weakening the sanctions merely in exchange for the promise of a nuclear standstill from the Iranians.  Liberals and conservatives, doves and hawks, all seem to realize that the best way to avoid the scylla and charybdis of a nuclear Iran or a military attack is to maintain the tough sanctions while diplomacy continues.  As usual, the only outlier seems to be J Street whose claim to be “pro-Israel” grows less credible by the day.  Previously, J Street claimed to support tough sanctions as an alternative to the military option and drumbeating.  But now that Israel and its supporters insist that sanctions be maintained, J Street seems to be supporting the Neville Chamberlain approach to diplomacy:  make substantial concessions in exchange for hollow promises, thereby weakening our negotiating position and increasing the chances that the United States will be forced to take military action as the only means of preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

This is the time when the entire pro-Israel community must stand together in opposition to the deal being offered the Iranians—a deal which is bad for the United States, for the West, and for Israel.  The Israeli people seem united in opposition to this bad deal.  The American Congress is doubtful about the deal.  This is not a liberal/conservative issue.  Liberals who view military action as a last resort should oppose this deal, and conservatives who fear a nuclear Iran above all else should oppose this deal.  Indeed all reasonable, thinking people should understand that weakening the sanctions against Iran without demanding that they dismantle their nuclear weapons program is a prescription for disaster.  Have we learned nothing from North Korea and Neville Chamberlain?

Alan M. Dershowitz, the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard, is a practicing criminal and constitutional lawyer and the author of The Trials of Zion. His autobiography, “Taking the Stand: My Life in the Law”, was published last month.

A shorter version of this article appeared in Haaretz.

15 Comments

  • What i find unbeleivable is that supposedly ” intelligent” people in very powerfu positions in our government would take the word of the Iranian mullahs. They want to wipe us( USA) and Israel off the map. These mullahs are playing you Mr Obama and Mr Kerry. Wake up

  • E. Patricia Coppola

    I believe that Alan Dershowitz is right. The problem is as I see it, that Chamberlain truly believed that he had signed a treaty with Germany that would ensure peace. It made him a laughing stock in the eyes of Hitler. Either Obama is unbelievably naive or he’s unbelievably un-American!! In any case it’s a very bad deal for the U.S. Israel and all of our other allies. Since when in the last several decades has Iran proved themselves anything but untrustworthy?? So why would we ever start to trust them now? They are out to develop nuclear weapons and I personally don’t think that anything will stop them. If we lighten up on the sanctions it will just happen that much faster. Keep the sanctions in place! It’s the only way to contain them and possibly keep them from having those horrible weapons. Because you know once they have them no one will ever feel safe again.

    • Your article is very tightly and accurate and as far as J Street is concern this is coming from a 58 y/o African American born in the projects of Chicago raised in the notorious Englewood area, Veteran, Hebrew Christian son of Abraham speaking and saying that J Street is little more than fully westernized assimilated traitor who need to make Aliyah so they can learn firsthand what and who and where the real deal is.

  • Irmgard Gesund

    I completely agree with Allen Donow’s comments. Prof. Dershowitz has many times spoken up for Israel,even written a book supporting Israel, and for that we can all be grateful. But what make him so disappointing is that in the final analysis, he cannot seem to break with Obama and Co. and admit the painful truth: Obama and Co. are Israel’s worst enemies. It is both very sad and infuriating. And probably true of a lot of Obama’s Jewish supporters.

  • Are you trolls really suggesting that one of the brightest jurists of our time is a warmonger?

    Mr Jagoda, I think that when you can bring an educated credible opinion to the table like the tenured Harvard Professor does, then you can comment like you have.

    Until then sir – you should shut your face.

  • Dershowitz, as always, makes a game with words. Truth is lost in a maze of verbal diarhea. As the proverb says “As a dog returns to its vomit, so a fool returns to his folly”. Only from Dershowitz would you hear a statement extolling (and underlining) a speech of John Kerry, who had just tried to close a deal with the Iranians by giving away the store. It is Dershowitz’s job to protect and defend Obama and Kerry at all costs, even if he must destroy Israel and the Jewish people in the process. For this he gets to meet with Obama “face to face”. As Chamberlain was to the English people (forever telling them how he was on their side and would bring them peace) so Dershowitz is to Israel and the Jewish people. He is a traitor and a fool. A pet dog to Obama and the Moslem Brotherhood.

    • Strange comments from Mr. Donow. Dershowitz is correctly saying the deal offered Iran by Kerry is a bad deal. The proposed deal relieves some of the sanctions in return for Iran promising to freeze its nuclear program. Promises from a country that is the world’s leading supporter of terrorism and has continued and continues to lie about its nuclear efforts. Dershowitz is rightly criticizing Kerry’s efforts, not supporting them. It appears Mr. Donow has gone off on an anti-Dershowitz tirade which has nothing to do with what Dershowitz wrote about.

      • The bottomline is that Dershowitz in his first paragraph (sometimes readers only read the first paragraph to get the gist of an article) elevated Kerry by quoting him when he stated on Nov 10 “no deal is better than a bad deal”. Dershowitz thus used Kerry as his authority, as his mentor, not letting the reader know, at that point, that it was actually Kerry who was promoting the deal with Iran. It took 2 paragraphs later for Dershowitz to give Kerry a second and last mention saying that Kerry “seemed ready to accept” the deal even though it was a bad deal. No condemnation of Kerry there, he was seemingly just simply going to accept the deal. As if he could have been ignorant of any of its contents, as if he was not the author, as if he was just an innocent bystander who happened to have the job of signing for a delivery. There is reason to be concerned about Kerry and Dershowitz gave him a pass in such a long article about Iran. Kerry is supposed to be Obama’s lead person in preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Dershowitz did not focus responsibility on Kerry or Obama or himself for his past history of support for Obama. He needs to own up.

  • Dr Gabriel Mayer

    Bravo !!!

  • Esther Sarah Evans

    b”H
    The only difference is that this is a “more so” case. Why? Because Chamberlain was just naive, but Obama is ONE OF THEM.

  • Dershowitz never met an approach to peace that he would not try to torpedo with his inexcusable and continuing war talk. Dershowitz is one of the globe’s leading threats to peace in the Middle East.

    Getting Iran back into the community of nations (after more than three decades) will take patience and the long view. Dirty Dershowitz is a loud-mouth showoff who might just cause the globe to be blasted by nuclear war–especially since Israel is so armed.

    Go home, Professor Dershowitz, and kindly shut-up your face! Thanks.

  • Dershowitz has contributed to bring those people to power with the rest of the Obamistas.

  • The “Dersh” has spoken!

  • OBAMA and Kerry worship the ground Neville Chamberlain and Frank Marshall Davis crawl on.

Leave a Reply

Please note: comments may be published in the Algemeiner print edition.


Current day month ye@r *

More...

  • Arts and Culture Theater US & Canada New Play Explores the ‘Arrogance’ of American Jews Critical of Israel, Playwright Says

    New Play Explores the ‘Arrogance’ of American Jews Critical of Israel, Playwright Says

    In his new play Mr. Goldberg Goes to Tel Aviv, playwright Oren Safdie tackles an issue that he has a major concern with: the relationship between Israelis and left-leaning Diaspora Jews with their “I know better” critical views. At the heart of the one-act play is Tony, a Jewish and gay Palestinian sympathizer who expresses strong anti-Israel sentiments when the play begins and at one point even sides with a Palestinian terrorist who holds his captive. Tony, who is also an [...]

    Read more →
  • Music US & Canada Hassidic Parody of Taylor Swift Song Apes Long Jewish Holidays (VIDEO)

    Hassidic Parody of Taylor Swift Song Apes Long Jewish Holidays (VIDEO)

    A Jewish comedy troupe released a parody video on Wednesday of Taylor Swift’s hit song Shake It Off in which they joke about taking extensive time off from work for Jewish holidays. “And the goyim gonna stay, stay, stay, stay, stay. And the Jews are gonna pray, pray pray, pray, pray. I’m just gonna take, take, take, take, take. I’m taking off,” goes the chorus for I’m Taking Off. Menachem Weinstein, the video’s lead singer, is the creative director at [...]

    Read more →
  • Arts and Culture Jewish Literature On 75th Anniversary, Looking at the Jewish Influence on Gone With the Wind

    On 75th Anniversary, Looking at the Jewish Influence on Gone With the Wind

    JNS.org – The 75th anniversary of the premiere of “Gone with the Wind” on Dec. 15 presents an opportunity to examine the Jewish influence on one of the most popular films of all time. That influence starts with the American Civil War epic’s famed producer, David O. Selznick. Adjusted for inflation, “Gone with the Wind” remains the highest-grossing movie ever made. It earned the 1939 Academy Award for Best Picture, the same honor another Selznick film, “Rebecca,” garnered in 1940. Selznick [...]

    Read more →
  • Featured Music US & Canada EXCLUSIVE: Matisyahu Provides Most Extensive Analysis Yet of His Religious, Musical Evolution (INTERVIEW)

    EXCLUSIVE: Matisyahu Provides Most Extensive Analysis Yet of His Religious, Musical Evolution (INTERVIEW)

    Matisyahu got candid in an exclusive interview with The Algemeiner on Monday about his religious and musical journey – after shedding his Chassidic skin, yarmulke, long beard and all – from the start of his career in 2005 when he became a reggae superstar with hits King Without a Crown and Jerusalem. The singer-songwriter embarks on his Festival of Light tour this month, an annual Hanukkah event that stops in Montreal, New York, and other cities before ending in San Juan, [...]

    Read more →
  • Arts and Culture Personalities ‘Sheriff of Mars’ Unveils Endearing Life of Jewish Music Star Hidden in the Fields of France

    ‘Sheriff of Mars’ Unveils Endearing Life of Jewish Music Star Hidden in the Fields of France

    JNS.org – It was an era of steel strings, guitar heroes, and storytellers—high on heroin, rebellious. Outlaw country music, the hallmark of Nashville’s powerful and angry music scene of the 1970s, was the brew of greats such as Johnny Cash, Willie Nelson, and Townes Van Zandt. But there is another, little-known music hero of that era: Daniel Antopolsky. A Jewish lad from Augusta, Ga.—the son of immigrants who settled in the south and ran a hardware store on Main Street—the [...]

    Read more →
  • Arts and Culture US & Canada Iranian Actress Replaces Israel’s Gal Gadot for ‘Ben-Hur’ Remake

    Iranian Actress Replaces Israel’s Gal Gadot for ‘Ben-Hur’ Remake

    Iranian actress Nazanin Boniadi replaced Israeli star Gal Gadot as the female lead in the new Ben-Hur remake, Hollywood.com reported on Tuesday. The Homeland actress will play Esther, a slave that Ben-Hur sets free and falls in love with. Gadot quit the movie when it became clear that filming conflicted with her schedule for the Man of Steel sequel. The Israeli actress plays Wonder Woman in the superhero film Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice. Actor Jack Huston takes on the [...]

    Read more →
  • Book Reviews Personalities Biography Sheds New Light on David Ben-Gurion’s Place in Jewish History

    Biography Sheds New Light on David Ben-Gurion’s Place in Jewish History

    JNS.org – There is one sentence in “Ben-Gurion: Father of Modern Israel” that made me sit up in surprise. I thought that I knew the basic facts about how Israel came into being, but while describing what it was like in the days and hours before the state was declared, author Anita Shapira provides one important anecdote I was not aware of. On the 12th of May, the Zionist Executive met to decide what to do. Moshe Sharrett had just returned [...]

    Read more →
  • Arts and Culture US & Canada ‘Death of Klinghoffer’ Actress Compares Met Opera to ‘Schindler’s List’

    ‘Death of Klinghoffer’ Actress Compares Met Opera to ‘Schindler’s List’

    An actress starring in the controversial Met Opera The Death of Klinghoffer defended the show on Tuesday by comparing it to the 1993 Holocaust film Schindler’s List, New York Post reported. “To me, this was like [the movie] Schindler’s List. We make art so people won’t forget,’’ said the actress, who plays a captured passenger in the show and asked not to be identified. The Met Opera focuses on the infamous murder of Lower East Side Jewish resident Leon Klinghoffer, 69. The wheelchair-bound father of [...]

    Read more →



Sign up now to receive our regular news briefs.