…Apparently it’s okay with President Obama, as long as it’s not triggered by Iran’s obtaining a nuke.
In his comments yesterday about the Iranian election, while he was feeling troubled about the whole issue, he also found the opportunity to slip in this gem:
“Now, with respect to the United States and our interactions with Iran, I’ve always believed that as odious as I consider some of President Ahmadinejad’s statements, as deep as the differences that exist between the United States and Iran on a range of core issues, that the use of tough, hard-headed diplomacy — diplomacy with no illusions about Iran and the nature of the differences between our two countries — is critical when it comes to pursuing a core set of our national security interests, specifically, making sure that we are not seeing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East triggered by Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon; making sure that Iran is not exporting terrorist activity.” [emphasis mine] [quote from the LA Times]
Geez, take a breath, will ya? But am I the only one who noticed that within PrezBO’s interminably loooong sentence about the odiousness of Ahmadinejad and hard-headed diplomacy, that he slid that little doozy in?
There are so many ways to read it:
“…making sure that we are not seeing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East triggered by Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon…”
He could mean that Iran must not obtain nukes. That’s what a simple hearing suggests. But it’s not quite what he said.
Conversely, he could mean that a Mid-East arms race is okay, as long as it’s not Iran getting nukes that triggers it.
Or he could mean that we’re going to allow Iran to obtain nukes, but it had better not set off a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.
Being the incredibly intelligent, savvy, diplomatic, eloquent speaker that he is, it seems unlikely that he would obfuscate unless he wanted to hide his real meaning behind a verbal quick-step. His previous stern utterances on the subject include:
- “It is not in their [Iran’s] interest to pursue a nuclear weapon and they should change course.” [Washington Times]
- When asked whether there was a moment in time when the U.S. would stop trying to negotiate with Iran over its nuclear program, Mr. Obama said he did not “want to set an artificial deadline.” [Washington Times]
- “Without going into specifics, what I do believe is that Iran has legitimate energy concerns, legitimate aspirations…” [AP]
If I were Ahmadinejad, I’d be quaking in my boots. Why, next thing you know, Obama might send a strongly-worded letter to the United Nations!
It seems clear to me that President Obama has resigned himself (and us, and the rest of the world) to the fact of a nuclear Iran. The question is, what are we going to do about it?