Tuesday, March 3, 2015

Here’s a little preview of the nuke deal rollout argument from Susan Rice at AIPAC.

Rice stated, “We cannot let a totally unachievable ideal stand in the way of a good deal. I know that some of you will be urging Congress to insist that Iran forgo its domestic enrichment capacity entirely,” but before she had a chance to refute the argument, the audience broke out into wild cheers—by far the loudest applause that would come during her speech.
“But. But as desirable as that would be, it is neither realistic nor achievable. Even our closest international partners in the P5+1 do not support denying Iran the ability ever to pursue peaceful nuclear energy,” she said. “If that is our goal, our partners will abandon us, and undermine the very sanctions we have imposed so effectively together. Simply put, that is not a viable negotiating position,” Rice added, before a few staggered claps in the audience of thousands.
Only a minute later, Rice said, “I know some of you would argue we should impose sanctions and just walk away, but let’s remember,” but before the former UN Ambassador could finish her sentence, the crowd again erupted into applause.

To believe this, you have to believe that Iran wants and needs a peaceful nuclear energy program. You have to believe that Iran has spent all this time and energy and money secretly developing its nuclear capability for only peaceful purposes.

But if that really were the case, what is there to negotiate?

If Iran wants a peaceful nuclear program, then there’s no need for negotiations. If it doesn’t, then it was developing a nuclear program for military purposes and cannot be trusted.

Either way the negotiations are futile.

Susan Rice is arguing that destroying Iran’s nuclear program is an “unachievable ideal”. It’s not. It’s a viable strategy. Just not one this administration has any interest in pursuing. Instead it will provide a rubber stamp for Iran’s “peaceful” program.

That worked well in North Korea. It’s bound to work well in Iran.

But why would you not believe Susan Rice? I mean she was right about Benghazi assault being a movie review gone wrong. She must be right here too.

Filed Under: The Point

About Daniel Greenfield

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. He is completing a book on the international challenges America faces in the 21st century.