Fundamentally Freund: Barack H. Chamberlain and Iran

Far away from the glare of the cameras, it appears that the commander-in-chief and his colleagues are swiftly caving in to the ayatollahs

February 4, 2015 22:45
4 minute read.
Oval Office

President Barack Obama talks with White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler in the Oval Office, Jan. 18, 2012. (photo credit: OFFICIAL WHITE HOUSE PHOTO / PETE SOUZA)

If several alarming media reports are true, US President Barack Obama is moving perilously closer to a nuclear deal with Iran that will endanger Israel and all of Western civilization.

Far away from the glare of the cameras, it appears that the commander-in-chief and his colleagues are swiftly caving in to the ayatollahs, hoping to buy some short-term quiet by allowing Iran to remain a threshold nuclear state.

Be the first to know - Join our Facebook page.

In a chilling exclusive filed on Tuesday, the Associated Press revealed that Washington and Tehran “are discussing a compromise that would let Iran keep much of its uranium-enriching technology but reduce its potential to make nuclear weapons.”

Under the proposal, the US would retreat from its previous demand that Iran dismantle most of its 10,000 centrifuges and allow the mullahs to keep them if they agree to reconfigure the equipment to produce a smaller amount of uranium.

This is a frighteningly naïve idea because should the Iranians decide to renege on the deal at any point in the future, they would still have a “breakout capacity” that would leave them poised just a few months away from the nuclear finish line.

As the AP story noted, “Experts warn that any reduction in centrifuge efficiency is reversible more quickly than a straight decrease in the number of machines.”

In other words, such a deal would be like permitting a violent offender to keep his gun and his ammunition, but telling him sternly not to load the chamber.

This proposal is said to be similar to one that Iran itself made last year but which the US and its allies rejected at the time because they would not tolerate allowing the Iranians to have more than 2,500 centrifuges.

But with the approach of a March deadline in the negotiations, it seems that Obama is now willing to agree to the very same demand that even he was unwilling to countenance just a year ago.

This is nothing less than folly of the highest order, and it is difficult to overstate the danger involved.

For even if the ayatollahs commit themselves to limits on the amount of enriched uranium they will produce with their many centrifuges, does anyone really think they will abide by their commitments? Consider the following: Since July 31, 2006, the United Nations Security Council has adopted no fewer than six resolutions demanding that the Iranians “suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and development.”

Most of these resolutions were adopted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, which means they are legally binding on Iran and all UN member states.

Nonetheless, Iran has violated every single one of them. They have added more centrifuges, continued with their nuclear research and development, and persisted in enriching uranium.

And now, the Obama administration is willing to allow Tehran to violate the UN Security Council resolutions which Washington itself supported.

What message does this send to the ayatollahs? Simple enough: if you dither and delay, disregard and disobey, eventually the West will give in.

If that is not textbook appeasement, then what is? Indeed, last Friday, Israel’s Channel 10 quoted unnamed senior Israeli officials as saying that Obama “has given the Iranians 80 percent of what they want” in the nuclear talks.

And according to a report on Tuesday morning on IDF radio, European officials have told their Israeli counterparts that the US is willing to allow Iran to keep a larger number of centrifuges in exchange for their promise to keep things quiet in places such as Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria.

The European officials added that in recent weeks, the Obama administration had agreed to take a “large step” in Iran’s direction out of a desire for some regional quiet, even if it means that Tehran’s centrifuges will continue to spin away.

If the above proves accurate – and we will find out soon enough – it will mark a watershed moment in modern history.

It will mean that until the end of time, Iran will always be “on the brink” of having atomic weapons, able at short notice to join the nuclear club and threaten Israel, neighboring Arab states, Europe and America.

And that is why it is so essential the Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu travel to Washington early next month to speak to Congress and warn the American people of the danger of appeasing Iran.

More than 70 years ago, Franklin Delano Roosevelt refused to bomb the train tracks to Auschwitz, thereby failing to stop the mass slaughter of our people.

Now, Barack Obama seems equally disinclined to stop the ayatollahs’ march toward building a nuclear Auschwitz, with all that might entail.

If the American president does agree to a feeble deal with Iran, he might as well sign his name at the bottom as “Barack H. Chamberlain.”

But while his legacy will merely be tarnished, our future and that of America too will permanently be at risk. That is a message that the American people need to hear. And no one is better suited to deliver it than our premier.

The writer served as an advisor to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his first term of office from 1996-1999.

Related Content

March 24, 2018
March 25, 2018: This says it all


Israel Weather
  • 10 - 25
    Beer Sheva
    13 - 21
    Tel Aviv - Yafo
  • 8 - 19
    12 - 20
  • 17 - 27
    12 - 24