Administration walks, quacks like pro-Iranian duck

Remember the Iranian bomb? We don’t hear much about it from our president these days, but

Iran is proclaiming significant gains in its nuclear program, progress that Western officials and experts say could effectively erase setbacks from recent cyber attacks and shorten the timeline for acquiring nuclear weapons.

Scientists from Iran’s atomic energy program, in announcements over the past three days, said they have successfully tested advanced centrifuges for enriching uranium and are less than a month away from starting the country’s first commercial nuclear reactor. The announcements, linked to the observance of “nuclear technology day” in Tehran, underscore recent assessments by intelligence officials and Western nuclear experts suggesting that Iran is preparing to speed up its production of enriched uranium. — Washington Post

I guess the ‘biting sanctions’ were more or less toothless, and the tough talk about nothing being off the table was just that — talk.

Indeed, almost any criticism of Iran coming from the White House has been muted recently, despite the violent suppression of demonstrations (several demonstrators were killed in February), and multiple attempts to ship massive amounts of weapons to Hizballah.

Our administration has been also particularly easy on the Iranian ally/satellite regime in Syria, where hundreds of anti-regime protesters have been shot.

And it hasn’t stuck up for traditional US allies, either. Barry Rubin writes,

In an unprecedented statement, the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC, consisting of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates) has condemned Iran for trying to overthrow them. Tehran has been at it since 1979 but this is the first time that these countries have been so bold…

Meanwhile, Iran is threatening Saudi Arabia, which the Iranian parliament’s foreign affairs and national security committee said, “should know it’s better not to play with fire in the sensitive region of the Persian Gulf.”

The Saudi government responded that this was an “irresponsible” statement containing “void allegations and blatant offense against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.” And, said the Saudi version of parliament, Iran’s position “fuels sectarianism,” a codeword for pitting Shias against Sunni Muslims. Iran must “stop these hostile policies and respect the rules of good neighbourliness … so as to preserve the security and stability in this region which is key for the entire world.”

The GCC’s secretary-general, Abdullatif al-Zayani, … condemned “Iran’s meddling in the internal affairs of GCC countries” that “threatened security and stability in the region.”

Where is U.S. policy in all of this? Nowhere at all. It is not siding with the GCC. At best, the United States is neutral between the two sides. Such a position is a terrible mistake.  The new development is that the U.S. government has stopped criticizing Saudi Arabia and Bahrain. But it hasn’t started helping them.

If Washington doesn’t support the GCC against Iran, who will? And the expansion of Iranian influence–on the eve of Tehran getting nuclear weapons–is catastrophic for U.S. interests.

On the other hand, the US did take sides against Egypt’s Mubarak, the other pillar of opposition to Iran in the Mideast.

What I want to know is this: it sounds absurd to say that the US has taken a turn toward Iran and away from its former friends, Israel and the conservative Sunni regimes. But the old saying “if it walks like a duck, etc.” seems to apply here.

Is American policy becoming pro-Iranian?

Technorati Tags: ,

2 Responses to “Administration walks, quacks like pro-Iranian duck”

  1. Robman says:

    Obama behaves as if he practically invented appeasement as a negotiating tactic in world affairs.

    He thinks he is being soooo, sooo clever. Kind of reminds me of the old poster of a mountain goat wtih the caption: “I’m so far behind, I think I’m ahead!”

    I have an Israeli expat friend who lives in upstate New York. We’ve often discussed these issues, and for quite some time now, a running point of contention between us was whether Obama was a Saudi puppet (my view) or an Iranian mole (his view).

    The above lends article lends credence to his view.

    However, I still stick with mine.

    I don’t think Obama is a Saudi puppet in the sense that someone picks up a phone in Riyadh and tells him what to do. Rather, he is more like a genuine “Manchurian Candidate” per the movie: In his own warped way, he really believes he is a “patriotic American”, even though he has been groomed and brainwashed for the whole of his life to be anything but.

    The fact that he won’t take a firm stand on Iran comes from two sources.

    1. He fundamentally believes that America is at the root of all the problems in the world. Iran is just one more variety of “blowback”. He doesn’t have the belief in what we stand for, the strength of his moral convictions, to defend us in the face of their advances. He doesn’t feel he has the moral authority to take such a stand, since it is all “our fault” anyway. This is why, as some suspect he is the “anti-Christ”, I have another name for him: the “Anti-Patriiot”.

    2. He might actually want a nuclear Iran for two Machievellan reasons, even if he’s not their “mole”.

    – Keeps a sword over Israel’s head that can be used as leverage by us to wring concessions out of them.

    – Keeps the Gulf Arab oil sheikdoms dependent on the U.S. for their protection, and thus in “our” camp.

    Both of these are flawed assumptions. Past a certain point, if Iranian nuclear capability is imminent, I expect Israel to act, with all of the conflagration which will ensue. Israel won’t care as her survival is at stake.

    As to the Gulf Arabs, if we don’t address their most fundamental security concerns within the context of being a reliable ally, they will make accomodation with Iran, as they have already made some moves to do.

    The whole thing will backfire. Our lack of resolve will result in greater war, strife, and instability.

    That’s the usual price of appeasement.

    But don’t tell Obama. He already knows everything, and it might confuse him.

    Once again, the biggest act of mass stupidity in world history, bar none:

    The election of Obama.

  2. Segulah says:

    Excellent post today concerning our President, and the comment was one of the best I’ve read to date. Thanks gentlemen.