by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright March 2, 2015
All Rights Reserved.

                Speaking today to the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee [AIPAC], 65-year-old Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu held no secrets of what he would say tomorrow to a joint session of Congress.  “American leaders worry about the security of the country,” Bibi told AIPAC’s policy meeting in D.C.  “Israeli leaders worry about the survival of their country,” setting the tone for why he chose to accept House Speaker John Boehner’s (R-Ohio) Jan. 21 invitation.  Boehner and the Republican caucus no doubt wanted to embarrass President Barack Obama, after a drubbing in the polls Nov. 4, hading the Senate to the GOP.  Members of Congress know Israel’s position on Geneva nuke talks with Iran, raising doubts about whether or not the Geneva deal would keep the Islamic Republic from becoming a nuclear state as declared by former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Feb. 11, 2010.

             Five years later, the P5+1, U.S., Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany find themselves behind the Eight Ball trying to force Iran into a nuclear deal that ends punitive economic sanctions.  Netanyahu wants the White House to demand Iran stop its nuclear enrichment program, something no one in the P5+1 expects.  Speaking to AIPAC today, White House National Security Advisor and former U.N. Amb. Susan Rice doesn’t expect Iran to agree to stopping in enrichment program.  “As desirable as that would be, it is neither realistic or achievable,” said Rice, putting Netanyahu on notice that the White House expect to get 10-year moratorium on Iran’s enrichment activities.  Rice doesn’t see any of the P5+1 pushing Iran to completely halt enrichment activities.  Iran believe its has the right under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes.

             Bibi doesn’t trust any agreement Iran signs in Geneva would inhibit it from working on weapons grade material.  Whatever the speculation by nuclear experts about the state of Iran’s nuclear weapons program, there’s little that the P5+1 can do to stop Iran from completing the nuclear fuel cycle, including spinning weapons’ grade uranium.  Inviting Netanyahu was intended to notify the White House after the Nov. 4, 2014 election that Congress would play a bigger role in U.S. foreign affairs.  While the State Department is part of the executive branch, Boehner put the White House on notice that Congress expects to influence foreign policy.  All the hot air about how Netanyahu’s speech endangers U.S.-Israeli relations is utter rubbish.  White House officials and Democrats on Capitol Hill are rightfully embarrassed by Netanyahu addressing the GOP dominated Congress.

             White House officials are finally dealing with the fallout of losing the Senate last November.  As the 2016 draws near, the GOP wants to highlight differences with the White House on foreign policy.  Since Obama took office Jan. 20, 2009, the White House has taken a pre-Sept. 11-mindset when it came to dealing with Israel.  After Sept. 11, former President George W. Bush broke off relations with Palestinians and joined Israel as never before in the fight against Islamic terror.  Israel became the U.S. Mideast listening post for preempting terror attacks.  Unlike the Bush White House, Obama didn’t get on the same page as Tel Aviv before pushing its Mideast foreign policy agenda.  Obama pushed Israel for a deal with Palestinians, despite having no peace partner in Ramallah-based PLO Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.  When Abbas joined Hamas April 213, 2014, the two-state solution died.

             Secretary of State John Kerry didn’t create much confidence pushing Israel for more than year into a peace deal with a known terrorist group.  Kerry knows that it doesn’t serve U.S. national security forcing Israel to compromise its own national security.  When it comes to current Geneva talks, there are no guarantees that Iran will abide by the terms of the agreement.  Netanyahu thinks he has a “moral obligation to speak up in the face of these dangers while there is still time to avert them,” regarding whether the U.S. should sign onto the P5+1 deal.   Netanyahu believes that no deal is better than one that allows Iran over time to develop the fissile material needed to build its first A-bomb.  What Netanyahu doesn’t get is there’s nothing the P5+1 can do to stop Iran’s enrichment program short of war.

             Since Ahmadinejad threatened to “wipe Israel off the map” Oct. 26, 2005, Netanyahu has called Iran an “existential threat,” threatening air strikes against Iran’s nuclear sites.  With Iran enrichment sites buried deep underground, most experts believe air strikes would not stop Iran’s plans.  However bad the deal in Geneva, it’s better for Israel’s national security to have a deal in place, than no deal.  Netanyahu’s probably right that Iran will figure out a way to a continue enriching uranium.   Whether Bibi’s re-elected again or not, there’s little the P5+1 can do to stop Iran’s nuclear enrichment program.  After trying to force Israel into a deal with Hamas, Netanyahu doesn’t have much confidence in White House.  Speaking tomorrow, Netanyahu won’t have much impact on Geneva, whether or not Iran eventually gets the bomb or, most importantly, on U.S.-Israeli relations.

About the Author 

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.