‘Winds of Munich’ blowing in the West
Israel Hayom | ‘Winds of Munich’ blowing in the West.
Dan Margalit
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will speak at the U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday. Two speakers ahead of him the representative from North Korea — the country that has trampled all over its pledge to stop producing nuclear weapons — will take the podium.
By the time Netanyahu addresses the U.N., he will have spoken with U.S. President Barack Obama. It is likely that his conversation with Obama will not be an easy one; that he will suggest that the American president see past Iranian President Hasan Rouhani’s good English and look for his actions instead, and that he will ask him to remember how deals with terror states, the likes of which are represented by the speaker that precedes him at the U.N., usually turn out.
The fact that Israel is not a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty is secondary to the fact that Iran, Syria, Iraq and Libya, which have signed it, have breached it. Not only will Obama struggle to reach a deal with the obstinate Iranians, he will soon learn that their signature it set in ice.
The U.S. is not pushing to balance the Israel-Iranian equation by demanding that Israel subject the Dimona reactor to international supervision. Others do, including Israeli Jews. But Obama’s speech at the U.N. linked the Iranian nuclear threat and the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, whose very existence is encountering growing criticism from within Netanyahu’s own coalition.
U.S. Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro explained to Channel 1’s Ayala Hasson that Obama had stressed the importance of both issues without linking one with the other, but the connection was clear and it does not seem like Netanyahu would be able to sever it. All he can do is try to position the Iranian nuclear threat as the top priority among the region’s other volatile issues.
The assumption that the Iranian threat cannot be resolved because the negotiations with the Palestinians are treading quicksand is not true — quite the opposite. When the Iranian issue is resolved it would be easier to reach an understanding regarding the local conflict. Reality, however, has created a climate in which it would be hard for Netanyahu to present Obama with a concrete plan of action.
An idea was raised recently saying that Netanyahu should push for Obama to stipulate that any dialogue with Iran must involve a suspension of all centrifuge operation for the duration of the talks. The problem is that Israel had rejected a similar suggestion regarding a temporary moratorium on settlement expansion in Judea and Samaria for the duration of its negotiations with the Palestinian Authority. Netanyahu will therefore have to offer Obama a different stipulation to present to the Iranians.
It is doubtful, however, if the weary Western democracies are willing to lift a finger at this point. The “Winds of Munich” — as U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry called it regarding the Syrian issue — are blowing across the West, which seeks to embrace Rouhani. Obama’s phone conversation with him was made to look like an Iranian gesture. When the appease-at-all-cost approach dominates international diplomacy, no one wants to listen to serious arguments warning against the trap being set by the nations making up the axis of evil.
It is true that Netanyahu would have been wiser to instruct the Israeli delegation to the U.N. to remain in their seats during Rouhani’s speech — a gesture of sorts to his allaying (and more deceitful) rhetoric — but that was a matter of decorum. The fact is that the danger has not diminished and Netanyahu’s concerns and warnings are valid.
WarSclerotic 
September 29, 2013 at 3:24 PM
At this point Netanyahu’s speech will be met with big yawns all the way around.
“Out, out, brief candle! Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more: it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.” Macbeth Quote (Act V, Scene V).
September 29, 2013 at 3:57 PM
Why are you so sure?
Does nobody else but Israel worry about Iran getting a nuclear weapon?
The Arab press is fully with Israel’s position. I think it’s likely that Canada and Australia will follow suit.
Obummer has to know that if he lets the Iranians con him, his “legacy” will be the worst that any US President has ever had.
While it’s certainly frightening, given the supposed “euphoria” being reported by the leftist media, I think it’s premature to assume that the truths Netanyahu will speak to Obama and the UN will fall on completely deaf ears.
September 29, 2013 at 4:30 PM
JW, I truly hope you’re right, but I think the world at this point is tired of the whole affair and would rather deceive itself and move on to other things. I also hope Netanyahu unleashes the IDF and take down the Mullahs but I no longer think he will. The situation has evolved beyond him.
September 29, 2013 at 4:35 PM
John…
Are you saying Netanyahu will give up and let Iran get nuclear weapons?
September 29, 2013 at 4:43 PM
JW it’s a trade off at this point, War for sure now, or perhapes war latter. You’re knee deep in, do you think/predicte Netanyahu will unleash the dogs of war?
September 29, 2013 at 4:56 PM
I’ve been doing this site for 4 years. If I’ve learned anything it’s NOT to predict when you don’t have access to all the info.
I know that Netanyahu knows a lot that we don’t. What he knows will determine how he acts.
The one prediction I WILL make… Israel will not allow Iran to get the bomb.
One way or another, they will be stopped.
IT IS WRITTEN !
September 29, 2013 at 5:01 PM
:0) from your lips to Gods ears…..
September 29, 2013 at 3:54 PM
For those predicting the demise of America via drowning in debt or what ever. Think again!
The United States is soon to be awash in oil and natural gas, positively brimming with the stuff whose scarcity and unreliability of supply has plagued us since the end of World War II. It is a remarkable, stunning turn of events — largely unforeseen just a few years ago yet now an imminent although still hard-to-believe reality. And the implications of this new reality will be dramatic too — almost all of them positive although not without some risks. Remember when the United States once trembled at the power of OPEC? In a short while, we may be running the thing.
Last month the well-respected International Energy Agency declared, “A new global energy landscape is emerging . . . redrawn by the resurgence in oil and gas production in the United States.” Within eight years, the America is expected to be the planet’s largest producer of oil. By 2030, we’ll be producing more than we need — exporting, not importing. The reason is technology. Techniques such as hydraulic fracturing have been invented and improved so that they can now economically unlock the vast stores of oil and natural gas across the middle of the country. The flyover states may finally start getting some respect.
It’s uncomfortable to admit this, but Sarah Palin had a point: The key to American energy independence is “drill, baby, drill” — or perhaps more correctly, “frack, baby, frack.”
Don’t count on this abundance making for cheaper gasoline, however. Oil is a global commodity, and, unless the United States decided to subsidize its price, it will still sell to the highest bidder. Nevertheless, the fears of supply disruptions and embargoes — remember the gas lines of 1973? — will largely disappear. Should some country decide to block the Strait of Hormuz, it’ll be other nations, not the United States, feeling the pain. (US law currently prohibits us from exporting oil. Even though it likely will be changed, we’ll still make sure our domestic needs are met first before shipping overseas.)
On the other hand, these newfound supplies may get us a cheaper military budget. Why is the United States so deeply involved in the Middle East but not in, say, Africa? Oil. For at least the last 60 years, its constant supply has been a paramount worry: without energy, the economy collapses. But that policy, while necessary, cost us blood, treasure, and integrity. Too often, we sacrificed our ideals to support a local strongman who could keep pipelines safe. And the wars, both far afield as well as attacks on our soil, have been a burden.
What happens when we no longer need Middle East oil? Foreign policy changes. Conflict is reduced, and our goals can, one hopes, become principled — less tarnished by economic exigencies, more focused on human rights.
There will be dramatic changes at home too. The states with oil reserves will see a huge bump in their economies (already shale-rich North Dakota has the lowest unemployment rate in the country). The entire nation’s economy will benefit too. With energy supplies and prices abundant and stable, business will thrive.
There are risks, two of which are obvious. Fracking can contaminate underground water supplies (and uses lots of water to boot). That’s an issue of smart regulation, however. We already take huge risks with offshore drilling — BP oil, for example. Fracking’s potential impact is arguably less risky and also more manageable.
The other has to do with global climate change. The scarcity of oil (“peak oil” — the theory that supplies are about to diminish — is now, at least for this century, largely kaput) had the beneficial effect of driving us toward conservation and cleaner energy. With a glut of petrochemicals, will that push stop, causing greenhouse gas emissions to worsen? Possibly but not necessarily. The natural gas being extracted by fracking is actually cleaner than oil. Then too, every barrel of oil saved by conservation or alternative energy is a barrel sold overseas — meaning there’s an economic incentive for using renewables.
Those risks notwithstanding, our new world of energy should be a cause of great optimism. Many fear our time is over; the Great American Century finished. The renaissance of domestic oil and gas are of such magnitude, though, it may be another Great American Century is about to begin.
September 29, 2013 at 4:13 PM
The internet has hard wired the world. Never before has the human race been so connected. The implications of this reality are still only murky future view. The world has been googled and American technology will rule the waves.