Why does Biden want to get back into a bad deal with Iran

 The Hill:

Which is more important to President Biden, rejoining the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) or strengthening the Abraham Accords between Israel and its Arab neighbors? There should be little doubt that Biden has shown he prioritizes the Iran nuclear agreement. But does that mean the death knell for the two-year-old Abraham Accords if the Iranians finally say yes to the American offer after the U.S. midterm elections?

Despite the protests for regime change running rampant through the Islamic Republic, the Biden administration has signaled to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei that it desires a return to the JCPOA — no matter what Iran’s “morality police” may do to their citizens. Although it is not a binary choice, a Biden foreign policy triumph with a return to the nuclear agreement would profoundly affect the sustainability of the groundbreaking Abraham Accords.

The impetus for the Accords in 2020 was mainly the threat of an expansionist Iran. However, America’s return to the nuclear deal without considering Iran’s aggressive behavior, or its breaches of the JCPOA since 2015, undermines the Abraham Accord signatories’ trust in America and the sustainability of that agreement.

One way to understand the relationship between the JCPOA and the Abraham Accords is through the prism of American politics. The Biden administration sees a return to the JCPOA as indispensable for Middle East stability. Yet, the bipartisan U.S. Senate Abraham Caucus co-chair, Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), called the Accords — not the JCPOA — the “most significant peace agreement of the 21st century.”

Except for the Iranians and Palestinians, most people welcomed the Abraham Accords as a substantial development. However, many in Congress, including members of the president’s party, see an Iran nuclear deal as the ultimate force for securing regional stability.

According to Ben Weinthal, a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, “there are question marks over whether the Biden administration’s overtures to Tehran are now encouraging the demise of the accords. … Are Sunni Arab nations hedging their bets and engaging in a rapprochement with Tehran, leading to a deterioration of the normalization process?” In fear of a potential (nuclear) deal, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) recently sent their ambassador back to Iran after a six-year hiatus to appease the ayatollah.

Although technically unrelated, the success or failure of the Iran deal and the Abraham Accords is interconnected. The ascendency of one agreement may mean the withering of the other. The Biden administration has tried to have it both ways. In March 2022, Secretary of State Antony Blinken joined six Arab foreign ministers for a summit in the Negev, providing a public display of support for the Abraham Accords.
...

A deal with the genocidal religious bigots in Iran is idiotic and a threat to US allies in the region.  It does nothing to secure Middle East Peace and makes war more likely.  That it is even being considered tells us something about Biden's incompetence.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t...
Read more

Is the F-35 obsolete?

Headline USA: Pentagon Fires Back after Musk Calls Its Most Expensive Project ‘Obsolete’ 'Yeah, as I'm sure you can appreciate, Mr. Musk is, currently, a private citizen, I'm not going to make any comments about what a private citizen may have to say about the F-35....'   ... ... Drones appear to be replacing jets for many operations.  The Russia-Ukraine war is an example of that.  Drones are often hard to detect and can be used for intelligence operations as well as for attacking enemy targets.  It would not surprise me to see drones engaging other drones in combat.  They also cost much less than manned fighters.  
Read more