Facing reality over Iran

 

I'm getting more and more fed up with politicians, commentators, journalists and so-called "experts" all saying that President Trump's decision to strike Iran was misguided, wrong-headed and stupid.  The same goes for all the European and other nations refusing to provide support, military or otherwise, for the joint US-Israeli campaign in that country.

The blunt fact of the matter is that for almost half a century, the West has wrung its hands, expressed dismay and shock, and uttered pious platitudes every time Iran did something evil.  Whether it was murdering tens of thousands of their own citizens, or exporting terrorism to many parts of the world, or bombing Israel, nothing Iran did elicited a suitably strong response from the West.  All they did was talk.  They did not act.  With every incident, they kicked the can further down the road, for future politicians and leaders to do something about it - but they never did.

President Trump and his leadership team recognized that the can could not be kicked any further.  The time had come to act, to stop Iran potentially wreaking havoc all over the world.  The key moment of decision probably came during negotiations in Switzerland in late February.

Iranian officials told their US counterparts during crunch talks last month that the Islamic Republic possessed enough enriched fuel to build 11 nuclear bombs, President Trump’s special envoy claimed Monday night.

“Both the Iranian negotiators said to us directly with, you know, no shame, that they controlled 460 kilograms of 60% [enriched uranium],” Steve Witkoff told Fox News host Sean Hannity, “and they’re aware that that could make 11 nuclear bombs, and that was the beginning of their negotiating stance.”

Witkoff and Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner engaged in three rounds of indirect talks beginning in Oman Feb. 6 and concluding in Geneva, Switzerland Feb. 26 in what turned out to be a last-ditch effort to prevent US military action against Iran.

“Jared and I opened up with the Iranian negotiators telling us they had the inalienable right to enrich all their nuclear fuel that they possessed. That’s how they opened up,” Witkoff recounted.

“We, of course, responded that the president feels we have the inalienable right to stop you dead in your tracks,” he continued.

“They then went on to say that beyond the inalienable right to enrich, that that was going to be their starting point. And Jared and I just sort of looked at ourselves flummoxed and said, ‘Well, we’re really in for it now.'”

Witkoff, 68, made worldwide headlines ahead of the Geneva talks when he claimed Iran was “probably a week away from having industrial-grade bomb-making material.”

The special envoy expanded on those remarks Monday: “I know this: They have 10,000, roughly, kilograms of fissionable material. That’s broken up into roughly 460 kilograms of 60% enriched uranium, another 1,000 kilograms of 20% enriched uranium …They manufacture their own centrifuges to enrich this material. So, there’s almost no stopping them. They have an endless supply of it.

“The 60% material ... can be brought to 90%, that’s weapons-grade, in roughly one week, maybe 10 days at the outside. The 20% can be brought to weapons-grade inside of three to four weeks.”

“They were proud of it,” Witkoff went on. “They were proud that they had evaded all sorts of oversight protocols to get to a place where they could deliver 11 nuclear bombs.”

Witkoff also claimed that he and Kushner, on behalf of the US, offered to provide Iran nuclear fuel for the next decade on the condition it was not used for any weapons program.

“They rejected that, which told us at that very moment that they had no — no notion of doing anything other than retaining enrichment for the purpose of weaponizing.”

With the US-Israeli war against Iran entering a fourth day, Witkoff described Tehran’s negotiating position as “silly,” but added: “They thought they could strong-arm us.”

There's more at the link.

Of course the Iranian leadership thought they could strong-arm President Trump!  They'd been doing it to Western nations, jointly and severally, for decades - why should this time be any different?  And so they presented the President with the one threat that he could not, dared not, leave unaddressed.  How do you kick the reality of nuclear weapons down the road?  You daren't . . . otherwise that reality might blow up in your face.

Think how easily Iran could smuggle a couple of nuclear warheads across our borders, perhaps concealed in container shipments from China, or carried by members of its diplomatic corps and/or terrorist groups that are already active in South America.  What would a US president do if he tried to rein in Iran in future, only to be told that unless he backed down, two or three US cities would be vaporized?  Can you imagine what a left-wing progressive President would do under those circumstances?  If you think Obama or Biden or another of their ilk would have stood up to that threat, I have this bridge in New York City I'd like to sell you.  Cash only, please, and in small bills.

No.  There are many reasons why the US and Israel might have refrained from acting as they did . . . but every one of them is trumped (you should pardon the expression) by the overriding threat of nuclear geopolitical terrorism.

As soon as Iran took that stance in Switzerland, it kicked the can right off the road and made its own destruction inevitable.  That's the bottom line.

I think that one day, the rest of the world might be very, very grateful to President Trump for taking the stance he did.

Peter