Now that the Joint Comprehensive Plan, (JCP), has been announced between the two negotiating parties, the six nations and the theocracy of Iran, there has been wide ranging reaction across the political spectrum. There are loosely two camps emerging - one virulently opposed that is spearheaded by Bibi Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, who has formed an alliance with the Republican Party of the USA .The latter believe that there should have been no dealing at all with Iran in the first place and see the plan as the go ahead to Iran to build a nuclear bomb. The second group are supportive, skeptical and apprehensive, to a lesser or greater degree, but have accepted the concept of negotiation as an opportunity to avoid war. (Incidentally among the second group are Bibi’s former heads of Mossad and Israeli Intelligence who see much positive in the JCP). There is an additional important sub faction in the USA Congress which includes all the GOP and unknown number of Dems who want to reserve the right to accept or reject the final deal.
All the above presupposes that the real Iranian power brokers wlll accept the deal which is contrary to the Ayatollah Khameini’s previous position on the subject. According to the Business Insider neither the JCP nor an acknowledgment of it has appeared on the Ayatollah’s website. Khameini had previously criticized the concept of a preliminary framework and wanted an immediate lifting of sanctions on the signing of the final pact. However, Jay H. Ell finds it impossible to interpret what the Iranian leadership mean with their bizarre and contradictory statements so any analysis of what they do or don’t do or say or don’t say, is impossible.
It is time for the nay sayers to stop playing games and openly proclaim that the only alternative to the painstaking tortuous process that has been conducted, with it’s surprisingly detailed but inevitably ambiguous outcome, is bombing the bejesus out of Iran and that means war. A war, as Obama has admitted, may ultimately be inevitable but let us at least try and prevent it. Netanyahu’s approach to link Iran’s recognition of Israel as part of the nuclear discussion is akin to declaring war. It can be likened to having insisted that Stalin drop Communism and totalitarianism if he wanted to join the allies against the axis powers. (Incidentally, the repulsive Iranian hierarchy are at present organizing a cartoon exhibition depicting the holocaust, indicating where their sick minds are at).
One of the major reasons for this impasse between the allies is what Billy Joel so poignantly wrote and sung, “A Matter of Trust”. (There is also obviously no trust between Iran and the six nations). In addition fixed viewpoints and prejudices, of which everyone is guilty of, including Jay H. Ell, hinder accessing the situation of the new Middle East and the JCP dispassionately.
The allies cannot afford the luxury of mistrust among one another so let us objectively analyze the responses to the accord and what is standing in the way of moving forward. The stakes are high so it is time for those oppose Iranian nuclear ambitions to forget their differences and attempt to create a common front on a crisis that many, with their Chamberlain allusions, are comparing to the Hitler threat, which implies that there is going to be war whatever happens.
MISTRUST BETWEEN THE “ALLIES”
The central problem of the key players that oppose Iran is a lack of trust. Nobody trusts anybody or accepts their bona fides.
Obama - The Manchurian Candidate Shiite Muslim
The GOP and Bibi don’t trust Obama. For whatever reasons the very fact that he is even parlaying with Iran forces forces them to believe he is going to sell the USA, his Arab Sunni allies and Israel the USA’s chief Middle Eastern ally, down the river. Obama’s alleged motivations are that he is at heart a Muslim and as his father was Shia he is therefore supporting Iran. So he is either a Manchurian Shia candidate in support of Iranian world domination, doing this for his legacy or an anti semite or all three.
As these arguments haven’t an ounce of objective evidence to back them up so let us for the moment ignore them and accept that Obama is attempting to avoid a war and trying to fulfill his philosophy of diplomacy rather than war. After all that broad philosophy did win him the Nobel Prize! If Obama is indeed a deep-seated Shia Muslim plant to one day become President of the USA so he could sell Israel down the river and allow Iran to obtain a nuclear option then one has to hand it to the conspirators for their thoroughness and attention to detail. They arranged for the former Israeli Heads of Mossad and Intelligence to come out broadly in favor of the accords. Now that takes real planning!
Obama, finally, has not let his irritation towards Netanyahu cloud his judgement on America’s commitment to Israel. He has stated categorically that he will stand by Israel if they are attacked and if the deal weakened Israel he would regard it as “my failure”.
Netanyahu - A war mongering political opportunist.
Netanyahu has been regarded as a highly divisive figure responsible for breaking the US Congressional bipartisan support for Israel. It is alleged that he did this in order to shore up his floundering political support in Israel. In his speech to Congress he hopelessly exaggerated the concessions that the USA were affording Iran in the negotiations He is now characterizing the Joint Comprehensive Plan as a direct pathway to the bomb - an interpretation that is not supported by any serious analyst. He is also not taking into account that if this whole process is revisited, de novo, Bibi’s “ third option”, the reluctant Russians and Chinese are likely to call it quits and then there will be no deal and war. Also the Iranians are unlikely to agree as among other factors the six nations word would be meaningless.
So the for the moment let us accept that Netanyahu has his beleaguered country’s interests at heart and is taking Iran at their word that their right to obliterate Israel is “non negotiable”. It is from this position that his opposition to the framework of accord is coming from. If he persists with his current line those who are trying to prevent war will just have to politely agree to disagree with him.
GOP’S - Pathological hatred of Obama
History will reflect that never before has a President been subject to such opposition and vilification as Obama has been. From the word go he has been opposed on almost every initiative, appointment, piece of legislation he has introduced. It comes as no surprise that all the GOP Presidential Candidates condemned the deal even before the ink was even dry.
Let us accept that the GOP are acting this way as they have Israel’s interests at heart and just need more briefing, input and reassurance on the JCP and final deal.
WHAT ARE UNCHALLENGED FACTS?
There are plenty of unchallenged facts but some of these are being deliberately ignored in the heat of the debate. These include:
* The six participating nations, all with disparate agendas, swallowed their differences to present a united front in the negotiations. Three of them, Russia, France and Germany played “bad cop” when Iran were stalling with their foreign ministers going home, ala a Middle Eastern market, as they saw “little hope for a deal”. This cohesion in of itself was a major diplomatic coupe and kudos to Kerry. This especially so when the USA and Russia are at loggerheads, China has no international morality other than trade and Germany and France oscillate between the fear of a nuclear Iran and the trade that would follow with a lifting of sanctions.
* Nobody but nobody trusts Iran.
* America has not abandoned Israel. Obama reiterated this in his call to Netanyahu.
* America has not abandoned their traditional Sunni Arab allies. Obama is supporting the Saudi and Gulf States directly in the war against the Iranian backed Houthi in Yemen. Obama has also sent weaponry to Egypt and has been expansive in his support of Jordan. Obama has set up meetings with the Gulf States at Camp David later this year. The Saudis have unconditionally supported Obama and the JCP.
* The actual populations of both Iran and the USA are in favor of negotiations in the hope of a successful outcome. In the USA the polls indicate that two - thirds of Americans are in support of the process and while there are no statistics for the Iranian electorate their spontaneous celebrations speaks volumes. The Iranian civilians would hardly be rejoicing at the possibility of being able to continue with a nuclear program!
* Iran is continuing with its neo - colonialist terrorist policy, having provided Hamas with tens of millions of dollars to rebuild its tunnels. They are also still propping up Assad. They are having military exercises in the event that the deal fails as they claim they expect to be attacked.
* Obama has distanced himself from Iran’s expansionist objectives by making the USA air cover in the successful Iraqi capture of ISIS stronghold in Tikrit dependent on Iran withdrawing its forces.
* Iran spends 30 billion on defense and America spends 600 billion.
* US Congress axing the deal will drop America’s standing in the world to zilch.
So stripped of mistrust, bias, prejudice and rhetoric all of America, Israel, the Gulf States, Egypt and Jordan should be behind the UNO mandated six negotiators in their dealing with the rogue state of Iran. To those that oppose that approach the only alternative is war and they need to say so or explain how it is not going to happen. Otherwise their contributions should be directed at problems with the Joint Comprehensive Plan and suggestions as to improvements and clarifications.
PROBLEMS WITH THE JOINT PLAN.
The devil is always in the details and this was just a framework so many issues need to be spelled out.There have to be very few if any who don’t at least want clarity let alone a spelling out of the provisions. It is being spun by each side to make it appear that they got all they wanted. Some of the spin is interpretation, for example, Iran claim that they have kept all their nuclear facilities which is true but they omit to add that they have been stripped of their nuclear ability. The Theocracy claim that sanctions will be lifted immediately while the six nations see a gradual loosening dependent on Iran fulfilling the denuclearization of their plants. Objections to the JCP that do not relate to interpretation or issues that were not part of the agenda of the negotiations, include the following some of which are listed in a Likud working paper:
* No timetable for lifting of sanctions.
* No provision for unannounced inspections to take place anywhere and at anytime.
* Where is the Uranium stockpile going to go?
* Will the research and development nuclear reactors be more sophisticated than those used for energy production? It is not clear what can be done or not done in the R and D component.
* What is going to happen to Iran’s Inter Ballistic Missiles?
* How effective is the mechanism to reintroduce sanctions?
* How does the prospective deal differ from the one negotiated with North Korea?
WHAT NOW?
From an allied point of view the ball is very much in Obama’s court. He needs to do what he enjoys least - smoozing, arm twisting, persuading, cajoling, caucusing, dealing, informing and hearing members within the American Congress, the six nations, (don’t forget they are an essential piece of this), and the Middle Eastern Regional allies. The latter are crucial piece to all of this so if Obama can initiate a formal alliance with the international allies, Israel, the Gulf States, Egypt and Jordan he will do much to reassure this group that he is onsides. This particularly so as Iran continues its local expansionist policies, in Syria, Iran,Yemen and finances Hamas and Hezbollah. It is time for Obama to create a coherent Middle East policy as opposed to his ad hoc responses to every crisis.
At the end of the day Obama is sitting in the pound seats for the very reason that brought Iran to the table in the first place - the economic chaos in Iran and its impact on their restless citizens. Obama and Kerry need to play hardball in the drawing up of the final accord. It is worthwhile repeating, a bad deal is worse than no deal.The danger that Obama faces is that the radical nay sayers will cut his feet from underneath him before he can hold up Iran’s nuclear ambitions from a three month lead time to at least ten to fifteen years. One final thought if the GOP finally succeed in blocking the accord and Iran immediately proceed to make a bomb who will be responsible?
….Then of course there is always the hope that there will be regime change in Iran….If not, to Jay H. Ell, the most important provisions for the final pact are unimpeded verification as often as is needed and a detailed roadmap to respond to any abrogations of the final treaty.
No comments:
Post a Comment