President Trump took us out of Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran yesterday. I’m glad he did, as the deal was too weak to stop Iran’s nuclear ambitions, strengthened Iran’s terrible leadership, and indirectly funded Iran’s terrorism. The deal would never have passed the Senate as an official treaty, and had bipartisan opposition. It was rushed to signature and sold under a false dilemma: either we agree to this deal or we plunge the area into war. Opposition to the deal was dishonestly cast as war mongering. Recently, Israeli intel demonstrated the Iranians are cheating on the already weak terms of the deal. So I’m glad the current President is throwing it out.
Reading the chatter online today, many agree with me, but many more are lost in their compulsion to blame the US for Iran’s bad behavior, focusing on the longstanding economic sanctions, our historic support for the Shah from 1953 to 1979, and our support for Israel. It fired me up to outline why they are wrong.
There is no question many Iranians hate the US because they do not understand why the sanctions were originally put in place, and why they persist. Even some people in the US have a hard time grasping that concept, apparently. The sanctions were intended to make it difficult for the Iranian theocracy to remain in power, as well as restrict their ability to support terrorism. Period. They were never an attempt to randomly cause suffering. To the contrary, they were an alternative response to direct military intervention, which would have caused greater suffering. The mullahs remain in power and continue to support terrorism, and so the sanctions must persist if only to curtail terrorism, especially as an alternative to military action.
My grandparents lived in Iran in 1979 and barely escaped with their lives. They lost friends in the Islamic revolution. Looking back, it’s clear that supporting the Shah 40+ years ago was a mistake, but one that can only be properly understood in the context of the Cold War. Building their oil producing infrastructure was a mistake, as the West lost billions due to the regional instability. Supporting Israel since 1948, however, has not been a mistake. The Iranian mullahs will never be friendly to us as long as we support Israel, no matter how many pallets of money we send them, or how many ridiculous deals we try to make. Israel deserves our support, and the real move toward peace that must be made is this: the Islamic world must recognize Israel and renounce terrorism.
Bottom line: It’s impossible to view any relations with Iran without considering the role played by supporting Israel and Iran's repeated threats to annihilate it. Israel deserves our support.
Why does Israel deserve our support?
Here’s a laundry list:
1) Because they are the only democratic, free, pluralistic, tolerant society in the region.
2) Because the nation was legitimately established by the UN in response to a horrific attempt to exterminate an entire people that nearly succeeded.
3) Because the UN tried to give both the Arabs and the Jews land. The Jews agreed. The Arabs disagreed, started a civil war, and haven't really let up since 1948.
4) Because Israel has been under near continuous attack by neighboring countries since 1948.
5) Because every attempt they have made to give the Palestinians some degree of autonomy has resulted in increased terrorism and threats to their people.
6) Because the Israeli goal (to live in peace among their neighbors) is noble, while the goals of their neighbors (to destroy Israel and scatter the surviving Jewish population) is vile.
Back to those blaming the US for our poor relations, why did we support the Shah from 1953-1979?
We were heavily invested in Iran’s oil infrastructure in the early 1950’s, as were other Western nations. The Iranians didn't have the full capability to extract their own oil prior to that time. The value of our investment in infrastructure was the main reason we opposed nationalization, as well as our desire to keep Soviet domination/influence in check. The idea of a Soviet port in the Persian Gulf was a strategic nightmare for the US. The Shah was friendly to the US, and we supported him in return. He was a terrible leader, and we stained ourselves through the association. It’s important to note that we got into bed with many evil characters around the world in those days, solely because they weren't friendly with the Soviets, and that continues to plague us today. Oil money was important, but was secondary to checking the Soviets.
You can go on about the Shah and the mistakes of the Cold War, but the Islamic mullahs have been little better for their people over the past 40 years. The greater cause of contemporary Iranian hatred of the US stems from our support for Israel in the face of radical Islam. It drives me nuts when left wing people try to delegitimize the state of Israel and make them to be the bad guys. They claim the Arabs properly own the land of present day Israel, and that the Palestinians should be running the show. But that view can only be held in complete ignorance of history.
Ancient Israel is a historic fact, persisting from the beginning of recorded history up until the time of the Romans. Since the fall of ancient Israel there has been a very fluid definition of ownership. The area became a cross roads where Jews, Arabs, and Christians have taken turns trying to create their own notion of order in a land with enormous religious significance. One thing is certain, there never has been an autonomous Arab nation of Palestine, governed by Palestinians. Arabs in Palestine as well as Jews lived for many centuries under the revolving door of different rulers, from the Romans to the Caliphates to the Crusaders to the Ottoman Empire to British colonialism. Never in all those years was there an independent Arab nation of Palestine.
The present day Palestinians in Israel originated in many neighboring states along with present day Israel, and those neighboring states have shown zero interest in granting them any real estate from their respective countries.
In 1948 UN resolution 181 tried to set up an independent Arab state of Palestine alongside an independent Jewish state of Israel. The Israelis accepted that idea, but the Arabs rejected it and plunged the region into a civil war, which the Israelis won. The losing Arabs began a decades long program of violent insurgency. The Israelis have periodically grabbed territory for strategic reasons, but they have given most of it back when the threat subsided, and they have never overthrown and absorbed a neighboring country. They are not conquerors, they are survivors, acting in self defense. That is the history.
Bottom line: The Palestinian Arabs and the surrounding Arab nations could live in peace with Israel tomorrow if they would accept it's legitimacy as a nation and use peaceful means to resolve their disputes. But they will not.
The Israelis want to coexist. The Islamic nations and Palestinian Arabs want the Jews to leave, and would kill those who refuse. That makes it pretty clear to me which side to support. The Israelis have made plenty of mistakes over the years, but given the existential threats they face, I hardly blame them.
President Obama’s nuclear deal with the Iranians was incapable of keeping them from developing nuclear weapons from the very beginning. It lacked vital verification, allowed them to develop missiles, and simply kicked the can down the road in return for very little. It was sold under false pretenses, as the only alternative to military action. The Iranians got far more from the deal than they gave. The lifting of sanctions and billions in bribes supercharged the ability of the mullahs to stay in power and support anti-Israeli, anti-US activities. Most of those billions in bribe money went straight into the hands of terrorists and evil client states such as Syria. It was a bad deal, and the world will be better off without it.
No comments:
Post a Comment