Bolton calls it on Iran

The most refreshingly frank voice on American foreign policy today, former UN Ambassador John Bolton minces no words when it comes to his recommendations on Iran in this Op-ed in the Washington Post:

Iran's nuclear threat was never in doubt during its presidential campaign, but the post-election resistance raised the possibility of some sort of regime change. That prospect seems lost for the near future or for at least as long as it will take Iran to finalize a deliverable nuclear weapons capability.

Accordingly, with no other timely option, the already compelling logic for an Israeli strike is nearly inexorable. Israel is undoubtedly ratcheting forward its decision-making process. President Obama is almost certainly not.

He still wants "engagement" (a particularly evocative term now) with Iran's current regime. Last Thursday, the State Department confirmed that Secretary Hillary Clinton spoke to her Russian and Chinese counterparts about "getting Iran back to negotiating on some of these concerns that the international community has." This is precisely the view of Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, reflected in the Group of Eight communique the next day. Sen. John Kerry thinks the recent election unpleasantness in Tehran will delay negotiations for only a few weeks.

Obama administration sources have opined (anonymously) that Iran will be more eager to negotiate than it was before its election in order to find "acceptance" by the "international community."

Bolton correctly surmises that the mullahs could care less about "international acceptance." If they did, they wouldn't have initiated the crackdown in the first place.

As for Israel going after the Iranian nukes, Bolton seems convinced and indeed, Israel may eventually reach that conclusion. But it is equally possible that Israel will wait to see if the president can do anything with the negotiating angle. Bombing now would really put Israel on the spot with the Obama administration which could lead to unforeseen consequences with our already strained relationship.

If, however, Israel believes Iran will not negotiate or fail to negotiate in good faith, then they have a ready made excuse. But if the Obama administration feels they weren't given a chance to talk Iran out of their nuclear program. it would have very serious consequences for our relationship with Israel.

Read the rest of Bolton's piece for some brutal honesty that the Obama administration should hear, b
ut won't.

The most refreshingly frank voice on American foreign policy today, former UN Ambassador John Bolton minces no words when it comes to his recommendations on Iran in this Op-ed in the Washington Post:

Iran's nuclear threat was never in doubt during its presidential campaign, but the post-election resistance raised the possibility of some sort of regime change. That prospect seems lost for the near future or for at least as long as it will take Iran to finalize a deliverable nuclear weapons capability.

Accordingly, with no other timely option, the already compelling logic for an Israeli strike is nearly inexorable. Israel is undoubtedly ratcheting forward its decision-making process. President Obama is almost certainly not.

He still wants "engagement" (a particularly evocative term now) with Iran's current regime. Last Thursday, the State Department confirmed that Secretary Hillary Clinton spoke to her Russian and Chinese counterparts about "getting Iran back to negotiating on some of these concerns that the international community has." This is precisely the view of Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, reflected in the Group of Eight communique the next day. Sen. John Kerry thinks the recent election unpleasantness in Tehran will delay negotiations for only a few weeks.

Obama administration sources have opined (anonymously) that Iran will be more eager to negotiate than it was before its election in order to find "acceptance" by the "international community."

Bolton correctly surmises that the mullahs could care less about "international acceptance." If they did, they wouldn't have initiated the crackdown in the first place.

As for Israel going after the Iranian nukes, Bolton seems convinced and indeed, Israel may eventually reach that conclusion. But it is equally possible that Israel will wait to see if the president can do anything with the negotiating angle. Bombing now would really put Israel on the spot with the Obama administration which could lead to unforeseen consequences with our already strained relationship.

If, however, Israel believes Iran will not negotiate or fail to negotiate in good faith, then they have a ready made excuse. But if the Obama administration feels they weren't given a chance to talk Iran out of their nuclear program. it would have very serious consequences for our relationship with Israel.

Read the rest of Bolton's piece for some brutal honesty that the Obama administration should hear, b
ut won't.