Posted: 23 Jul 2015 08:02 AM PDT
Last year Iran was selling gasoline for less than 50 cents a
gallon. This year a desperate regime hiked prices up to over a dollar.
Meanwhile, Iranians pay about a tenth of what Americans do for electricity.
Unlike
Japan, Iran does not need nuclear power. It is already sitting on a mountain
of gas and oil.
Iran blew between $100 billion to $500 billion on its nuclear program. The
Bushehr reactor alone cost somewhere in the neighborhood of $11 billion
making it one of the most expensive in the world.
This wasn’t done to cut power bills. Iran didn’t take its economy to the edge
for a peaceful nuclear program. It built the Fordow fortified underground
nuclear reactor that even Obama admitted was not part of a peaceful nuclear
program, it built the underground Natanz enrichment facility whose
construction at one point consumed all the cement in the country, because the
nuclear program mattered more than anything else as a fulfillment of the
Islamic Revolution’s purpose.
Iran did not do all this so that its citizens could pay 0.003 cents less for
a kilowatt hour of electricity.
It built its nuclear program on the words of the Ayatollah Khomeini, “Islam
makes it incumbent on all adult males, provided they are not disabled or
incapacitated, to prepare themselves for the conquest of [other] countries so
that the writ of Islam is obeyed in every country in the world.”
Iran’s constitution states that its military is an “ideological army” built
to fulfill “the ideological mission of jihad in Allah's way; that is,
extending the sovereignty of Allah’s law throughout the world.”
It quotes the Koranic verse urging Muslims to “strike terror into (the hearts
of) the enemies, of Allah”.
Article 3 of Iran’s Constitution calls for a foreign policy based on
“unsparing support” to terrorists around the world. Article 11, the ISIS
clause, demands the political unity of the Islamic world.
Iran is not just a country. It is the Islamic Revolution, the Shiite ISIS, a
perpetual revolution to destroy the non-Muslim world and unite the Muslim
world. Over half of Iran’s urban population lives below the poverty line and
its regime sacrificed 100,000 child soldiers as human shields in the
Iran-Iraq War.
Iran did not spend all that money just to build a peaceful civilian nuclear
program to benefit its people. And yet the nuclear deal depends on the myth
that its nuclear program is peaceful.
Obama insisted, “This deal is not contingent on Iran changing its behavior.”
But if Iran isn’t changing its behavior, if it isn’t changing its priorities
or its values, then there is no deal.
If Iran hasn’t changed its behavior, then the nuclear deal is just another
way for it to get the bomb.
If Iran were really serious about abandoning a drive for nuclear weapons, it
would have shut down its nuclear program. Not because America or Europe
demanded it, but because it made no economic sense. For a fraction of the
money it spent on its nuclear ambitions, it could have overhauled its
decaying electrical grid and actually cut costs. But this isn’t about
electricity, it’s about nuclear bombs.
The peaceful nuclear program is a hoax. The deal accepts the hoax. It assumes
that Iran wants a peaceful nuclear program. It even undertakes to improve and
protect Iran’s “peaceful” nuclear technology.
The reasoning behind the nuclear deal is false. It’s so blatantly false that
the falseness has been written into the deal. The agreement punts on the
military dimensions of Iran’s nuclear program and creates a complicated and
easily subverted mechanism for inspecting suspicious programs in Iranian
military sites.
It builds in so many loopholes and delays, separate agreements and
distractions, because it doesn’t really want to know. The inspections were
built to help Iran cheat and give Obama plausible deniability.
With or without the agreement, Iran is on the road to a nuclear bomb.
Sanctions closed some doors and opened others. The agreement opens some doors
and closes others. It’s a tactical difference that moves the crisis from one
stalemate to another. Nothing has been resolved. The underlying strategy is
Iran’s.
Iran
decided that the best way to conduct this stage of its nuclear weapons
program was by getting technical assistance and sanctions relief from the
West. This agreement doesn’t even pretend to resolve the problem of Iran’s
nuclear weapons. Instead its best case scenario assumes that years from now
Iran won’t want a nuclear bomb. So that’s why we’ll be helping Iran move
along the path to building one.
It’s like teaching a terrorist to use TNT for mining purposes if he promises
not to kill anyone.
But this agreement exists because the West refuses to come to terms with what
Islam is. Successful negotiations depend on understanding what the other side
wants. Celebratory media coverage talks about finding “common ground” with
Iran. But what common ground is there with a regime that believes that
America is the “Great Satan” and its number one enemy?
What common ground can there be with people who literally believe that you
are the devil?
When Iranian leaders chant, “Death to America”, we are told that they are
pandering to the hardliners. The possibility that they really believe it
can’t be discussed because then the nuclear deal falls apart.
For Europe, the nuclear agreement is about ending an unprofitable standoff
and doing business with Iran. For Obama, it’s about rewriting history by
befriending another enemy of the United States. But for Iran’s Supreme
Leader, it’s about pursuing a holy war against the enemies of his flavor of
Islam.
The Supreme Leader of Iran already made it clear that the war will continue
until America is destroyed. That may be the only common ground he has with
Obama. Both America and Iran are governed by fanatics who believe that
America is the source of all evil. Both believe that it needs to be
destroyed.
Carter made the Islamic Revolution possible. Obama is enabling its nuclear
revolution.
Today Tehran and Washington D.C. are united by a deep distrust of America,
distaste for the West and a violent hatred of Israel. This deal is the
product of that mutually incomprehensible unity. It is not meant to stop Iran
from getting a nuclear bomb. It is meant to stop America and Israel from
stopping it.
Both Obama and the Supreme Leader of Iran have a compelling vision of the
world as it should be and don’t care about the consequences because they are
convinced that the absolute good of their ideology makes a bad outcome
inconceivable.
"O Allah, for your satisfaction, we sacrificed the offspring of Islam
and the revolution," a despairing Ayatollah Khomeini wrote after the
disastrous Iran-Iraq War cost the lives of three-quarters of a million
Iranians. The letter quoted the need for "atomic weapons" and
evicting America from the Persian Gulf.
Four years earlier, its current Supreme Leader had told officials that
Khomeini had reactivated Iran’s nuclear program, vowing that it would prepare
“for the emergence of Imam Mehdi.”
The
Islamic Revolution’s nuclear program was never peaceful. It was a murderous
fanatic’s vision for destroying the enemies of his ideology, rooted in war,
restarted in a conflict in which he used children to detonate land mines, and
meant for mass murder on a terrible scale.
The nuclear agreement has holes big enough to drive trucks through, but its
biggest hole is the refusal of its supporters to acknowledge the history,
ideology and agenda of Iran’s murderous tyrants. Like so many previous
efforts at appeasement, the agreement assumes that Islam is a religion of
peace.
The ideology and history of Iran’s Islamic Revolution tells us that it is an
empire of blood.
The agreement asks us to choose between two possibilities. Either Iran has
spent a huge fortune and nearly gone to war to slightly lower its already low
electricity rates or it wants a nuclear bomb.
The deal assumes that Iran wants lower electricity rates. Iran’s constitution
tells us that it wants Jihad. And unlike Obama, Iran’s leaders can be trusted
to live up to their Constitution.
Daniel Greenfield is a New York City based writer and blogger
and a Shillman Journalism Fellow of the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment