There are two ways [...]]]>
There are two ways to look at red lines. One is, “should we make a public announcement than can be used by Israel or any country as its justification for going to war?” That we cannot do.
No. We cannot subcontract the right to go to war. That is an American decision.
Kissinger also merged Washington’s previously stated red line, an Iranian nuclear weapon, with Israel’s red line, nuclear capability, when arguing that the White House needs to decide what preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon boils down to:
Now, we do need to define for ourselves when we say that nuclear weapons are unacceptable — nuclear weapons capability is unacceptable — we need to know for ourselves what we mean by that. What is the definition?
I would say private red line, publicly decided in terms of tactical necessity.
Kissinger concluded by endorsing Mitt Romney’s “responsible foreign policy.”
On Iran, Mitt Romney told ABC that his “redlines” are essentially the same as Obama’s. But he subsequently changed his position on the subject when pressed by pro-Israel advocates in a private campaign forum, the Cable reports. It’s now unclear which position he and his foreign policy advisors agree on.
]]>On Thursday Barak told an Israeli radio show that he was pleased with the “change of emphasis” expressed by Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta when he made controversial comments about Iran’s nuclear program on CBS News. (The Pentagon later [...]]]>
On Thursday Barak told an Israeli radio show that he was pleased with the “change of emphasis” expressed by Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta when he made controversial comments about Iran’s nuclear program on CBS News. (The Pentagon later said that some of Panetta’s statements were made “hypothetically“):
“The change of emphasis … is a very important development, because it makes clear a fact that was already known to us from closed-door (discussions),” Barak told Israel Radio. “It makes clear to Iran that it faces a real dilemma.”
He also repudiated an accusation by neoconservatives and hawks that Obama has been “appeasing” Iran:
“You may not like what he does (but) you discern a man who is capable and ready to undertake the fiercest of political risks to his survival, in order to make good on what he believes in,” said Barak, who met Obama in Washington last week.
“We are asked, sometimes, whether Obama is really a soft appeaser. To that, I say: ‘Go ask Osama bin Laden.’”
In November Barak rejected claims made by U.S.-based Israel advocates that the Obama administration is anti-Israel:
I am saying very clearly that this administration in regard to Israel’s security–and we are traditionally supported by each and every American president in our generation–but under this administration we went even further into a clear, deep, deep commitment to the security of Israel. And beyond.
The endorsements are meant to prop up President Obama’s re-election campaign.
]]>