Thursday, October 19th | 29 Tishri 5778

Close

Be in the know!

Get our exclusive daily news briefing.

Subscribe
November 4, 2013 12:17 pm

Iran Nuclear Program: We Only Have Ourselves to Blame

avatar by Ben Cohen / JNS.org

Email a copy of "Iran Nuclear Program: We Only Have Ourselves to Blame" to a friend

Irani President Hassan Rouhani at the United Nations. Photo: Screenshot.

Irani President Hassan Rouhani at the United Nations. Photo: Screen shot.

JNS.orgOne of the most irritating aspects of the international efforts to deal with the Iran nuclear program lies in the unrealistic expectations that negotiations create, even among those—like the American Jewish advocacy groups who met with the White House Oct. 29 to discuss the nuclear issue—who have every reason to be cynical.

From Nov. 7-8, members of the so-called P5+1, which comprises the five members of the U.N. Security Council along with Germany, will meet with representatives of the Iranian regime in Geneva. These talks follow on from preliminary discussions whose content has not been revealed, yet we are assured that they were “very intensive and very important,” (Catherine Ashton, EU Foreign Policy Chief) and that the Iranians brought with them a proposal “with a level of seriousness and substance that we had not seen before” (Jay Carney, White House spokesman.)

Hence, the sense we are getting is that one of the most intractable problems facing the Middle East is on the cusp of being resolved.

Related coverage

October 18, 2017 3:51 pm
0

New York Times Pulls Out All the Stops to Push Iran Deal

Seven to two is the lopsided score of opinion pieces the New York Times has published this month about the...

That’s why I’m going to break ranks by issuing a spoiler alert. These talks aren’t going to lead to a deal. Instead, they will function as they have always done, by allowing the Iranians to buy time, safe in the knowledge that the other options we are told are always on the table—from tighter sanctions to pre-emptive military action—are on the back-burner for now.

There are three main reasons behind my assertion. Firstly, the P5+1 cannot for a moment pretend to represent an international consensus. On the inside, you have the Russians and the Chinese, who have consistently backed Iran during the nuclear dispute of the last decade. And on the outside, you have Israel and the conservative Arab states, whose trust in the Obama Administration when it comes to Iran is close to evaporating, and who thus may well reject any agreement framework.

Secondly, all the attention paid to the apparently constructive atmosphere at the preliminary discussions, along with the public relations offensive unleashed by Iran’s new president, Hasan Rouhani, cannot camouflage some very basic facts. For example, if Rouhani really does want to reach a deal, how come he won’t he explain why Iran’s nuclear program was, from the beginning, a clandestine enterprise? The answer is simple: he is faithfully parroting the mullahs line that Iran’s intentions were always peaceful, that the regime never intended to build nuclear weapons, and that anyone who thinks otherwise has fallen victim to an Israeli plot that seeks, in Rouhani’s own words, “to divert international attention not only from its own clandestine and dangerous nuclear weapons program, but also from its destabilizing and inhuman policies and practices in Palestine and the Middle East.”

Thirdly, we’ve already had the opportunity to test Iran’s peaceful intentions outside the scope of the nuclear negotiations, and the result is an unmistakable F.” A recent BBC report included footage of Iranian Revolutionary Guards fighting with the Assad regime in Syria, under the watchful eye of a commander named Ismail Heydari, who described Assad’s bloody onslaught against his own people as a war “of Islam against the infidels.” So rather than praising the Iranians over their willingness to talk about talking (about talking about talking…) about their nuclear program, we should be hauling them before the Security Council to demand answers over Tehran’s decision to cross an international border in order to defend one of the world’s most monstrous regimes.

Yet it’s unrealistic to expect the Americans or the Europeans to raise any of these objections. After all, they shamefully folded over the use of chemical weapons in Syria, so why should Iran be any different? Moreover, even if they agree a vague declaration of principles with the Iranians, these will collapse under the weight of details like the kind of monitoring regime to be put in place. For you can rest assured that whatever is acceptable to the Iranians will likely be unacceptable to the Israelis, the Saudis, and the Bahrainis, among others. And in any case, according to Olli Heinonen, a former International Atomic Energy Agency inspector, the Iranians have very little more to do on the uranium enrichment front before reaching weaponization capacity.

What’s needed now is a bold domestic voice to challenge the Obama Administration’s new-found confidence in Iran’s rulers. But if you’re looking to Jewish establishment organizations to play that role, forget it. Given that they’ve already been persuaded by Obama to drop support for further sanctions for now, it’s unlikely that they will push for the stronger measures that will be necessary down the line. Remember that line about the all-powerful “Israel Lobby”? If only it were true. If only.

Ben Cohen is the Shillman Analyst for JNS.org. His writings on Jewish affairs and Middle Eastern politics have been published in Commentary, the New York Post, Ha’aretz, Jewish Ideas Daily and many other publications.

The opinions presented by Algemeiner bloggers are solely theirs and do not represent those of The Algemeiner, its publishers or editors. If you would like to share your views with a blog post on The Algemeiner, please be in touch through our Contact page.

Share this Story: Share On Facebook Share On Twitter Email This Article

Let your voice be heard!

Join the Algemeiner
  • Sandy Brown

    Yes, I keep saying that too. They are just trying to buy some time for that moment when they have their nuclear missiles and then they can bomb Israel. End of.

  • Arthur Wright

    It appears to me that the Iran-Iran-Syria Shi’ite confederacy is fulfilling “the king of the north” role and Saudi and the Sunni Arabs the “king of the south” from verse 30-45 of Daniel chapter 11. Behind each is a greater power and there is a greater power still waiting in heaven for the right time to accomplish Daniel chapter 12. Art

  • Mark NYC

    As mentioned in another context, it is unrealistic to expect that the American people, let alone the Obama administration, will carry out pre-emptive strikes on Iran’s developing nuclear capability. Americans simply don’t feel that threatened, and are tired of wars involving Moslem nations. This administration, and paricularly Kerry, will go for the best deal they can get and declare victory! You know, peace in our time. At best, we can only hope that if the Israelis feel compelled to launch an attack on Iran, the U.S. will not withdraw its support in the chaos that follows. And even that is probably a vain hope. One suspects that the only reason Israel has restrained itself till now is the fear of losing U.S. goodwill and then being totally isolated from the world community (a la South Africa). Other nations will then beat their breasts in indignation and spit venom at the Jews who are the cause of all the world’s problems. Perhaps we can take heart from the past actions of Menachem Begin, who when the U.S. government was severely criticising Israel, had the guts to come to here uninvited and took the offensive against administration policy. Since the Holocaust, have any of us really thought that we Jews were going to get off so easy?

  • Michael Garfinkel

    To paraphrase Hillel, how can the Jews survive when they won’t stand up for themselves?

  • Charles Martel

    This is just one more proof that man is the only creature who trips twice on the same stone. To me, this is abysmal, beyond comprehension. The Obama administration actions are no surprise, and the rest of the world follows. In the meantime, everybody knows what Iran´s game is. What problem represents one more treaty for them. Treaties are to be signed when it´s in their advantage, and broken them as they have the upper hand, like the old pedophile taught his followers in Medina.

    But what I find even more incredible, is the release of more savages (26 this time) into the welcoming arms of more perpetual savages. Who can even dream there will be “negotiations?” Islam hates Jews, it´s in the Quar´n. The dream of every devout Muslim is the annihilation of Israel. Their maps don´t even show the country! And the government believes there is room for negotiations? Showing their good will by releasing savages? Dream on!

    I wonder, all these murderers, convicted, I imagine by Israeli courts, are kept in prison at high cost for the taxpayers, and are a hot burning rod in the minds of all savages. Doesn´t Israel have the death penalty? These are enemy combatants who have murdered civilians, children, and even infants for the mere fact of being Jews.

    Don´t you think a military tribunal, a proper trial in a military court, and a prompt execution if found guilty would have solved the problem? Ah! the bodies should have been cremated immediately, without any consideration to religious practices. Spread the ashes in the Mount of Olives to fertilize the ground. Period. Mo martyrs, no virgins, nothing. Let them burn in hell.

  • Morry

    Brilliantly and succinctly put!

  • newsel

    “What’s needed now is a bold domestic voice to challenge the Obama Administration’s new-found confidence in Iran’s rulers.”

    There is no “new found confidence” just a way of this administration back dooring Israel. And who helped vote this administration into power. Elections have consequences.

    “Taqiyya is commonly used as a form of ‘outwitting’.”

Algemeiner.com