Israel Matzav

Robert Wright and a nuclear Iran

The Atlantic's Robert Wright publishes a lengthy piece that accuses AIPAC of pushing the United States toward war with Iran (Hat Tip: Memeorandum). But the usual accusation of dual loyalty and 'Israel firsterism' that Wright tries to append to AIPAC pales by comparison with his refusal to acknowledge the reality that stands behind Iran's nuclear weapons program.

The key is in the way the resolution deals with the question of whether Iran should be allowed to enrich uranium, as it's been doing for some time now. The resolution defines as an American goal "the full and sustained suspension" of uranium enrichment by Iran. In case you're wondering what the resolution's prime movers mean by that: In a letter sent to the White House on the same day the resolution was introduced, Lieberman, Graham and ten other senators wrote, "We would strongly oppose any proposal that recognizes a 'right to enrichment' by the current regime or for [sic] a diplomatic endgame in which Iran is permitted to continue enrichment on its territory in any form."

This notwithstanding the fact that 1) enrichment is allowed under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty; (2) a sufficiently intrusive monitoring system can verify that enrichment is for peaceful purposes; (3) Iran's right to enrich its own uranium is an issue of strong national pride. In a poll published in 2010, after sanctions had already started to bite, 86 percent of Iranians said Iran should not "give up its nuclear activities regardless of the circumstances." And this wasn't about building a bomb; most Iranians said Iran's nuclear activities shouldn't include producing weapons.

Enrichment may be allowed under the NPT - but given Iran's repeated violations of the NPT, do we really want to allow Iran to enrich uranium. As to Iran's 'national pride,' who cares? This isn't just an Israeli issue - does Wright really believe that we are the only targets or that the United States will not be a target down the road when all indications are that Iran is developing an ICBM capability. And last but not least, how does Wright propose to establish a 'sufficiently intrusive monitoring system' when the IAEA cannot even gain admittance to Iran's nuclear facilities?

Even Dennis Ross--who has rarely, in his long career as a Mideast diplomat, left much daylight between his positions and AIPAC's, and who once categorically opposed Iranian enrichment--now realizes that a diplomatic solution may have to include enrichment. Last week in a New York Times op-ed, he said that, contrary to pessimistic assessments, it may still be possible to get a deal that "uses intrusive inspections and denies or limits uranium enrichment [emphasis added]..."

Now that the IAEA has once again left Iran empty-handed, I wonder if Ross would stand by that statement. As to the alleged lack of daylight between Ross and AIPAC - that irrelevant comment has to make one wonder whether Wright has the same agenda as the anti-Semitic Center for American Progress. And just in case you think Wright hasn't read enough Trita Parsi,

The Congressional resolution goes beyond the UN resolutions in another sense. It demands an end to Iran's ballistic missile program. Greg Thielmann of the Arms Control Association notes that, "Even after crushing Iraq in the first Gulf War, the international coalition only imposed a 150-kilometer range ceiling on Saddam's ballistic missiles. A demand to eliminate all ballistic missiles would be unprecedented in the modern era--removing any doubt among Iranians that the United States was interested in nothing less than the total subjugation of the country."

The Iranian government is not the government of a civilized Western democracy. It is a ruthless apocalyptic regime that is a danger to its people, to the surrounding countries, and to the entire world. Wright's proposal to treat them as if they were Canada or Australia is simply beyond absurd.

Does this represent Obama's thinking too? I don't think I even have to answer the question.

Labels: AIPAC, anti-Israel obsession, Iran sanctions regime, Iranian nuclear threat

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 8:52 AM