Despite PM’s pleas, top House Dems open to testing Iran’s new leader
Despite PM’s pleas, top House Dems open to testing Iran’s new leader | The Times of Israel.
( Et tu Brute? DAMN you to the hell you deserve ! – JW )
Netanyahu believes time has run out on diplomacy with Tehran; some of Israel’s closest US friends aren’t quite so sure
But in ways both subtle and direct, some of those friends — among them some of Israel’s closest allies in Washington — are saying that maybe Hasan Rouhani is worth hearing out.
That was the message delivered this week by Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), the second-ranking Democrat in the U.S. House of Representatives, while leading a tour of Israel for 36 fellow House Democrats.
“We have a new [Iranian] president,” Hoyer told JTA from Israel, where the stalwart supporter of the Jewish state was on his 13th tour as a congressman. “It makes sense for the [Obama] administration to test the sincerity, willingness and ability of the new president to accomplish the objective of assuring the West and Israel and the U.N. what the Iranians are not doing, and will reverse what they already have done, toward a nuclear capability.”
The divergence represents a rare public gap on a crucial security issue between pro-Israel lawmakers and Netanyahu, who in a succession of meetings this month with congressional delegations to Israel has lobbied hard to persuade American leaders to ignore Rouhani’s overtures.
“I know that some place their hopes on Iran’s new president,” Netanyahu told a delegation on Wednesday led by Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.). “He knows how to exploit this, and yesterday he called for more talks.
“Of course he wants more talks. He wants to talk and talk and talk. And while everybody is busy talking to him, he’ll be busy enriching uranium. The centrifuges will keep on spinning.”
In his first news conference as president, Rouhani said Iran wants to improve its relations with the United States and intimated he was prepared to increase transparency of his country’s nuclear program, which he insists is peaceful but which Western intelligence agencies believe is aimed at producing weapons.
Iran “will defend its people’s rights and at the same time will remove the concerns of the other party,” Rouhani said. “If we feel that the Americans are truly serious about resolving problems, Iran is serious in its will to resolve problems and dismiss worries.”
Netanyahu dismisses such talk as a sham, but the Democratic leadership in the House doesn’t appear to agree.
Iran’s president Hasan Rouhani at a press conference, in Tehran on June 17, 2013. (photo credit: Ebrahim Noroozi/AP)
An official in the office of Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the minority leader, said her thinking on Iran was consistent with Hoyer’s, pointing to a floor speech July 31 when she joined the overwhelming majority of the House in voting to stiffen sanctions against Iran.
Though she backed new sanctions against the Islamic Republic, Pelosi also welcomed Rouhani’s openness to talks aimed at ending the nuclear standoff.
“Let’s do it diplomatically. Let’s do it with economic sanctions. Let’s do it by encouraging dialogue, engagement and the rest,” she said. “But let’s do that engagement from strength.”
Like Pelosi, Hoyer backs both increased economic pressure and an openness to talks — a position he said is not inconsistent with Netanyahu’s tough line. Nor is a letter signed by 131 House members urging President Obama to test Rouhani’s offer, Hoyer said.
“The letter and the actions of the House of Representatives are consistent with what the prime minister has said,” said Hoyer, who did not sign the letter. “Words are cheap, talk is cheap and let’s see what the walk is.”
For Netanyahu and some in the pro-Israel community like Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N .Y.), the clock has run out on that approach.
In July, Netanyahu told the news program “Face the Nation” that Iran was “within a few weeks” of crossing the red line — a boundary the prime minister defined as possessing 250 kilograms of 20 percent enriched uranium — and vowed it would not be permitted to do so.
“If this were three years ago, I would have said, we have a couple of months to lose, OK,” said Engel, the senior Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. “Now, while Iran is playing out the clock spinning centrifuges, pretending Rouhani is a moderate and stepping back, thinking we might be pleasantly surprised — we would not be pleasantly surprised. We would be three months closer to Iran having a nuclear weapon.”
Eric Cantor (Photo credit: CC BY/Gage Skidmore via Flickr.com)
Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) in his July 31 floor speech backing the intensified sanctions also suggested there was no point in waiting out Rouhani.
“Considering that Iran continues to flagrantly violate numerous U.N. Security Council resolutions that call for the suspension of its nuclear enrichment program while denying inspectors access to suspected nuclear sites, it is clear that Iran has negotiated again and again in bad faith,” he said.
“America’s policies must be based on facts and not some hope about a new government in Iran that will somehow change the nature of the clerical regime in Tehran. We must respond to Iran’s policies and behavior, not to its rhetoric.”
Nevertheless, the letter urging Obama to test Rouhani — spearheaded by Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.) and Rep. David Price (D-N.C.) — appears to have had an impact. Its signatories include 18 Republicans, most of them from the party’s mainstream. Dent is on three subcommittees of the Appropriations Committee. Also included were pro-Israel stalwarts Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), Alcee Hastings (D-Fla.) and Michael Grimm (R-N.Y.).
The following week, J Street and Americans for Peace Now urged senators to join a similar letter to Obama initiated by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.). The letter has yet to be sent — a sign that Feinstein may be having a hard time finding signatories.
A separate and tougher letter to Obama backed by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and initiated by Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, garnered 76 signers. The Menendez letter, sent Aug. 2, emphasized intensified sanctions and urged that Iran be threatened with military engagement.
But in a sign of how the “test Rouhani” message is gaining traction, the AIPAC-backed letter notes Rouhani’s offer to engage and counsels “a sincere demonstration of openness to negotiations.”
Obama appears to have embraced the message, although in carefully restrained tones. After Rouhani’s inauguration, the White House issued a statement praising Iranian voters, not Rouhani. It was issued by the White House, not by Obama.
“The inauguration of President Rouhani presents an opportunity for Iran to act quickly to resolve the international community’s deep concerns over Iran’s nuclear program,” the statement said. “Should this new government choose to engage substantively and seriously to meet its international obligations and find a peaceful solution to this issue, it will find a willing partner in the United States.”
Explore posts in the same categories: Uncategorized
WarSclerotic 
August 16, 2013 at 6:59 PM
When will American politicians be held accountable for their ignorance? How much proof is it needed for them to stop and listen to what Rouhani is actually saying?
Video: Rouhani boasting how he duped the European nuclear negotiators.
http://www.madisdead.blogspot.co.il/2013/08/video-rouhani-boasting-how-he-duped.html
When will American politicians take note of what Bernad Lewis says on Iran? Do US Congressmen really believe they know more about Iran than the kneading scholar of Islam in the West?
Bernard Lewis:
In this context, the deterrent that worked so well during the Cold War, namely M.A.D. (Mutual Assured Destruction) , would have no meaning. At the End of Time, there will be general destruction anyway. What will matter is the final destination of the dead– hell for the infidels, and the delights of heaven for the believers. For people with this mindset, M.A.D. is not a constraint; it is an inducement…
Why are Bernard Lewis’s views on MAD ignored?
http://www.madisdead.blogspot.co.il/2012/05/why-are-bernard-lewiss-views-on-mad.html
August 16, 2013 at 8:17 PM
“They would not listen, they’re not listening still.
Perhaps they never will. ”
– Don Mclean
August 16, 2013 at 7:12 PM
Fogetaboutit! The United States has absolutely no desire to take military action against Iran. Our representatives, Jewish or not, merely reflect the sentiment of the majority of people. So they found an excuse in Rouhani and they fully understand he is full of crap and only is there to delay. Listen people of Israel, the Democrats, Jewish and non Jewish, will sell you out in a heartbeat. Most Democrats ONLY care about their own skin. There is no cause, idea or country that they will risk their life for.
August 16, 2013 at 8:02 PM
Bingo!
August 16, 2013 at 8:13 PM
Bless you, Norm…
August 17, 2013 at 4:49 PM
If we do not know the belief system that motivates the Iranian Twelvers, we cannot understand how serious the situation is. I wonder if the US congressmen would react differently if they understood that the Iranian messianic fanatics are set to destroy not only Israel, but 2/3 of humanity, including the US. Probably not – they are unteachable. That is why Churchill remarks from 1935 are as valid today:
“When the situation was manageable it was neglected, and now that it is thoroughly out of hand, we apply the remedies which then might have effected a cure. There is nothing new in the story. It is as old as the Sibylline books. It falls into that long dismal catalogue of the fruitlessness of experience and the confirmed unteachability of mankind. Want of foresight, unwillingness to act when action would be simple and effective, lack of clear thinking, confusion of counsel until the emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong – these are the features which constitute the endless repetition of history.”
August 17, 2013 at 5:01 PM
Amen brother! Amen.
August 16, 2013 at 8:21 PM
The Muslim Brotherhood are like the water: when a weak point is identified, there the water will go. So, the actual crisis in Egypt pointed out the weakest point we could imagine: the American Administration and Obama, of course. And there the Brotherhood will go. In our opinion, in the coming weeks, may be days, we shall see in increase in the activity of the Muslim Brothers of the USA and from there, the sky will be the limit. Obama will get the bitter taste of their cooking in his own kitchen, in his own home, America. He promised to them certain things even before the first elections, they helped him but Obama didn’t delivered, from their point of view. He knows it and they know it. And now, they are angry on him, too. America will soon see ”angry marches” of the Brotherhood on its very streets. ” The Brothers” are upset for many of them got killed in Egypt . Somebody will have to pay this bill. They think that Obama should.
August 16, 2013 at 8:27 PM
I wouldn’t be too sure the Mo Bro will get very far in the USA. A lot of folks here are fed up with their BS. Like water, they could end up in the sewer.
August 16, 2013 at 8:28 PM
Anyone notice “Muslim Brotherhood” makes a great oxymoron?
August 16, 2013 at 8:43 PM
They also make this : MB of USA = MABUS.
August 16, 2013 at 10:17 PM
LUIS SAYS = SAUL IS Y’S
August 16, 2013 at 10:35 PM
Y’S ?!
August 16, 2013 at 10:45 PM
Always in your face: Our muslim ‘friends’ never miss an opporunity to offend: AMPAC plans a “million muslim march” to DC on 9/11.
http://ampacus.webs.com/apps/blog/categories/show/1530754-million-muslim-march-to-white-house-on-9-11-13
August 16, 2013 at 11:43 PM
This article / link / entry is strengthening what we previously have asserted : the final bill will be served to Obama, for the payment day, by his former supporters, The Brotherhood.
August 16, 2013 at 11:56 PM
As it was so it is.
They are not supporting him.
He supports them.
August 17, 2013 at 12:06 AM
He is afraid of them. He got them all around the country. The MB of USA is a very powerful and disciplined organization. He needed them for the elections, but that soup opera is finished. He has disappointed them, from their point of view. In their opinion, he isn’t tough enough. He was not tough in Syria – he was too slow and inefficient – and now in Egypt he didn’t gave the order to USAF to attack Sisi forces, as the Brotherhood dreamt of. So now, they will turn against Obama, openly. In his home, America.
August 17, 2013 at 7:09 PM
Enter the Minutemen, US citizenry is armed to the teeth!
August 16, 2013 at 8:46 PM
If Netanyahu had any second thoughts that the US might be of any use to him on Iran, he only needs to look at how the president has dealt with Egypt.
At every turn he supports the terrorists. I feel ashamed for my country right now.
August 16, 2013 at 9:37 PM
Netanyahu is an old political fox, he knew from the start that Obama will n e v e r back up Israel in case of a strike against Iran. This is the real reason why Netanyahu has delayed it so much: he knows that in the aftermath that will come, Obama will show him the third finger. Its a fact.
August 16, 2013 at 10:37 PM
The cards are reshuffled again. With implications for Syria.
The Atlantic: The Muslim Brotherhood’s Fall Lands Turkey an Unexpected Ally: Kurds
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/08/the-muslim-brotherhoods-fall-lands-turkey-an-unexpected-ally-kurds/278775/
August 16, 2013 at 10:51 PM
And now the joke of the day:
The Washington Post: Taliban issues statement non-ironically condemning violence in Egypt
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/08/16/taliban-issues-statement-non-ironically-condemning-violence-in-egypt/?wprss=rss_world&clsrd
August 16, 2013 at 11:47 PM
Here is an even better one.
Ya Libnan: Hezbollah chief accuses Islamist extremist of bombings
http://www.yalibnan.com/2013/08/16/hezbollah-chief-accuses-islamist-extremist-of-bombings/
Brace yourselves. Here comes the kicker.
Nasrallah: “If the battle against Takfiris required this, I will personally go fight in Syria …”
Bwahaha.
August 17, 2013 at 12:10 AM
” Looking For Comedy In The Muslim World ” movie. That was only a good and old Shiite spirit of humor. Like in that movie.
August 16, 2013 at 11:29 PM
The only way Rouhani could prove that he is serious is a temporary halt of all Uranium enrichment for say 3 months.
That would give an extra time for negotiations.
But that will not happen.
What is there to test? Iran is playing the old game. Talking while enriching. As long as the talking goes on it’s good for them.
But the US and Europe fall for this everytime not because they are stupid but because they want to be fooled. Contrary to all the bullshit we hear from them they think they can live with a nuclear Iran.
The model they follow is Syria.
1. Boldly declare a red line.
2. Oops, the red line is crossed.
3. We’re not shure that the red line has been crossed.
4. Anyway there is nothing we can do about it.
5. Let’s talk.
6. Nothing happens. Too bad.
7. The mess is spreading.
August 17, 2013 at 5:53 AM
The only way to settle differences is to talk to each other. Israel never understood this concept and continues to try to dictate its terms.
August 17, 2013 at 10:59 AM
As if talking, negotiating with psychopaths was easy and fruitful !
August 17, 2013 at 3:22 PM
Iran of the ayatollahs will never talk with Israel. If such an idea should ever arise from any rational leader there, Israel will take this opportunity with its two hands.