Now that people as primitive and backward as the legislators
who populate the American Congress are beginning to understand that a
non-Jewish point of view may be as valid as a Jewish point of view, we can try
to talk to them like we talk to adults. Given that the Jews are neither gods
nor saints, and given that the rest of humanity is not made of evil beings
determined to exterminate the Jews, we may offer the view that the issue of
nuclear weapons in the Middle East ought to be
handled on the basis of equal treatment for everyone.
This brings us to Dennis Ross and David Makovsky who, once
again, have rehashed the same old arguments about the necessity to convince the
Iranians that all options are on the table. They did not use these exact words
this time, but used milder ones while signaling a mellower stance with regard
to the demands they make on Iran .
They now say that Iran
can refine some uranium, and can keep some of it. They put it this way: “This
new approach would involve defining an acceptable civil nuclear capability for Iran . It could
mean accepting limited enrichment … Practically, there would need to be limits
on the number and type of centrifuges, maximum level of enrichment and amount
of enriched uranium that could remain in Iran .”
Ross and Makovsky presented their views in an article they
wrote jointly. It came under the title: “Iran 's
nuclear games demand a tougher U.S.
approach” and was published on May 27, 2013 in the Washington Post. The first
few paragraphs establish that their concern matches that of Israel – it is their obsession with Iran . The early
paragraphs also establish that the two authors want America
to drop every concern it may have in the world, and concentrate on doing what
is good for Israel .
Here is how they put it: “Perhaps because the U.S.
hesitancy on Syria , or our
withdrawal from Iraq , or our
transition out of Afghanistan ,
or talk of the U.S. 'pivot'
to Asia , Iranian leaders seem not to believe
that we will use force if diplomatic efforts fail.”
To reinforce that view, they warn: “The Iranian misreading
of [our] determination could put us on a fast track to conflict.” To avoid this
outcome, they demand that “the United States
establish greater clarity about what we can and cannot live with regarding Iran 's nuclear
program.” And this is the point where you get the sense that even if we can
talk with the American legislators as we do with adults, Ross, Makovsky and the
Jewish lobby they represent will not allow them to grow up. The clue that
something has gone wrong is signaled by their use of the word “clarity” for,
this is the word they use to prepare for the muddled ambiguity of what they are
brewing.
In fact, it was their demand for moral clarity on the part
of the Americans that got the Americans involved in almost every deadly
conflict since the Second Great War. And while they demand that America expresses with clarity what they can and
cannot live with, they choose to remain ambiguous about Israel 's
nuclear program. Not only that; they have even managed – in the name of clarity
– to make America torpedo every conference convened to discuss a nuclear free
Middle East, the moment that the neighbors asked a question about Israel's own
nuclear program – if it has one.
Consequently, if as it seemed for a while, America's
legislators and other officials have matured enough to stop behaving like
backward and primitive, and if it is possible to talk to them like we talk to
adults, the message to convey to them is that the nuclear question in the
Middle East can only be dealt with comprehensively, with everyone being treated
the same.
That is, if Israel
will not come clean with regard to its nuclear program, America will
tell the world what it knows about that program. In the meantime, America should force Israel
to come clean by taking the advice of Ross and Makovsky who said the following
about Iran :
“Coercive diplomacy succeeds when threats are believed and the game-playing and
manipulation stop.”
To this end, America
should offer Israel a
credible endgame proposal that would convince it that time is running out – and
that America is setting the
stage for cutting off all forms of aid till Israel complies. America should give Israel a clear diplomatic way out –
and the Israelis should understand the consequences if they don't take it.
When this is done, Iran will gladly do what is asked
of it to show its good intention. In the meantime, America
would do well to encourage Iran
to continue full speed ahead with its program so that Israel be
forced to come to its sense.
Coercive diplomacy succeeds, say Ross and Makovsky – put it
to work, America