Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu today gave President Obama an Ultimatum saying that US must stop Iran's proliferation or Israel will.
A bold statement if you ask me. But, is Netanyahu stupid to be this provocative or I am looking at a clone of Dick Cheney here? Or, shall I say it is a gaff?
I don't think it is a gaff personally but let me capture his interview in this month's Atlantic below the fold:
The Obama presidency has two great missions: fixing the economy, and preventing Iran from gaining nuclear weapons. ... Western civilization will have failed if Iran is allowed to develop nuclear weapons.
Netanyahu said he would support President Obama's decision to engage Iran, so long as negotiations brought about a quick end to Iran's nuclear ambitions. 'How you achieve this goal is less important than achieving it,' he said, but he added that he was skeptical that Iran would respond positively to Obama's appeals.
Neither Netanyahu nor his principal military advisers would suggest a deadline for American progress on the Iran nuclear program, though one aide said pointedly that Israeli time lines are now drawn in months, 'not years.' These same military advisers told me that they believe Iran's defenses remain penetrable, and that Israel would not necessarily need American approval to launch an attack. 'The problem is not military capability, the problem is whether you have the stomach, the political will, to take action,' one of his advisers, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told me."
Here is what President Obama said about Israel so that it is understood about the Administration's unwavering support for Israel:
In his speech to AICAP, he first crystallized the US commitment to Israel:
Our alliance is based on shared interests and shared values. Those who threaten Israel threaten us. Israel has always faced these threats on the front lines. And I will bring to the White House an unshakable commitment to Israel's security. That starts with ensuring Israel's qualitative military advantage. I will ensure that Israel can defend itself from any threat — from Gaza to Tehran. Defense cooperation between the United States and Israel is a model of success, and must be deepened. As president, I will implement a Memorandum of Understanding that provides $30 billion in assistance to Israel over the next decade — investments to Israel's security that will not be tied to any other nation.
He also addressed in his statements how a Nuclear Iran is unacceptable not just because a Nuclear Iran is a threat to Israel but to the whole region in general.
We will also use all elements of American power to pressure Iran. I will do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. That starts with aggressive, principled diplomacy without self-defeating preconditions, but with a clear eyed understanding of our interests. We have no time to waste. We cannot unconditionally rule out an approach that could prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. We have tried limited, piecemeal talks while we outsource the sustained work to our European allies. It is time for the United States to lead.
There will be careful preparation. We will open up lines of communication, build an agenda, coordinate closely with our allies, and evaluate the potential for progress. Contrary to the claims of some, I have no interest in sitting down with our adversaries just for the sake of talking. But as president of the United States, I would be willing to lead tough and principled diplomacy with the appropriate Iranian leader at a time and place of my choosing — if, and only if, it can advance the interests of the United States.
Most critical to the President however is how to find a balance to use diplomacy to resolve the challenges he is facing about Iran's Nuclear program. Robert Kagan, in Washington Post wrote a nice op-ed that rationalize Obama's strategy to Iran in What's the Harm in Obama's Approach to Iran? He makes the argument:
Either the friendly diplomatic approach works, and the Iranians actually cave and accept American and European demands, which would be good. Or the friendly approach doesn’t work, and the Iranians proceed on their present course, thus proving that even diplomacy sincerely pursued by a well-intentioned president has no impact on Tehran’s calculations.
On March 20, 2009, the President wished the Iranian people from the White House via a video message a happy New Year and a pledge for a new beginning which was unprecedented. In 10 days since that gesture of friendship was made by President Obama, I see diplomacy has already showed an early sign of progress and corporation in Iran's part.
Times piece from yesterday had an article: Obama's Unlikely Ally: Iran Signs On To Afghan Plan which pointed out how Obama's approach to Iran has so far succeeded in bringing in Iran as a partner to rebuild Afghanistan. It notes:
Barack Obama may be new to the world of international diplomacy, but he has already scored an impressive victory by co-opting Iran into joining the U.S.-led efforts to rebuild Afghanistan. At an international, one-day conference on Afghanistan at the Hague, Tuesday, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Mohammad Mehdi Akhundzadeh offered to help fight the Taliban, saying that, "Iran is fully prepared to participate in the projects aimed at combating drug trafficking and plans in line with developing and reconstructing Afghanistan.
The pledge, coming just ten days after Obama's televised appeal for a "new beginning" between the U.S. and Iran, suggests the White House's efforts to thaw relations with Tehran are paying off. U.S. Afghan envoy Richard Holbrooke even met Akhundzadeh, and had what was described as "a brief and cordial exchange."
My point is why at a time when progress is being made, Israel PM Netanyahu corners the President by giving him an ultimatum? Is what America doing worth anything to him and the Israeli leadership? or is it Netanyahu's intention to defuse the possibility of agreement to be reached with Iran? But why? These are legitimate questions I don't have an answer for. We all understand the urgency to ensure that your adversaries does not have the capacity to produce nuclear weapons especially when treats are being made by the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, regularly calling for Israel to be "wiped off the map.
However, similar rhetoric of attacking Iran do not help President Obama's effort in working out the issues of Iran's nuclear proliferation program through diplomatic efforts as the Administration is trying to do.
A more sensible Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff was asked specifically about Netanyahu's quote and he said to Canadian Jewish News,
...I don't want to encourage any sabre-rattling rhetoric, especially not at a moment when the president of the United States is beginning to open the door to discussion.
I hope Netanyahu is listening.