Sunday, October 22nd | 2 Heshvan 5778

Close

Be in the know!

Get our exclusive daily news briefing.

Subscribe
November 10, 2013 5:00 pm

Why is Obama Allowing Iran to Build Nuclear Weapons?

avatar by Rachel Ehrenfeld

Email a copy of "Why is Obama Allowing Iran to Build Nuclear Weapons?" to a friend

The Arak IR-40 heavy water reactor in Iran. Photo: Nanking2012/Wikimedia Commons.

Departing from Geneva after another negotiation charade with the P5+1, Iran’s Foreign Minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, assured reporters: “we are all on the same wavelength.” Secretary of State John F. Kerry, for his part, stated “we’re closer now … than when we came.” Their “closeness” is giving Iran the time to reach its desired uranium enrichment levels, without fearing American intervention any time soon.

On the first day of the negotiations news leaked that the U.S. was offering a “reverse sanctions program” in return for the suspension of part of Tehran’s uranium enrichment. But Iran’s position on its nuclear program has never changed: It must be allowed to enrich uranium without limitations and maintain the freedom to develop any nuclear weapons it sees fit. Therefore, only when the West can verify that Iran has ceased it’s nuclear program and has stopped sponsoring terrorism, should some sanctions be lifted. But that’s not what the negotiations are about.

On November 3, the AP reported that Khamenei had admonished hardliners not to undermine negotiators engaged in talks with the West. However, Khamenei also said on the same day that he was not optimistic about the negotiations “and called America the most hated power in the world.” He also reiterated his regime’s view of Israel: “We have said since the very first day (of the Islamic Revolution), and we do say it now and we will say it in the future as well, that we believe the Zionist regime is an illegitimate and bastard regime.”

Former Revolution Guard member “Reza Kahlili” notes that the regime’s media outlet, Kheybar Online, published a statement by Hossein Allahkaram, the regime’s “radical,” saying, “the value of enriching to 20, 40, 60, and 99 percent that Iran is capable of doing is much more (important) than a good economy.”

Related coverage

October 22, 2017 1:22 pm
0

Israeli Government Cultivates Allies at First Christian Media Summit

JNS.org - Recognizing that it's easier to communicate with journalists who are prone to be supporters of Israel than those with a perceived anti-Israel bias, the Israeli...

Indeed, the Obama Administration lifted some sanctions already before Hassan Rouhani’s visit to the UN General Assembly in New York. And in advance of the current meeting, the Obama Administration leaked that it was considering releasing $12 billion of Iranian assets held in the United States, which would undoubtedly be followed by Europe’s unfreezing another $35 billion in assets. Nearly $50 billion would seem like a prize for at least the cessation of all uranium enrichment. But neither Obama nor the Europeans are making such demands.

After the first meeting of the new round in Geneva, Fars News was quick to show that Iran had the upper hand, with lead negotiator Seyed Abbas Araqchi saying that the P5+1 had accepted Iran’s proposed framework for continuing the talks.

The Obama Administration’s longstanding plans regarding Iran were laid out on the eve of the Geneva talks by the Wall Street Journal. While using back channels is nothing new, Obama seems to have used them with Iran since the beginning of his presidency. According to the Journal, the lead dog in this has been NSC-staffer Puneet Talwar. Talwar early on “conveyed a succinct message for his Iranian interlocutors: The U.S. wants to peacefully resolve the dispute over Tehran’s nuclear program” and “is ready to deal.” The article also mentions that former UN Ambassador Susan Rice was charged with conveying much the same message to the Iranian UN ambassador during her stint there.

To veil their intentions, Obama’s staff used the United Nations Association, Asia Society vice president Suzanne DiMaggio, and the Council on Foreign Relations in efforts to bring Rouhani and Obama face-to-face during the recent UN General Assembly meeting. The Journal noted, “U.S. diplomacy has also been aided by Hossein Mousavian, a former top Iranian diplomat and now a visiting scholar at Princeton University.”

Obama himself recently admitted that soon after his inauguration, he wrote to Iran’s Supreme Leader, to lay out his intentions for rapprochement with Iran. It’s no wonder, then, that just before Obama’s 2012 reelection, White House adviser-in-chief Valerie Jarrett, who has childhood friends in Iran-some in influential positions, decided to leak the news that the White House was near a deal with Tehran. She wanted to assure the boss’s reelection by producing good news.

It seems that as far as Obama is concerned, the deal with Tehran has already been consummated. The arrival of a so-called, progressive, reformist thinker Hassan Rouhani provides Obama with the opportunity to reach a Détente with Iran. He ignores Iranian clerics’ repeated statements that Iranian “hatred for infidels and oppressors will never cease.”

Rest assured that Iran’s appetite for concessions and humiliation from the U.S. “The Big Satan,” may bring up some new demands. As with prior “negotiations” with Iran, the U.S. and the others agreed to meet again. We will witness more stalling from Tehran to allow it to fulfill its nuclear agenda. By then, the U.S. withdrawal from the Middle East will be complete and its pledge to have Israel’s back will be ignored.

In the meantime, the news about the American “reverse sanctions program” has led the Saudis to let it be known that they are ready to collect the nuclear bombs they’ve ordered from Pakistan.

In addition to abandoning Washington’s traditional policy of preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons, the Obama Administration’s actions are all but going to set the region on fire. Years of Iranian lies are dismissed in complete disregard to the predictable outcome. One wonders why Obama forges ahead with his plans to give Iran the time to develop nuclear weapons.

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
  • E Pluribus Wombat

    Obama, either intentionally or through incompetence has allowed all of the parties to go out and strike whatever deals they want with Iran, on their own. Today the UK announced it was reestablishing all diplomatic relations with Iran. Soon, no doubt they will shelve all sanctions. Next to fall will be Germany. And of course Obama will be third, once again ‘leading from behind’. France has the least to lose so it will hold out the longest. Expect a nuclear armed Iran no later than midyear 2014.

  • Eric L

    Is President Obama capable of carrying out his responsibilities to lead the free world and stop spread of WMD? This is not simply about misguided good intentions. The damage to the world will be irreversible with a nuclear breakout capable Iran. Next Saudi Arabia, Egypt, etc. etc. etc. Is the American admin really that incompetent and that gullible? Can the world survive the Obama Presidency without further global damage? If hist first term is any indication, I fear not.

Algemeiner.com