by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright April 5, 2015
All Rights Reserved.

                After a two-month-long row with Israel over the Iranian-nuke deal, President Barack Obama tried to undo the political damage that has American Jews flocking to the Republican Party.  Started when House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) extended an invitation Jan. 21 to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to speak to a joint session of Congress March 3, the White House threw everything at Israel but the kitchen sink.  White House officials even sent political operatives to Israel to torpedo Netanyahu’s reelection.  Furious with Boehner, but cleverly scapegoating Netanyahu, the White House prompted Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.) to tell Obama March 22 to “get over his tantrum,” threatening to “reassess” the U.S. Security Council position on vetoing anti-Israel measures lobbied hard by Israel’s enemies in the U.N.

             Admitting weakening Israel would be a “fundamental failure of my presidency,” Obama pulls back his threats now that Secretary of State John Kerry nailed down his nuke deal with Iran April 2.  “I would consider it a failure on my part, a fundamental failure of my presidency, if on my watch or as a consequence of work that I’ve done, Israel was rendered more vulnerable,” Obama admitted to the New York Times.  Before professing again his loyalty to Israel, Barack railed against Netanyahu’s public remarks opposing a two-state solution right before the March 17 Israeli election.  Obama knew full-well that Netanyahu opposed a two-state solution with the Hamas-PLO entity sworn to Israel’s destruction.  Obama and Kerry haven’t acknowledged when 79-year-old Ramallah-based PLO boss Mahmoud Abbas joined Hamas April 23, 2014, the U.S.—and Israel—lost a viable peace partner.

             Obama’s approach to Israel has walked the wrong side of the razor’s edge, putting the White House out on a limb.  Instead of acting conciliatory as he is now, Obama let White House spokesman Josh Earnest threaten Israel by suggesting Obama was re-evaluating U.S. policy on the Security Council.  Voices on the Security Council have vowed to impose a two-state solution on Israel, despite knowing that Hamas seeks Israel’s destruction.  “Even in the midst of the disagreements that I have had with Prime Minister Netanyahu both on Iran as well on the Palestinian issue, I have been consistent saying that our defense of Israel is unshakable,” said Barack.  Threatening to stop hostile vetoes on the Security Council doesn’t show “unshakable” support of Israel or too its backers on Capitol Hill.  Obama’s pre-April 2-nuke agreement attitude was only hostile toward Netanyahu.

             Threatening to not back Israel on the Security Council raised problems for likely Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton who’d be forced out the gate to denounce Obama’s Israeli policy.  Backpedaling now paves the way for Hillary’s announcement, perhaps coming in the next few weeks.  Obama insists now its “not just a strategic failure, I think that would be a more failure,” to weaken Israel in any way.  Republicans, led by McCain, have railed against Obama’s Israeli policy precisely because it weakens U.S. national security.  Since Sept. 11, 2001, Israel has served as the only seamless U.S. ally in the fight against Islamic terror.  Israeli intelligence and military bases have been home to the U.S., preventing another Sept. 11.  Obama’s vocal sparring with Netanyahu has emboldened terrorists and left Israel’s enemies trying gain leverage with the White House.

             White House officials accused Netanyahu of sabotaging the final Lausanne talks that resulted in a workable peace framework April 2.  What Netanyahu objects to is the fact the Iran continues to keep its uranium enrichment centrifuges, regardless of promises to keep enrichment under 5 percent—fuel for medial isotopes or nuclear reactors.  Netanyahu’s vociferous objections stem from former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s 2005 threats to “wipe Israel off the map.”  Viewed as a bag-of-wind, no one took the diminutive Iranian hothead seriously other than Netanyahu.  Netanyahu’s backers on Capitol Hill would help matters to get Netanyahu over past Iranian threats.  However flawed the Lausanne agreement, it helps more than it hurts Israeli national security.  Netanyahu isn’t about get any of his unrealistic public demands met in the Lausanne nuke deal.

             Making amends looks disingenuous for Obama now that he’s nailed down his nuke deal with Iran.  While the deal certainly gets concessions—and more inspections from Iran—it doesn’t stop Iran’s centrifuges from spinning more enriched uranium.  Getting the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency monitoring is reason enough from Netanyahu to zip it and show some gratitude to Obama and Kerry for pulling off a reasonable deal with the otherwise recalcitrant Iranians.  “There is no formula, there is no option, to prevent Iran form getting a new weapon that will be more effective than the diplomatic initiative and framework that we put forward, and that’s demonstrable,” said Obama, telling Netanyahu and his detractors on Capitol Hill to accept the Lausanne agreement.  Empowering the IAEA to do its job should be reason enough for Netanyahu to welcome the deal.

About The Author