Not the right kind of trust
President Barack Obama and champions of his nuclear weapons “deal” with Iran continue to insist, in effect, that if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck and quacks like a duck – it isn’t necessarily a duck.
Despite ongoing evidence Iran is engaged in an all-out military hardware buildup, the White House maintains Tehran will comply with provisions of a multi-party pact intended to keep that country from building nuclear weapons, at least for the next 10 years.
Last week, White House press secretary Josh Earnest criticized Iran for detaining several Americans, including a journalist, on spying charges. He did not mention that the administration refused to use the nuclear arms deal as leverage to help the U.S. citizens.
Earnest also slammed Iran over new ballistic missile tests, which he said violate United Nations resolutions. But asked how Americans can trust a country that rejects international pressure on missiles, Earnest responded, “This is altogether separate from the nuclear agreement … We will be able to verify Iran’s compliance (with that).”
How? Through inspections of Iranian nuclear plants – for which Tehran has to be given enough advance notice to clean them up?
Iran “has demonstrated a track record of abiding by the commitments they’ve made in the context of the nuclear talks,” Earnest added.
Those commitments – not formally put into effect by the pact’s signers, by the way – were revealed only this summer. If the Iranians have abided by them, that gives them a “track record” of a few months.
Compare that to the established record of many years in which Iran’s leaders have lied about their nuclear weapons program and deceived U.N. inspectors, while laboring consistently to develop an atomic arsenal.
But Obama is right about one thing. Tehran can be trusted – to continue a buildup of conventional forces, support for terrorism, long-range ballistic missiles and yes, nuclear warheads for them.