Wednesday, November 19, 2014

Persian New Clear Dealing


Pursuing a Persian New Clear deal...

Odds are good the White House will strike a deal with Iran. All indications are that 44 wants a deal—any deal.

As 44 has explained in a number of interviews, he is aiming for a new geopolitical equilibrium balancing traditional American allies, like Little Satan and Whahabbi Arabia, against their longstanding adversary in Tehran.

From his perspective, we need to build up the Iranians’ confidence. Sure, it would be better if they didn’t have the bomb, but maybe having it will make them less paranoid. If the regime is no longer scared of being toppled, from within or without, it can become normal and real moderates might then come to power in Tehran. In short, 44 sees himself sowing the seeds of a Persian perestroika, and if the path to Middle East peace has to start with a nuclear-weapons-capable state sponsor of terror, so be it.

So much of this administration’s Iran policy has been conducted in secret it’s hard to know what they’re thinking. 44 writes private letters to Ali Khamenei because Iran’s supreme leader makes the final call. Perhaps the American president has come to imagine that he, too, is a supreme leader, who can circumvent the representatives of the American people.

Fortunately, Congress understands the stakes involved. The new Republican majority in the Senate wants oversight of any agreement with Iran, and it may be joined by Democrats like Robert Menendez in a bipartisan push. To date, the administration keeps telling its critics to wait and see what a final deal looks like—in other words, it’s trying to keep them at bay until it’s too late to do anything about a nuclear agreement.

Yet the White House has already established a clear pattern of caving to Iran, on the nuclear file and elsewhere. There’s no need to wait.

Pic - "Iran’s continued duplicity underlines how little faith we can place in any commitments the regime makes. At this point, we can only hope that Tehran saves us from ourselves by overreaching, as it has so often before."

0 comments: