By Cal Thomas
November 12, 2013
In Geneva, Switzerland, The United States and other major powers appeared
close to a deal with Iran to curb its nuclear program in exchange for
lifting some economic sanctions against the terrorist-sponsoring state.
Negotiations, however, fell apart at the last minute when France and Iran
balked at the final wording on the interim draft. Talks are expected to
resume within a few weeks, but it is worth pausing to consider what was
nearly agreed to and what the outcome could likely be.
President Obama has pledged to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that
America has Israel’s “back.” Who knew he had a knife? An agreement that
trusts Iran’s promises and allows it to surreptitiously complete development
of nuclear missiles would stab Israel in the back.
North Korea promised former President Jimmy Carter during his 1994 visit to
Pyongyang it would close a nuclear reactor at Yongbyon in exchange for food
and humanitarian aid. The reactor was subsequently re-opened. Memo to the
Obama administration: tyrants lie.
Unlike North Korea, an officially atheist state, Iranian mullahs have
repeatedly said they have a religious duty to annihilate Israel, not to
mention America. How do secular diplomats negotiate with people who, in
their minds, would be violating “Allah’s will” by making deals with the
While the negotiations between Secretary of State John Kerry and Iran were
taking place in Geneva, Ynetnews.com claims, “…the Iranian government sent a
different message with a broadcast on state television of a simulated
missile attack on Israel.” How much more evidence of Iran’s intentions and
ultimate objective are needed?
Last month, Kerry and Netanyahu met for seven hours in Rome. Caroline Glick
of the Jerusalem Post, citing the Israeli newspaper Yediot Aharonot, writes,
“The secretary of state told the prime minister that he heard from his
European friends … that if the negotiations (with the Palestinians) fail,
Israel can forget about participating in the European research and
development program ‘Horizon 2020’.” Kerry is then quoted as saying, “And
that will only be the beginning.”
Doesn’t Kerry have this backward? Sanctions might be lifted against Iran for
a promise that won’t be kept, but possibly imposed on Israel if it won’t
agree to what amounts to assisted suicide?
It would also appear that this “deal” had been in the works for at least
several months before the Geneva meetings. The Daily Beast reports: “The
Obama administration began softening sanctions on Iran after the election of
Iran’s new president in June, well before the current round of nuclear talks
in Geneva or the historic phone call between the two leaders in September.”
The administration pledges to watch Iran closely and if it violates any
provisions in a final agreement, sanctions would be re-imposed. If sanctions and other means, such as the introduction of the Stuxnet virus into Iran’s
computers, failed to deter Iran’s nuclear program, why would anyone think
additional threats and more sanctions would produce the desired results?
Iran is playing for time and it appears the United States is willing to give
it to them.
History is a great teacher, but not everyone pays attention. In “The Guns at
Last Light,” Rick Atkinson’s chronicle of World War II, the author recalls
President Franklin Roosevelt’s view of Soviet dictator Josef Stalin
following their meeting at Yalta in February 1945: “‘Stalin doesn’t want
anything other than security for his country,’ the president said. ‘He won’t
try to annex anything and will work for a world of democracy and peace.’”
Winston Churchill similarly misjudged Stalin, writes Atkinson, telling his
war cabinet, “‘Stalin I’m sure means well to the world and Poland. … He will
not embark on bad adventures.’ He added, ‘I don’t think I’m wrong about
Stalin,’ whom he had called ‘that great and good man.’”
Times and dictators change, but human nature remains the same. Roosevelt and
Churchill were wrong about Stalin and the Obama administration is wrong