by Joe David
“We are being told that the only alternative to this bad deal is war. That is just not true. The alternative to this bad deal is a much better deal.”
– Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
Both sides of the political divide in Washington, DC, agree, Iran can’t be trusted. It is a rogue state with murderous intent; yet President Barack Obama insists on negotiating a nuclear deal with it.
Given the administration’s favorable attitude toward Islamic groups, astute political observers aren’t surprised by this decision. In view of Obama’s history toward Israel, it was only a matter of time before he attempted to neutralize it. It is consistent with his plan for the Middle East. Since Israel will be directly affected by the outcome of these negotiations, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had no choice. At all costs, he had to prevent Israel’s most dangerous enemy from obtaining nuclear capabilities.
So he came to Washington, spoke to the world, and eloquently made his point. Instead of failing, and being rejected by the political elite, Netanyahu gained its respect and proved to world that he couldn’t be humiliated by a Chicago Community Worker’s tactics. In fact, by his actions, Netanyahu revealed to the world that he is a giant world leader, and Obama is merely a petty operative.
Many strongly believe this confrontation between the two leaders was a set up. Obama had a game plan. According to the National Review: “Obama chose to pursue a deal that he knows Israel can’t live with. Obama knew that his policy virtually guaranteed a painful and public rupture with Israel. And he went ahead and did it anyway. So make no mistake: House speaker Boehner issued the invitation, but it wasn’t Boehner who brought Netanyahu before Congress to criticize U.S. policy in front of the entire world. Obama did that.”
Netanyahu obviously realized this, and when he delivered his talk Tuesday (March 3, 2015) to Congress (and the World), he was determined to achieve what the administration hoped he wouldn’t, and he succeeded admirably. He not only got the full attention of the world, but he also said what many Washington leaders lacked the courage to say publicly. (Read Daniel Tauber’s op-ed in Israel National News for an astute analysis of the talk.) In retaliation for such success, the liberal press has been attacking Netanyahu aggressively. The argument that seems to be sticking is that his visit to Washington was a re-election political stunt (according to The New Yorker) To admit that he came to warn America and protect his country from annihilation would imply that he was a man of principle, a trait cynical politicians and journalists in Washington don’t have.
As a result, all the venom oozed from the fangs of the left-wingers. Here’s just a modest rewind of the events. Al Jazeera mentioned four negative points that Netanyahu’s talk accomplished, from angering the Obama Administration to snubbing the democrats. What Al Jazeera neglected to mention was the huge turn-out, the numerous standing ovations, and a world eager to hear every word the prime minister uttered. In an attempt to tarnish Netanyahu’s creditability The Huffington Post claimed its fact-checkers uncovered five “lies” that he made without once acknowledging any of the truths (such as Iran’s brutal record for slaying dissidents and its public outcries of death to Zionist regimes). And The Christian Science Monitor identified the momentous occasion as being an outsider’s hyper-partisanship attempt to influence U.S. foreign policy rather than a concerned prime minister’s attempt to gain the support of its long-time friend, America, against a fanatical and dangerous enemy, Iran.
These spins (along with many variations) will probably continue until the deal is final and the subject is dead, which the current administration and many Democratic Party members hope will be soon.
Lost amidst all the negative press is a more balanced response, which sprouted up here and there like spring tulips. For a summary, you may want to read what Business Insider said. In short, it supports what Netanyahu said clearly: “(The deal) doesn’t block Iran’s path to the bomb. It paves Iran’s path to the bomb.” More simply stated: “This is a bad deal.” (To view the entire video, visit YouTube.)
What was Obama’s response to the talk? In a terse put-down, he said the prime minister brought nothing new to the table. In truth, nothing new was necessary. What Netanyahu said was sufficient. Iran under its current leadership is an untrustworthy terrorist state. Finalizing a deal with such a rogue regime offered no guarantees that it would live up to its agreement. By dismissing Netanyahu with flippancy, Obama hoped to avoid any discussion on the matter. Reason? The U.S. President has no defense. Refusing to watch the talk on television or send his representatives to hear Netanyahu in person confirms his desire to disconnect himself from Israel and advance his destructive end.
What will be the outcome? It is hard to say at this time, but rumors are circulating that Obama is trying to interfere in Israel’s elections and dethrone Netanyahu for embarrassing him. Will this ploy backfire? Hopefully it will. The Israeli are collectively too savvy to be fooled by a second-rate American leader like Obama.
Joe David is the author of The Infidels, a moving story about a genocide that occurred in the Middle East exactly one hundred years ago. His writing have appeared in numerous publications including Christian Science Monitor, U.S. Airways, Education, and more. He has published six books.
For publication rights, contact: Joe David, PO Box 202, Warrenton, VA 20188, 540-428-3175, Jdavid@bfat.com