The press is reporting criticisms of President Obama for wiretapping Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. But Obama did the right and necessary thing.
Let’s do a thought experiment. Let’s say Netanyahu and his allies in the Congress (including many Democrats) had succeeded in sabotaging the Iran Deal this year. What are the possible outcomes? These Israel-loving US politicians claimed they wanted a better deal, but it was plainly impossible. The Russians, for instance, were on board with this deal; they are Iran’s ally, so they would not come back to Vienna to drive a harder bargain.
So there would be no deal. And no doubt: there are rightwing elements within Iran, pushing to go nuclear. In another five or ten years, Iran gets small nuclear weapons — which completely destabilizes the Middle East. Israel, by now with an even more far-right-wing government, bombs Iran like the Iraq/Osirak strike of 1981. And the far rightists in power in Iran demand retaliation, and we get what is euphemistically called “a limited nuclear exchange.”
Can you imagine how much death destruction and unrest a “limited nuclear exchange” would unleash?
And the US is dragged in with who can say what hellish consequences because, like it or not, America is still the policeman of the world. Washington tries to hold Israel back, but can’t.
So if you think things are bad now, look at how the Middle East would look in a few years with no Iran Deal. A nuclear exchange. In a volatile nuclearized Middle East, that would drag the U.S. into a spreading regional conflict, which makes the current crisis look like a tea party.
President Obama wasn’t just trying to score political points against a bitter rival in authorizing the wiretap. He was addressing the major threat in the near-to-medium future to not just stability in the Middle East but to overall world peace. The president was very clear about this goal. He did not at any stage say, we’re trying to strengthen the moderates in Iran and bring Iran back to the community of nations. It wasn’t about the Israeli occupation (though it has surely increased world pressure on the occupation). It wasn’t about the American hostages either. It was straightforward: We’re trying to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons in the only way possible, because an Iran with nuclear weapons would destabilize the Middle East.
Obama was trying to do a principled thing, a courageous undertaking that he struggled to get through the Congress, spending considerable political capital to do so. And he did so in the interests first and foremost of the people of the United States.
In trying to stave off this threat to world peace, he used serious tactics, yes — which included wiretaps on the Israeli prime minister. He needed to know what this man was capable of doing.
Remember, Benjamin Netanyahu had come to this country without the invitation of the president, in fact defying the president, and addressed both houses of Congress to oppose the president. This was an unprecedented step by an unprincipled, politically cunning, desperate man, who would, as he demonstrated in March (with racist appeals to Israeli voters), do anything to hold on to his office. Netanyahu sought to compromise US sovereignty, but this is really not about sovereignty in the end; it is about world peace.
For world peace, President Obama had to know what this wily, dishonest man was doing to sink the deal.
P.S. The press and the politicians are missing this story. The Republican chair of the House Intelligence Committee, Devin Nunes, says he’ll have a hearing on the spying. Arutz Sheva:
He said his goal would be to “get the facts” about the situation.
“We’re going to play this right down the middle and determine whether or not somebody did something wrong,” Nunes told AP by phone from California….
Earlier on Wednesday, [Israeli] Likud ministers responded angrily to the report and demanded that Israel protest Washington’s action.
And the neocon golden boy, Marco Rubio, condemned the spying publicly, but was caught off-mike saying this is what leaders do.
“We spy on everyone,” Rubio told [South Carolina Rep. Trey] Gowdy, defending the practice of spying on a U.S. ally. “That’s the nature of intelligence.”
“It’s more complicated than the [original Wall Street Journal] story makes it seem,” Rubio added.
The US is not and never has been the world policeman, please stop repeating this silly mantra. Also, the odds of a nuclear exchange would have been very low. At most it would create a detente and curb Israel’s aggression. That would pave the way for real peace in the long run.
re: “Obama was trying to do a principled thing, a courageous undertaking that he struggled to get through the Congress, spending considerable political capital to do so. And he did so in the interests first and foremost of the people of the United States.”
Yes, he deserves credit for that. (Ironically, it also served Israel’s interests to have a deal with Iran, leaving Israel free to be the only nuclear power in the region, though Israel screamed about it for political reasons. Also ironically, one reason it served our interests is that the sanctions regime was likely to collapse soon anyway, as the world grew weary of our pressure to maintain it.)
I don’t mind your optimism and good feelings about Obama, since I guess you have to have some hope to keep doing the good work of this site. But I have to ask, what has he actually done to help Palestinians, or to reduce America’s complicity in their oppression?
I recall seeing someone here describe their hope that after the election in November Obama will actually do something. I guess some people will hope until the next President takes the oath of office.
PHIL- “…like it or not, America is still the policeman of the world.”
Policeman? Has the militarization of the US police gone so far that you can say this with a straight face? A more honest appraisal is that Uncle Sam is the foremost serial killer of nations and people.
This whole article is probably the absolute worst thing you have ever written, so far out of touch with reality that I question your ability to be minimally objective. When it comes to Obama, you manifest what is usually described as battered wives syndrome. The worse Obama behaves, the more you feel compelled to make excuses.
As for Iran, Obama is considering renewing sanctions over their missile development program. The agreement with Iran was merely a short term tactic, not a change in strategic objectives. Syria has been effectively destroyed, the Ukraine also. Iran, Russia and China remain targeted. The Obama administration is the most militaristic administration in US history. When combined with its aggressive neoliberalism, it is the most destructive administration in US history. A quote and a link:
“US President Barack Obama’s administration is reportedly preparing fresh sanctions on international companies and individuals over Iran’s missile program.
….
US officials claim the new sanctions are in line with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the nuclear agreement, and the Treasury Department can impose new sanctions on Iran over its missile development.
Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, who has the final say on all matters of the state, has made it clear that Iran would consider any new sanctions a breach of the JCPOA.” http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-preparing-new-sanctions-over-irans-missile-program/5498654
As I read the reports, the surveillance has been pretty much constant since long before the Merkel affair resulted in some foreign leaders being exempted, and the NSA brought these materials to the White House’s attention; it wasn’t the President acting to “order a wiretap.” As I further read it, the White House even declined to give NSA any specific direction, merely asking NSA to disclose to them what it thought it should know.
Here’s former CIA officer Phil Giraldi’s take at the American Conservative: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/why-the-u-s-spies-on-netanyahu/
His comments lead one to speculate that at least some Congresspersons, when asked, “what does it take to get you on board?” responded with a “quid” for that “pro,” but that NSA hasn’t necessarily turned any of that over to anyone. Apparently, if they turn over to the Administration that a specific congressperson was observed or overheard, they must also disclose that to the Congressional Intelligence Committees. Given what happened with the effort to prosecute Rosen with Lawrence Franklin, perhaps Justice would be shy about prosecuting illegal influence, just as many in the news media are shy about expressing anything about the propriety of Israel buying influence in Congress.
So, sheer speculation here on my part, if there were Congresspersons caught in compromising deal-making on those phone calls, it’s possible an intrepid spy, might instead of disclosing it, file that information away – a la J. Edgar Hoover – for potential one-on-one use in their own dealings with Congress.
This is an excellent, straightforward analysis of Obama’s actions in this case.
This plain analysis is not presented in the mainstream press because Israel effectively controls the mainstream press. Israel also controls all the Republicans and most of the Democrats in Congress.
Despite this overwhelming power of the banking / war profiteering / Israeli / neocon cabal, many progressives persist in thinking a U.S. president could simple do “something” to bring them all down. The reality is that for any action he took in that direction he would be attacked ferociously by the oligarchy through their media and political puppets. Even for proposing Republican ideas he has been subjected to relentless character assassination. Even most of his own party deserted him in the 2014 elections, refusing to defend the ACA, with Alison Grimes in KY being a standout example, cowering before the race-baiting, divide and conquer tactic of the ruthless oligarchy.
Some people talk casually about rogue CIA agents trying to control the world. “Rogue” CIA agents are working for somebody with immense financial resources. Big money lies behind this vast network of deception and control. Here is an early article that recognized the immense forces Obama is up against.
http://whowhatwhy.com/2010/03/10/what-obama-is-up-against/
Obama has OBVIOUSLY worked hard against these fierce forces to avoid a war with Iran. Why is it so hard to acknowledge the significance of that? He has also clearly sought to minimize American involvement in Middle East combat while still taking some actions to help stabilize a very volatile region, with volatility being continually and purposely provoked by Israel. Yet even the progressive press quibbles about what “boots on the ground” means. What other American president since JFK has acted so strongly to resist Israel’s corrupt, immense power?