Obama Rejects Containment of Iran, Again
After my interview with the President in March, and after his speech to AIPAC a few days later, many of his critics asserted that he was simply sucking-up to The Jews, trying to get through the November election, at which time he would call Ayatollah Khamenei and tell him, never mind. Well, here is what he is planning on saying to the United Nations (which is not exactly a Hadassah convention), later today. Granted, we are not on the far side of November 6 yet, but please tell me, how exactly does he take this back?
Make no mistake: a nuclear-armed Iran is not a challenge that can be contained. That is why a coalition of countries is holding the Iranian government accountable. And that is why the United States will do what we must to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.
In March, he said the following:
In addition to the profound threat that it poses to Israel, one of our strongest allies in the world; in addition to the outrageous language that has been directed toward Israel by the leaders of the Iranian government -- if Iran gets a nuclear weapon, this would run completely contrary to my policies of nonproliferation. The risks of an Iranian nuclear weapon falling into the hands of terrorist organizations are profound. It is almost certain that other players in the region would feel it necessary to get their own nuclear weapons. So now you have the prospect of a nuclear arms race in the most volatile region in the world, one that is rife with unstable governments and sectarian tensions. And it would also provide Iran the additional capability to sponsor and protect its proxies in carrying out terrorist attacks, because they are less fearful of retaliation.
Nothing he has done or said since then makes me think he has altered his analysis, and changed his position on the necessity of stopping Iran from going nuclear.