You are on page 1of 4

ABOUT

Home

Articles

Blogs

Audio & Video

Press Room

JOIN

DONATE

WORK AT AIM

Citizens Commission on Benghazi

CONTACT

AIM Store

Home Guest Columns President Obama Must Not Complete a Disastrous Deal With Iran

President Obama Must Not Complete a


Disastrous Deal With Iran

SEARCH

Get our free daily email!


Steve Emerson April 3, 2015
No comments | Printer Friendly

Email Address :
SUBSCRIBE

For purchase:

From Steven Emerson, Executive Director of the


IPT:
To our readers: I felt that the commentary below which
ran Tuesday in The Observer encapsulated the essence of
what may ultimately become the most dangerous deal
since the appeasement of Hitler in 1939. Given the sudden
flurry of contradictory and get-tough statements made in
the last 36 hours, no one can be 100 percent certain that a
final deal will be made.
On the other hand, as the editorial points out, President
Obamas obsession with negotiating an agreement with
Iran has resulted in his making such irreversible

The Obama Years: Beyond the Halo


by AIM Editors and Other Writers
Available on the site:

4
Like

Hizballah: Irans Other Looming Threat to the


West by Clare Lopez
Grand Theft Obama: The Biggest Heist in
U.S. History by James Simpson
Ft. Hood Killer Admits He Committed Act of
Terrorism by Roger Aronoff
Analyst Says Anti-NSA Campaign Benefits
Americas Enemies by Cliff Kincaid
Police Militarization, Abuses of Power, and
converted by Web2PDFConvert.com

concessions that Iran will find it impossible to refuse to


come to terms. Yet it is those very concessions that lie at the heart of
the matter. Because the president seem blind to the collateral damage of
such a deal that would threaten the very survival of Israel and the very
security of the West itself.
The following originally was published Tuesday by the Observer:
With the US on the brink of signing an agreement that will lift the crippling
economic sanctions on Iran in exchange for alleged guarantees that Iran will limit
its nuclear ambitions to peaceful means, the Observer urges President Obama not
to place his personal hunger for a legacy issue ahead of his most solemn duty
protecting Americas national security.
Barack Obama has been compared to British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain ,
who concluded the ill-fated Munich Pact with Hitler in 1938. But Chamberlain
acted out of a sincere belief that he was avoiding a greater evil. Chamberlain was
not thinking of his place in history. He was thinking only of the Britain that he
loved, a Britain that was all but disarmed, exhausted, and vulnerable. He was
dealing with a nation that had been decimated by the Great War, a nation whose
best and brightest five years earlier had declared in the infamous Oxford Oath
that they would not fight for king or country, and a nation that was as materially
unprepared for war as Germany was prepared to fight. Chamberlain dealt from a
position of weakness, one that Hitler continually exploited in the negotiations,
even by changing the time and place to make it more inconvenient for the British
leader to attend them.
In sharp contrast, Mr. Obama is acting out of personal aggrandizement. He
believes he is replicating President Richard Nixons historic opening of China. For
Mr. Obama, the Iranian nuclear arms deal is about his place in history. Mr.
Obama is dealing from a position of strength that he refuses to use. The sanctions
have hurt Iran. Falling oil prices only add to Irans vulnerability. Instead of using
the sanctions to pursue his original promise that Iran would not get the bomb, Mr.
Obama has moved the goal post. Iran would not get the bomb immediately. It
would be permitted to enrich uranium well beyond the 5 percent need for
generating nuclear energy and be left with a breakout capacity to create a bomb.
Meanwhile, Iran is refusing surprise inspections, the hallmark of any such
agreement, and has ruled its military facilities, such as the enrichment plant at
Fordo, off limits to any inspections, period. Iran continues to showcase public
displays of Israel being obliterated by an Iranian nuclear bomb, and even in the
midst of negotiations government-orchestrated mass rallies cry out, Death to
America.

the Road to Impeachment by James Simpson


The Gang of Eight and Immigration Reform:
Bordering on a National Security Nightmare
by Michael Cutler
Marylands Endemic Corruption: An Object
Lesson for the Nation by James Simpson
Terrorist Professor Bill Ayers and Obamas
Federal School Curriculum by Mary Grabar
Browse the other CIJ Special Reports

AIM on Twitter and Facebook

Accuracy in Media
Like
10,133 people like Accuracy in Media.

Facebook social plugin

Accuracy In Media Inc

Special Report

If Chamberlain possessed Americas strength and was dealing with Irans


weakness, would he be negotiating as Mr. Obama is? Would he be more concerned
about a Jew building an extra bedroom in Jerusalem than an Iranian building a
bomb at Fordo?
Before becoming prime minister, Chamberlain held two ministerial portfolios. He
was considered a thoughtful and effective cabinet member. Upon becoming Prime
Minister in 1940, Winston Churchill appointed Chamberlain to the new War
Cabinet.
History has debated whether Chamberlain was the reckless appeaser that he is
stereotyped as or the man who dealt from a position of extreme weakness against
a foe he was unprepared to go to war against and who sacrificed part of
converted by Web2PDFConvert.com

Czechoslovakia to buy Britain time to rearm. Even Churchill, who filleted


Chamberlain with his famous choice between war and dishonor and now will get
both zinger, understood that Chamberlain was acting in good faith and kept his
vanquished predecessor in his War cabinet.

Recent Articles and Posts

It is unrealistic to hope that Mr. Obama could emerge as a modern Churchill in


this chaotic and dangerous chapter in human history. But even Chamberlain would
not have made the disastrous agreement that Mr. Obama seems so eager to
conclude.

Veterans Affairs Director Mislead GOP


Senator on Contaminated Drugs

Mr. Obama is an amateur who is enthralled with the sound of his own voice and is
incapable of coming to grips with the consequences of his actions. He is surrounded
by sycophants, second-rate intellectuals, and a media that remains compliant and
uncritical in the face of repeated foreign policy disasters. As country after country
in the worlds most dangerous region fall into chaos-Libya and Yemen are
essentially anarchic states, even as Syria and Iraq continue to devolve-Mr. Obama
puzzlingly focuses much of his attention and rhetoric on Israel, childishly refusing
to accept the mandate its people have given their prime minister in an election
that, by the way, added three additional seats to the countrys Arab minority.
We can debate whether we should ever have been in Iraq, but Mr. Obamas hasty
withdrawal to make good on a campaign promise created the power vacuum filled
by the Islamic State. In Syria, he vacillated over the enforcement of red lines and
whom to arm. There too, he created a vacuum filled by the Islamic State.
In Egypt, he withdrew support for President Hosni Mubarack, who for thirty
years kept the peace with Israel and turned Egypt into a stable and reliable ally.
Obama permitted the tyrannical Muslim Brotherhood to come to power failing to
realize that one election, one time, resulting in a tyranny is not democracy.
In Libya, President Muammar al-Gaddafi, once an international pariah, had
reversed course as far back as 1999 and attempted to reenter the community of
nations, even giving up his nuclear program. Libya was a stable dictatorship that
was willing to engage in economic and diplomatic relations with the West. Its
revolutionary ambitions of pan-Arabism and its expansionist tendencies had
abated. When revolutionary forces rose up against Gaddafi, Mr. Obama not only
verbally supported the revolutionaries, he sent NATO war planes to assist them.
Gaddafi was defeated and murdered. Libya is now in chaos and another hot house
for Islamic extremism.
The deal with Iran follows in the wake of these foreign policy disasters. Among our
traditional Sunni allies in the region, it is seen as a betrayal not simply because it
advances Irans nuclear ambitions but also because it encourages Irans support
for the Houthi Shiite militia in Yemen and Irans adventurism in Iraq. The lifting
of sanctions means more resources for Iran to transfer to its meddlesome proxies
like Lebanons Hezbollah, the assassin of Lebanons democratic aspirations. The
nuclear deal gives Iran an unacceptable nuclear umbrella that will compel the Gulf
State Sunnis to launch their own nuclear programs, setting off a disastrous
proliferation in the region.

President Obama Must Not Complete a


Disastrous Deal With Iran

United Nations says 25,000 Plus Foreigners


are Fighting with ISIS in Middle East
Indiana Set to Pass Anti-Discrimination Law
after Media Outcry and Lies about RFRA
Only in Portland: Airport to Retire their
Carpet, Locals Lament It
Kerry agrees to Lifting Sanctions on Iran,
Reports Say

The Newswire
Al Jazeera Hates the Post-Charlie
Hebdo Unity
GOP needs 4 Votes to Pass Veto-Proof
Keystone XL Bill
South Korean President Urges North
Korea to Stop Delaying Talks
France Mobilizes up to 10,000 to
Protect Sites
Pakistani School where Taliban
Massacred 130 Children has Reopened
No American Dignitary Showed up to
Pro-France Rally in Paris

Take AIM Podcast

The Iran deal is a march toward the nuclear abyss hand-in-hand with the worlds
largest exporter of terrorism- the patron of Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthi militias in
Yemen, Shiite militias in Iraq, and operatives killing Jews in Argentina.
Regrettably, a nave, petulant President Obama sees this as a crowning part of his
legacy and nothing will stand in his way.
Until Mr. Obama released a 1987 classified report detailing Israels nuclear
converted by Web2PDFConvert.com

program, we believed that the presidents Iranian policy was motivated by a


different vision of Americas interests in the Middle East. Admittedly, it is one that
would be difficult to dissect, let alone to explain.
But Mr. Obamas latest petulant act shows that this is not a president motivated
by policy but by personal feelings. He sacrificed the security of our close ally and
its seven million citizens because he felt slighted. How else does one explain that
Israels nuclear program is made public while the reports description of the
programs of our NATO partners is redacted?
We might call for Mr. Obama to find his inner Churchill and walk away from this
tragedy, but we would be happy if he would simply find the character of the real
Neville Chamberlain, who when dealing from a position of Americas strength
would never have signed a deal with the devil. Ultimately, this deal will come back
to haunt Mr. Obamas legacy far more than Munich haunted Chamberlains.

Guest columns do not necessarily reflect the views of Accuracy in Media or its
staff.

Share This

About the author


Steve Emerson
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributor Steve Emerson is an internationally
recognized expert on terrorism and national security and the author of five
books on these subjects, most recently "Jihad Incorporated: A Guide to
Militant Islam in the US." Steve also writes for the Counterterrorism Blog and
he is the CEO of the Investigative Project on Terrorism.

Copyright 2014 Accuracy in Media

converted by Web2PDFConvert.com