IS KERRY SUFFERING FROM STOCKHOLM SYNDROME?
Monday, May 04, 2015
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry tried hard, but he failed to convince Israeli leader Bibi Netanyahu.
In a rare interview with Israel's Channel 10 News, Kerry even distorted the facts by claiming:"Iranian deal is not a ten year deal, it will last forever!"
Like Washington's nuclear accord with North Korea? And Kerry accused Netanyahu and others of hysteria over the impending nuclear accord. Really? Did Kerry bother to read the joint critique of Henry Kissinger and George Shultz, who charged that Washington has given in to Tehran every step of the way, stating:"Iran has gradually turned the negotiations on its head - the West has felt the need to break every deadlock with a new proposal."
Moreover, the two former secretaries of state also warned the nuclear deal will open the door to nuclear proliferation in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia has already hinted that it will seek nuclear 'parity' with its arch enemy Iran. So, are Shultz and Kissinger, and a significant number of American and foreign experts also hysterical? Or is the International Atomic Energy Agency, which has repeatedly warned that Iran has refused repeatedly to respond to suspicions about its military nuclear development?
Is Kerry suffering from Stockholm syndrome?
Kerry himself has so much of his personal prestige wrapped up in the accord that he may be suffering from Stockholm syndrome.
The fact is that Mr. Kerry appeared to genuinely believe that he and President Barack Obama are forging a harebrained nuclear deal that will actually stick. This raises the question of whether Kerry himself has so much of his personal prestige wrapped up in the accord that he may be suffering from Stockholm syndrome. On the other hand, his boss Obama makes no bones about it. He is determined to disengage militarily, as far as possible, from the Middle East. What's more, senior advisor Ben Rhodes has referred to the Iranian nuclear deal as the President's 'Obama-care' of his second term.
Both Obama and Kerry have put on foreign policy blinders that permit them to ignore Iran's most recent acts of aggression in the Middle East. Amazingly, since the Lausanne understandings less than one month ago, Iran has thrown caution to the wind by instigating a proxy take-over of most of Yemen. It followed up by dispatching Iranian warships carrying a cargo of weapons to their Houthi allies in Yemen that had to be sent back by the U.S. aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt.
Obama would do well to remember the advice of President Teddy - 'Talk softly but carry a big stick'. In the Iranian deal, Obama has opted for 'talking softly and carrying a big check!' - the lifting of economic sanctions on Iran. What's more, vessels of Iran's Revolutionary Guards have confiscated at sea a commercial vessel flying the flag of the Marshall Islands. In addition, Iranian naval ships have harassed a U.S. flagged cargo vessel. So the U.S. has now been forced to send U.S. Navy escorts to accompany American commercial vessels in the strategic Strait of Hormuz.
Does Secretary Kerry actually believe he can persuade the Ayatollahs and the Revolutionary Guards back in Tehran to capitulate on their drive for acquiring A-Bombs?
Be that as it may, the Obama administration will likely succeed in pushing through a nuclear accord with Tehran. As Secretary Kerry once claimed:"We're not stupid, and I don't think we're foolish."
This most certainly applies to the Iranians. Although Kerry's negotiating partner, Iran's suave Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, has a totally different take on Lausanne, he can be expected to hold out for an accord that Obama wants desperately. Does Secretary Kerry actually believe he can persuade the Ayatollahs and the Revolutionary Guards back in Tehran to capitulate on their drive for acquiring A-Bombs? The truth is that if the nuclear deal is 'Obama-care' for the U.S. President, then the nuclear weapons program is the center-piece for the fanatic regime that rules Iran.
Back To The Top