So the U.S. (by which we mean Germany,
France, England, Russia, China, and the U.S.) and Iran are striking
a deal about nuclear development in the Peacock Kingdom and U.N.
One odd byproduct? An aligning of interest between Israel and
Saudi Arabia, which are hardly friendly to one another. Yet both
countries – along with a number of other Sunni-majority states in
the Middle East – are absolutely opposed to the United States
cozying up to Iran.
The Saudis now fear Obama may be tempted to thaw ties with
Tehran by striking a deal to expand inspections of its atomic sites
in return for allowing Iranian allies to go on dominating Arab
countries such as Lebanon, Syria and Iraq. That such a bargain has
never been publicly mooted from within the Obama administration has
not stopped Saudis voicing their concerns.
“I am afraid in case there is something hidden,” said Abdullah
al-Askar, chairman of the foreign affairs committee in Saudi
Arabia’s advisory parliament, the Shoura Council. “If America and
Iran reach an understanding it may be at the cost of the Arab world
and the Gulf states, particularly Saudi Arabia.”
As Ed Krayewski
noted earlier today, Israel – or at least its elected leader,
Benjamin Netanyahu – is apoplectic at the deal. And
as Matt Welch wrote, hawkish elements in the American GOP are
trying to wrap any deal with Iran in the mantle of appeasement and
Munich Redux. Given that a majority of Americans are interested in
seeing the United States play a more limited role in disputes
around the globe, it’s going to be tough sledding for hawks to push
the idea that we need to be bombing Iran even as we negotiate with
the country. Funny how a decade-plus of failed foreign wars have
made everyone but neocon hawks rethink U.S. foreign policy, isn’t
Which isn’t to say that Obama is a good spokesman for American
interests. He’s a trigger-happy character himself, who tripled
troops in Afghanistan, tried to stay in Iraq past the original
withdrawal date (something he’s succeeding at in Afghanistan
incidentally), unconstitutionally dispatched American forces over
Libya, and was all set to bomb Syria until wiser, cooler heads won
the battle of public opinion.
And then there’s John Kerry, our secretary of state. As Hawkeye
Pierce once said of Col. Henry Blake, the hapless commander of the
good ol’ fashioned M*A*S*H 4077 in that awful TV series that lasted
five times longer than the Korean War, I honestly believe John
Kerry could get held up via the mail.
Is Iran a trustworthy negotiating partner? Kind of a weird
question coming from people in a country that was bugging the phone
of Angela Merkel and other allies, but no, Iran isn’t trustworthy.
Which doesn’t mean you don’t negotiate with them – it just means
you trust but verify, as Reagan counseled with the Soviets.
from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/25/will-us-deal-with-iran-make-israel-and-s