Everybody has their favorite “rules to live by.” Most are instilled in us by our parents or authority figures we come to admire. My experience falls squarely within this paradigm. For example, my parents taught me to never indulge bullies. This species of reprobate is by nature insatiable: It will always return to collect more of your goodies where there is no penalty for doing so. Similarly, my admiration for Winston Churchill has been focused on his unwavering determination to never give in to bully-bad guys—even where such belligerence was inconvenient (or worse) for his career ambitions.
These life lessons are especially relevant in geo-politics circa 2016. Just take a look at Mr. Obama’s foreign policy initiatives – that collection of high sounding, feckless policy ploys that has led to a far more dangerous world than many of us could have imagined eight years ago. And nowhere is the failure to follow the “do not indulge bullies” moral more obvious than the infamous Iranian nuclear deal.
Published news reports over the past two years reveal the U.S. either caving to Iranian interpretations of the agreement or simply adding gratuitous sweeteners to placate Tehran. These gifts include the now permissible non-disclosure of past nuclear related scientific research, the jettisoning of “anywhere, anytime” inspections (thereby allowing the International Atomic Energy Agency to cut its own deals regarding self-inspection), a secretly negotiated side agreement to lift sanctions on Iranian state banks involved in funding its ballistic missile program, the secret air lifting of $400 million in cash (representing an initial installment of a $1.7 billion settlement) at the very moment four American prisoners were released from Iranian captivity, new guidelines to facilitate dollar transactions with Iranian businesses, and a repudiation of “snapback sanctions” should the regime be caught violating one or more of its treaty obligations.
We now know the domestic marketing of the “historic” deal was equally dubious. Recall that Ben Rhodes, Mr. Obama’s alter ego, was quite willing to brag (at least until a furor over his egotistical remarks ensued) as to why it was necessary to manipulate a gullible media in order to sell the controversial deal. Also recall that the foregoing givebacks, freebies and newly coined interpretations are at odds with numerous Obama/Kerry promises made to the American public over the past four years.
All of which begs the question of what the U.S. received in return for all of the gratuities extended to the world’s leading sponsor of terror. The answer is a growing litany of provocative misdeeds – including but not limited to dangerous near miss fly-bys by Iranian fighters, the detention of eleven U.S. Navy sailors by the Iranian Navy, Hezbollah’s continuing murderous rampage in Syria, and the seemingly endless pronouncements of “Death to America” and “Death to Israel” led by Supreme Leader Khamenei – our alleged “partner” in nuclear peace.
The U.S. response to the foregoing has been sustained forbearance. And no close observer of Barack Obama can fain surprise at America’s weak-kneed response to Iran’s continuing provocations. You see, the mullahs fully understand Mr. Obama was wholly invested in this “historic” deal, notwithstanding considerable American embarrassment and continuing negative bipartisan reviews. As a result, Iran stretches, cheats, and acts out in miscreant ways because it can, without consequences.
But the U.S. election is a game changer. President-elect Trump has repeatedly stated that a high priority will be to “dismantle the disastrous deal with Iran.” Yet it is far more likely that the new American president will seek to strengthen-stiffen-revisit the most problematic provisions rather than jettison the entire deal.
The primary rationale here is about keeping peace in the (allied) neighborhood. Recall our Sunni allies are more interested in a slow go, inspection intensive road than having to worry about a rogue neighbor fully (re-)engaged in the (destabilizing) bomb building business. The “go slow” option also has the advantage of taking the bomb building pressure off the Saudis (and others similarly situated) – a strategic
and
economic relief to governments urgently engaged in the difficult task of economic modernization.
It was not so long ago that the Iranian economy was running on empty. Tough American sanctions and growing domestic discontent had the despotic regime on the ropes. Here, the world could get excited about the unexpected onset of a nascent democracy moment – an “Iranian spring.” But the appeaser at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue would have none of it. He wanted a foreign policy legacy deal – and he knew how to get it. Now, the Trump Administration must deal with an empowered terror regime accustomed to getting its way despite repeatedly acting out in aggressive ways.
The moral in all this is indeed familiar. Mom and Dad and ol’ Winston got it right. In fact, Mr. Churchill said it best: “An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.”
Here’s hoping a new American president will secure a few pounds of flesh before further feeding.
Gov. Robert Ehrlich is a Washington Examiner columnist, partner at King & Spalding and author of three books, including the recently released Turning Point. He was governor of Maryland from 2003 – 2007.
