(photo credit: REUTERS)
With “How and why to kill the deal” (Our World, July 22), Caroline B. Glick, whom I admire, is wrong.
There are innumerable reasons to kill the deal, but Congress can do nothing. Violating his word to its members, President Barack Obama submitted a resolution to the Security Council of the United Nations immediately after signing the deal. The European Union will follow shortly.
The trade sanctions are finished. If Congress rejects the deal by a two-thirds vote of both houses, the only effect will be to make it impossible for American firms to compete for Iranian business. The Iranians will be able to get whatever they want from the rest of the world (and also from the US, by using various subterfuges).
Which leaves the financial sanctions. After all, they can’t buy much if they can’t pay for it.
Wrong. All the financial sanctions imposed by the US Treasury Department, including the frozen funds, were imposed by executive order, meaning the president can rescind them at any time and Congress can do nothing about it (assuming it isn’t going to impeach him).
In other words, nothing that Congress does at this point makes any difference whatever. It is a done deal.
One last point. Were Congress to pass a resolution declaring the deal a treaty rather than an executive agreement, it would have the same effect as if it passed a resolution repealing the law of gravity. It is not a treaty and was specifically designed not to be one. What’s more, none of the other five countries that signed with Iran is submitting the agreement to its respective legislature for ratification, which it would have to do if the deal were a treaty.
NORMAN A. BAILEY
The writer is a professor of economics and national security at the University of Haifa’s National Security Studies Center. In the US, he was a senior member of the staff of the National Security Council in the White House and the office of the Director of National Intelligence.Beitar not Betar
In response to your justified editorial “Beitar’s red card” (July 20), it is incumbent upon Betar, the revisionist youth movement, to disassociate itself from the soccer team and, in particular, its hooligan supporters.
Betar is in no way connected with the team.
Ze’ev Jabotinsky made it one of the founding principles of Betar to foster what he termed hadar, the ennoblement of the Jew, not only in daily life, but as a principle of the Zionist idea.
For example, he detailed in a letter to young volunteers who joined the Betar naval school in Civitavecchia, Italy, to maintain and show explicit good manners and decorum to their host country – rather a far cry from the hooligans at the recent soccer match in Belgium.
Herzliya Headline health
Words matter! If you are going to use a famous quote as a headline (“Peace in our time,” Comment & Features, July 22), the least you can do is ensure that the words used are correct.
Neville Chamberlain, upon returning from Munich, said “peace for our time.”
Regarding “Moynihan’s message on BDS and Iran appeasement: We’ve got to stop this” (Center Field, July 22), the headline is disingenuous.
Daniel Patrick Moynihan died in 2003. He never publicly expressed an opinion on either BDS (which was launched in 2005) or the “appeasement” of Iran.
Ottawa, Canada APOLOGY
“The invention of a village” (Comment & Features, July 23) was cut short due to an editing error. We wish to apologize to author Ari Briggs, as well as to our readers.