On Tuesday, March 13th, Vice President Joe Biden was in Israel discussing prospects for peace with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas who, in the classic fashion of Israel’s “partners for peace,” rejected all proposals. At the same time not too far away, Iran was busy test-firing ballistic missiles capable of reaching Israel. This clear sign of belligerence was not surprising coming from Iran, the largest state-sponsor of terrorism the world over.
Some are claiming that these missiles are not in direct violation of Security Council Resolution 2231, put in place shortly after the passing of the Obama administration’s incredibly controversial nuclear deal with Iran, which “calls upon Iran not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles.” As if to assuage doubts that they were not in violation of international law, Iran then fired two ballistic missiles on Wednesday emblazoned with Ayatollah Khomeini’s ever-catchy tagline “Israel must be wiped off the Earth.” To add incitement to aggression, General Amir Ali Haji Zada, commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard’s air force, informed the media that these missiles “belong to the Palestinian people.” Yet somehow, Iran is maintaining that this launch, and its blatant hostility and provocation, was carried out purely with self-defense in mind. It is baffling that some people possess the power to delude themselves into believing that Iran is seeking nuclear missiles for peaceful purposes.
A week later, Biden told Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that “a nuclear-armed Iran is an absolutely unacceptable threat to Israel, to the region and the United States.” He then assured Netanyahu that America will see to it that Iran adheres to nuclear deal, proposed by the Obama administration this past summer. “If in fact they break the deal,” said Biden, “we will act.” So it seems that, given this obvious sign of aggression, the US should “act.” America said it would bring this matter to the Security Council, which is to convene on Monday to discuss what American ambassador to the UN, Samantha Powers, calls “dangerous launches.” Yet despite the fact that these launches were “provocative,” it was determined by the Obama administration that these missiles did not violate the nuclear agreement.
In response to this attack, Bibi beseeched the free world to “take immediate punitive steps following the repeated gross transgressions by Iran in the matter of rockets.” The European Union is considering issuing sanctions on Iran given the recent missile tests, an especially bold move considering the fact that this is a governing body who claimed that the singling out of Israeli products with labeling would somehow “serve to reduce the current levels of tension, fear and despair, among both Israelis and Palestinians.”
Even those shortsighted or intellectually dishonest enough to claim that the Iran deal is good for the free world must admit it qualifies as “a pretty good deal,” as Colin Powell so eloquently said, only if all parties adhere to said deal. If Iran can break the nuclear agreement so soon after its passing and feel no consequences, what kind of message does that send?
Contributed by CAMERA Fellow at NYU Polytechnic, Raizy Cohen.
