by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright February 12, 2015
All Rights Reserved.

                Working feverishly to cut a deal to limit Iran’s nuclear enrichment program, the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany, hope to get Iran to sign a responsible non-proliferation agreement.  Based on a Nov. 24, 2013 Geneva agreement to roll back its nuclear enrichment program in exchange for ending punitive economic sanctions, Iran already pressed beyond the Jan. 20, 2014 drop dead date to secure a comprehensive disarmament agreement no later than July 1, 2015.  “We do have today a profound disagreement with the United States administration and the rest of the P5+1 over the offer that has been made to Iran,” said Prime Minister Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu’s office.  Netanyahu agreed, against typical White House protocol, to accept House Speaker John Boehner’s Jan. 21 invitation to speak to a joint session of Congress March 3, telling his side of the story.

             Boehner and conservatives on Capitol Hill don’t need Bibi’s speech to know he doesn’t trust anything the Ayatollah does with regard to a nuclear deal.  Since former Iranian Preisdnet Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talked about “wiping Israel off the map” Oct. 27, 2005, Netanyahu’s convinced that if Iran had the bomb he’d drop in on Israel.  Forget about Israel’s own deterrence with a “secret” nuclear arsenal of its own.  Ahmadinejad threw gasoline on Iran-Israeli relations Dec. 11, 2006 when he hosted as “scientific” Holocaust deniers’ conference, sending Netanyahu over the edge.  Since then, Bibi often refers to Iran as an “existential threat” to Israel, reserving the right to launch air strikes against Iran’s nuclear sites.  With most of Iran’s enrichment sites deeply underground, most experts agree that any military action would only stave off Iran’s nuclear development by a short time.

             When Netanayahu speaks to a joint session of Congress, he’ll repeat the claim that Iran’s trying to dupe world leaders about its true intent to build nuclear weapons.  Apart from wanting to humiliate the Obama administration, conservatives can’t acknowledge that with-or-without the agreement, Iran will continue pursuing its clandestine military program.  Signing an agreement with the P5-+1 doesn’t jeopardize Israel’s security one iota, more than if there were no agreement at all.  “This is a regime, Iran, that is openly committed to Israel’s destruction,” said Bibi, flashing his cards of what he plans to say to a joint session of Congress.  If Israel really felt that Iran threatened Israel’s existence, they would have attacked Iran long ago.  Coaxing Iran into signing some agreement is better than no agreement at all, since the deal would make Tehran amenable to the P5+1. 

             Since Ahmadinejad’s famous words—“wipe Israel off the map”—Iran has not attacked Israel, other than backing its Lebanon-based Hezbollah militia for launching a border war with Israel in 2006.  Netanyahu makes no distinction between Tehran and Hezbollah’s Beirut-based Iranian funded terror group.  “A bad deal with Iran is forming in Munich that will endanger Israel’s existence,” Netanyahu told an Israeli Likud Party event.  Unable to explain why an agreement would endanger Israel more than no agreement, Netanyahu flawed logic is fully exposed.  Netanyahu believes that with or without an agreement Iran will continue to develop weapons grade uranium and bomb-making capability.  After years of menacing rhetoric on both sides, neither Israel nor Iran have fired a single shot at each other, other than letting its Hezbollah militia do the terrorist dirty work.

             When Iran’s Ayatollah Khaemenei signaled a willingness to compromise on a nuclear deal with the P5+1 Feb. 8, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and his hard-working Foreign Minister Javad Zarif could see light at the end of the tunnel on inking a nuclear deal.  “This is not a political issues or a party issues, neither here nor there.  This is an existential issue, and I approach it with the fullest responsibility,” said Bibi.  Delivering the same message to a joint session of Congress March 3, Netanyahu hopes to push the P5+1 drive a harder bargain with Tehran.  With Iran already pushed to the wall, it’s doubtful the P5+1 will get any better deal from Tehran.  Whether Netanyahu admits it or not, getting the Ayatollah to sign of on a nuclear deal limiting uranium enrichment benefits all parties, especially Israel.  Israel faces no more or less of a threat from Iran with or without the current nuclear deal.

             To fully appreciate the P5+1’s hard negotiations with Iran, Netanyahu needs to get beyond Ahmadinejad’s incendiary rhetoric about “wiping Israel off the map.”  If Netanyahu were around when Pakistan got the bomb in 1998, he would have argued it was also an “existential threat.”  Ahamdinejad’s hot air about “wiping Israel off the map” does not constitute an “existential threat.” Iran could just as easily argue Israel represents a clear-and-present-danger because it possesses an undisclosed amount of nuclear warheads and ballistic missiles.  Whatever happens with Iran’s nuclear program, mutual-assured-destruction would keep Tehrnn from committing suicide hitting Tel Aviv with a nuke.  Whatever agreement emerges from Geneva, it improves Israel’s national security by forcing Iran to be more accountable.  Scuttling the current Geneva deal would do no good for anyone concerned.

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He’s editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.