JINSA CEO Makovsky in Washington Post on Iran Talks Extension
Walker on Iran
By Jennifer Rubin
While it was a source of concern early on, the strongest part of Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s message may be foreign policy. In a tough piece on Iran he appears direct, informed and steely-eyed. He writes: “The truth is these talks were doomed from the start by the administration’s pattern of retreat. As the Iranians hang tough, insisting on their core demands, the president has steadily abandoned commitments he made to the American people and our allies.” He continues:
Walker on Iran
By Jennifer Rubin
While it was a source of concern early on, the strongest part of Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s message may be foreign policy. In a tough piece on Iran he appears direct, informed and steely-eyed. He writes: “The truth is these talks were doomed from the start by the administration’s pattern of retreat. As the Iranians hang tough, insisting on their core demands, the president has steadily abandoned commitments he made to the American people and our allies.” He continues:
In the most recent example, Secretary of State John Kerry backed off from the longstanding demand of the United States and its partners that Iran come clean about the possible military dimensions of its program before any deal is signed. If the administration continues on this course, we will never know how much progress the Iranians made toward building a nuclear weapon in the past, leaving us in the dark about how quickly they could make a bomb in the future. As a result of this and many other concessions, negotiations originally designed to deny Iran a path to the bomb are instead giving an American stamp of approval to the country’s nuclear-weapons ambitions. . . .While failing to stop the mullahs’ march toward a bomb, President Obama’s deal risks turning Iran into the dominant power in the Middle East. The so-called “signing bonus” – the many billions of dollars Iran will receive even before it delivers fully on its commitments – will provide the regime that chants “Death to America” and calls for Israel’s destruction the resources to fund more terrorism across the region; to further destabilize Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen; and to build up Hamas’s lethal arsenal.
He correctly dings the president for excluding ballistic missiles from the negotiations. He recommends sending “a message loud and clear that America demands a deal in which Iran dismantles its illicit nuclear infrastructure and agrees to full transparency and verification.” In addition he argues, “We should remind the world that Iran is in active violation of numerous U.N. Security Council resolutions. We should redouble efforts to impose crippling economic sanctions on Iran without apology and rollback Iran’s regional influence. We should focus international attention on Iran’s abysmal human-rights record and its support for terrorism abroad. And we should stand with our key allies and partners in the region, especially Israel.” And finally he rebukes the president for insisting it is this deal or war.
Walker is in sync with Iran experts who are cautioning against what will inevitably be a bad deal negotiated out of a sense of legacy desperation. “Any day there’s no dangerous deal agreed to is a good day, so the expected extension is welcome,” observes Michael Makovsky of JINSA. “Ideally, this extends past July 9, and Congress will have longer (60 days) to consider a deal, if one. But Obama is so obsessed to reach any deal, however terrible, one can’t bank on it. So far it is the Iran supreme leader who has saved us.”
Walker projects strength here, using direct and forceful language and drilling down on specifics. He would do well to adopt the same approach to domestic policy, which is supposed to be his strong suit. He should avoid trying to compete with the far-right, self-marginalizing candidates on issues such as same-sex marriage and instead focus on bread-and-butter economic issues. He will not be able to get by on platitudes (“take power from the special interests and give it back to the people”) nor will he win simply by reciting his battles against Big Labor in Wisconsin. His expected announcement later this month must show him to be a presidential-caliber candidate on domestic and foreign policy. It’s surprising but reassuring he appears to be most of the way there on the latter.