Barack Obama and the Fatal Myth of Appeasement
<http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/03/12/barack-obama-and-the-fatal-myth-of-appeasement/>


MARCH 12, 2015 12:13 AM  12 COMMENTS
<http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/03/12/barack-obama-and-the-fatal-myth-of-appeasement/#comments>
*Author:*

*John Bolton <http://www.algemeiner.com/author/john-bolton/>*

<http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/02/10/obama-omits-antisemitism-in-description-of-paris-kosher-supermarket-attack/obama-28/>

President Barack Obama. Photo: White House.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s powerful speech to Congress
about Iran’s nuclear weapons program now is behind us. America obviously
benefited by hearing directly from him about the brutal nuclear reality
Tehran’s ayatollahs have created and the risks posed by the ongoing
negotiations between Iran and the U.N. Security Council’s five permanent
members (plus Germany).

Netanyahu was entirely justified in trying to influence debate about what
he rightly sees as an existential threat to his country. The deal now
pending is grievously flawed and, with near certainty, Iran will not comply
with it in any case. Secretary of State John Kerry has been wrong to say
that negative comments are unfair because no one yet knows the deal’s final
terms. In fact, the administration routinely has leaked provisions thought
to benefit President Obama; one can only wonder at the unleaked provisions
they think might be problematic.

We should now put behind us the needless controversy preceding Netanyahu’s
address, which was little more than Barack Obama’s offended sense of amour
propre , a decidedly un-presidential response. The central focus should
always have been the mortal threat to the United States, Israel and other
friends and allies posed by the prospect of nuclear weapons in the hands of
Iran.

Its religious fanatics have been the world’s central bankers for
international terrorism since the Islamic Revolution — their term to
describe the events of 1979, not mine — seized power in Iran. Their
militarized power base in the Iranian Revolutionary Guards has armed and
trained terrorists on an equal-opportunity basis: Shia Hezbollah in
Lebanon, anti-American militias in Iraq, Sunni Hamas in the Gaza Strip and
Iran’s sworn enemies, the Taliban in Afghanistan.

The ayatollahs seized America’s Tehran embassy in 1979 and took our
diplomats hostage — terrorist acts prohibited under long-standing treaty
commitments and international custom. This hostage crisis was the first
exposure most Americans had to the mindset that still grips Iran. It tells
us everything we need to know about how likely the mullahs are to keep
their word today.

Of course, it didn’t stop there. Iran has been killing Americans since
Revolutionary Guards officers assisted in planning and carrying out the
1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon. They have fabricated
explosively formed projectiles, designed especially to penetrate armored
vehicles, to use against American forces in Iraq.

Their assistance to the Taliban — what the Pentagon called “calibrated
lethal aid” in a 2014 report — also is aimed primarily at killing
Americans, either in terrorist attacks or more conventional combat. To
Iran’s ayatollahs, we have always been “the Great Satan.”

So when the leader of Israel, which the ayatollahs are pleased to call “the
Little Satan,” speaks to Congress, we should listen, focusing on substance
rather than protocol. We urgently need to debate the deal’s merits before
Iran graciously accepts Obama’s too-numerous-to-list concessions. Instead,
in one of history’s cruel ironies, John Kerry couldn’t meet with Netanyahu
in Washington because he was in Geneva, desperately trying to reach
agreement with Iran’s negotiators. There is no better way to demonstrate
the Obama administration’s true priorities.

Iran has, for more than 30 years, been pursuing a consistent, dogged
strategy intended to achieve its objective of deliverable nuclear weapons.
In seeking such an enormous military capability, Iran is prepared to make
temporary, easily reversible concessions along the way — always keeping in
mind the limited, time-bound nature of these arrangements. It has done so
repeatedly in the past, and it is doing so again in the current
negotiations. To the ayatollahs, deals are tactical maneuvers, not efforts
to resolve disputes.

Particularly difficult for Americans to understand is that, when the deal
is signed, the negotiating will not be over. In fact, to Iran, agreements
are just hitching posts along the trail toward deliverable nuclear weapons,
temporary resting places before Iran begins its inexorable search for
further weaknesses, leverage points and terms of the deal it will violate.

By contrast, Obama is not pursuing a strategy but a myth called
appeasement. Appeasers hope that buying off potential adversaries with
concessions and demonstrations of goodwill would dissuade them from
committing aggression. When dealing with insignificant threats in secondary
regions at minimal costs, concessions of this sort might make sense. Or as
an act of desperation, when no other alternatives are available, such
concessions might also work.

But for mortal threats to security of our country and its allies — even
their very existence — against an implacable opponent, where the costs of
weakness are enormous, appeasement is a fatal mistake. Obama hopes that by
making concessions on economic sanctions and perhaps even diplomatic
recognition, he can somehow make the ayatollahs forget their own strategic
objectives. This is delusional, as we shall regrettably see soon after the
agreement is announced.

*John Bolton, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, was the
U.S. permanent representative to the United Nations and, previously, the
undersecretary of State for arms control and international security. **This
article was originally published by The Pittsburgh Tribune Review.*


__._,_.___
 ------------------------------
Posted by: "beowulf" <[email protected]>
------------------------------


 Visit Your Group
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmNzE0ZzFxBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0MjYyNTk1MTI->


 [image: Yahoo! Groups]
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlMnZ0NDJmBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQyNjI1OTUxMg-->
• Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> •
Unsubscribe <[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe>
• Terms of Use <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/>

__,_._,___

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to