On a day when the Dow drops more than 500 points and the Shanghai exchange drops more than 8.5%, I should be expected to discuss the interrelation of world economic structures. Unfortunately, I am fixated on the continuing push by Obama to ram a perilous and poorly constructed agreement with a criminal regime in The Islamic Republic through the Congress unconstitutionally and against the will of the American people.
Last night, Harry Reid announced that he would support passage of the agreement, despite the revelation that one secret (are there more?) arrangement between the IAEA and the Islamic Republic (I think I'm going to begin calling Iran by the name it prefers) appears to permit the Republic to conduct its own inspections of Parchin (and other sites?). John Kerry claimed before Congress that he had not seen or read this secretive agreement. And these side agreements have not been provided to Congress despite the fact that the lunatic Corker bill required that all relevant documents be transmitted to Congress before a vote was taken.
In my view, Harry's support effectively kills any chance that the agreement will be rejected under the terms of the Corker bill. Even if it were to be rejected, it is inconceivable that a presidential veto would be overridden. Therefore, we must now face facts: the Islamic Republic will soon be an internationally accepted nuclear power; initially, experimenting with centrifuge technology, midterm, continuing its work on ballistic missile technology, longer term, extracting plutonium and developing methodologies for creating focused explosive techniques to create nuclear combustion.
How to project how this nuclear legitimacy will or will not alter the Republic's behavior? We can assume - early on - that the Islamic Republic and the radical element which controls much military and intelligence infrastructure - the IRGC - will renew its purchase of conventional arms with Russia and others. Antiaircraft missile batteries, halted temporarily by economic sanctions, are already rescheduled for delivery, even though the deal has not been approved in the Congress.
Even when the Republic was subject to UN and international weapons and economic sanctions, they worked in conjunction with North Korea on Syria's behalf to construct a nuclear reactor in the Syrian desert. If they are freed from sanctions and their nuclear experimentation is essentially "blessed" by the UN and the Security Council, how might we predict they will act? Will they abandon their support for Bashar Assad? Will they cut off funding to Hizballah which is supporting the Assad regime militarily and acting as a front line confrontation proxy with Israel in Lebanon?
It is pure fantasy to expect that the Islamic Republic's return to the international community of nations will somehow alter the fiber of a regime that has not moved since 1979. That is focused on the evils of America and Israel to divert attention from its internal failures. That embraces revolutionary dogma - like Mao, like Stalin, like Fidel - to justify suppression and repression of expression by its populace to consolidate its hold on power.
Barack Obama and John Kerry with their democrat allies are legitimizing the chronic concealment that has defined the Republic's nuclear program's essence. They will not receive a single republican vote in either House. Like whatever legacy might be left by Obamacare domestically, they will also forever be tied to the consequences of legitimizing the Islamic Republic's nuclear program.
Obama took his deal to the UN before Congress. The United States continues to pay a disproportionate share of the operating expenses of an organization that targets Israel for unbalanced humanitarian offenses, that seats totalitarian regimes on human rights councils, that is ineffectual in preventing ethnic cleansing, that has embraced and coddled the "non-aligned" movement for decades which was never non-aligned.
The IAEA is a bureau born and bred by the UN. It stands by its impartiality, but even former arms inspectors are surprised by the secretive, unusual nature of these "side" agreements. Given the Republic's penchant to evade, conceal and bury facilities, on what basis have they earned the right to conduct even cursory inspections without rigorous oversight? How do they have standing to demand that American and Candiam inspectors cannot be present during visits or that they can demand that the IAEA be barred from access to certain sites? If there weren't desperate American interest to reach a deal, there would be no deal under these circumstances largely driven by the Republic.
Obama and Kerry have worked with accommodating establishment republicans to circumvent the "advise and consent" provisions of the Constitution regarding treaties. Both parties cannot avoid culpability whatever the consequences of this agreement. Should the Republic become an ally in the fight against Isis; should they tamp down their bellicose rhetoric and action against Israel; should they squeeze Hizballah and others financially and materially; and, should their nuclear program be verified as having no military application, then Obama and Kerry will rightfully be hailed as visionaries and worthy of Nobel Peace Prizes.
Forgive my skepticism. Neither Obama and Kerry, the UN/IAEA, nor the Islamic Republic have track records worthy of such dreamy expectation.