- The Washington Times - Sunday, March 8, 2009


The Obama administration’s remarkable inability to say or do the right things to aid our sinking economy, stay the collapse of our equities markets, or even build a competent Cabinet is now the stuff of cartoons, talk-show fodder and late-night comedy.

Who hasn’t heard the one about how “this year’s IRS 1040 allows every taxpayer to claim one Geithner or a Daschle depending on how much tax you don’t want to pay?” Humor may help us deal with our current financial travail - but national security is no laughing matter.

Unfortunately, this week has proven that the new administration may be no better at protecting us from incoming Iranian nuclear warheads than it is at creating jobs. It started last Sunday, when Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on NBC that Iran isn’t “close to a stockpile, they’re not close to a weapon at this point, and so there is some time.” That same morning on CNN, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen was asked if Iran has enough fissile material to make a nuclear bomb. “We think they do, quite frankly,” he replied. The admiral added, “Iran having a nuclear weapon … is a very, very bad outcome for the region and for the world.” Somehow, it doesn’t seem that both Pentagon leaders can be correct.

By Tuesday, it was worse. That morning the New York Times reported that three weeks ago, Mr. Obama wrote a confidential letter to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, suggesting that European-based Ballistic Missile Defenses in Poland and the Czech Republic might not be deployed as promised if Moscow helps keep Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. This revelation generated an international media feeding frenzy.

Hours later, during a White House press availability with visiting British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Mr. Obama claimed his missive had been “mischaracterized” and denied that it was “some sort of quid pro quo.” He insisted it was merely “a very lengthy letter talking about a whole range of issues, from nuclear proliferation to how are we going to deal with a set of common security concerns along the Afghan border and terrorism.” He also noted that “the missile defense program, to the extent that it is deployed, is designed to deal with not a Russian threat, but an Iranian threat.”

During a visit to Madrid, Mr. Medvedev maintained that “no tradeoffs have been discussed, I assure you.” It didn’t help.

The furor over Mr. Obama’s “to the extent that it is deployed” language about the missile shield was exacerbated Wednesday by the release of a new “Presidential Task Force” report on Iran by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. The bipartisan authors of the document, titled, “Preventing a Cascade of Instability: U.S. Engagement to Check Iranian Nuclear Progress,” conclude that Iran has the means and material to develop a nuclear weapon within a year and sufficient fissile material on hand to produce 50 more.

The nine-page report also warns that Iranian plans to acquire Russian-made advanced anti-aircraft missiles could accelerate Israeli military plans for dealing with Tehran’s threat to “wipe the Zionist entity off the earth.” According to the authors, “Israeli leaders seem convinced that at least for now, they have a military option.” However, the report states, “Israelis see the option fading over the next one to two years, not only because of Iran’s nuclear progress and dispersion of its program but also because of improved Iranian air defenses, especially the expected delivery of the S-300.”

All this prompted more than 40 Republican members of the U.S. House of Representatives to send their own letter to the White House on Wednesday night. In it, the congressmen expressed their concern that Mr. Obama’s “policy does not adequately recognize the threat posed by Iran,” and that the administration “may be undertaking a surprisingly unilateral action” by offering concessions to Russia.

Noting that last month the Iranians “launched a satellite into orbit using dual-use, long-range ballistic missile technology,” the House Republicans caution that the Obama-Medvedev correspondence “undermines NATO’s endorsement” of European missile defenses, and “undercuts our allies.” The signatories observe that “Russia used financial incentives to persuade Kyrgyzstan to deny the U.S. access to its Manas military base in order to support coalition operations in Afghanistan.”

In response, Mr. Obama says, “We’ve had a good exchange between ourselves and the Russians” and “we’re rebooting” our relationship. Administration officials are putting out the word that Moscow is playing nice, noting that this week they allowed a NATO supply convoy to pass through Russia to Afghanistan. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton described her meeting on Friday in Geneva with Russian Foreign minister Sergei Lavrov as a “tremendous opportunity.” Meanwhile, the “transparent” administration refuses to release the Obama-Medvedev letter.

In the pictures and on the tube everyone but the House Republicans is smiling. Our president, our secretary of state and the Russians are happy. You should be, too. Now you have something to think about besides the economy. Don’t worry. Be happy.

Oliver North is the host of “War Stories” on the Fox News Channel, the author of “American Heroes,” and the founder and honorary chairman of Freedom Alliance.

Sign up for Daily Newsletters

Manage Newsletters

Copyright © 2020 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide