Home
In this issue

July 2, 2009

Rabbi Abraham J. Twerski: The hallmark of a person

Abe Novick: Up, up, and aliya

July 1, 2009

Rabbi Avi Shafran: The Road Taken

The Kosher Gourmet by Marialisa Calta: Get into the holiday spirit with these Star-Spangled desserts

June 30, 2009

Rabbi Binyomin Ginsberg: What makes a great parent?

Caroline B. Glick: Ideologue-in-Chief

June 29, 2009

The Jewish Ethicist by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir: Beware of 'Caveat Emptor'

Steven Emerson: ACLU pushing for more money for Hamas

June 26, 2009

Rabbi Yoni Posnick: Learn the secret to a healthy marriage from a scriptural villain

Caroline B. Glick: Barack Obama vs. International Law

June 25, 2009

Rabbi Shimon Apisdorf: The Absurd Power of Truth

Jordan "Gorf" Gorfinkle's strip: Everything's Relative

June 24, 2009

Rabbi Yonason Goldson: Advancement of technology is a wake-up call for humanity

The Kosher Gourmet by Andrea Weigl: Summer on a stick: Making frozen treats can be easy, creative and fun

June 23, 2009

Martin M. Bodek: 'On Surnames': And so, We Begin

Caroline B. Glick: The Obama Effect

June 22, 2009

The Jewish Ethicist by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir: Working for a corrupt firm

N. Richard Greenfield : Where are American Jews?

June 19, 2009

Rabbi Abraham J. Twerski: Emotion v. intellect

Caroline B. Glick: Israel's rare opportunity

June 18, 2009

Jonathan Rosenblum: Sometimes it is more essential to define the nature of evil than good

Jordan "Gorf" Gorfinkle's strip: Everything's Relative

June 17, 2009

Rabbi Yonason Goldson: The Language of Confusion

The Kosher Gourmet by Linda Gassenheimer: Nothing pleases Dad more than a thick, juicy onion-smothered steak. Add home-Baked Potato Chips and …

June 16, 2009

The Jewish Ethicist by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir: Career v. Careersism

Caroline B. Glick: Obama's losing streak and Israel

Richard Z. Chesnoff: ‘Palestinians’: Never Missing an Opportunity …

June 15, 2009

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu: How Judea and Samaria can become 'Palestine'

Daniel Pipes: Where Netanyahu's speech failed

June 12, 2009

Rabbi Abraham J. Twerski: Some big thoughts about not acting so big

Caroline B. Glick: Obama's High Commissioner

June 11, 2009

Victor Davis Hanson: Our historically challenged President

Mitch Albom: Beware the True Believers

Lewis Grossberger: What we learn from the new Hitler photos

June 10, 2009

Mort Zuckerman: What Obama and his advisors won't -- or refuse to -- grasp about Israel and the Muslim world

The Kosher Gourmet by Steve Petusevsky Lotsa pasta: Tips, techniques and (amazing) taste

June 9, 2009

Anne Bayefsky: Obama's stunning offense to Israel and the Jewish people

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.: America's first Muslim president?

June 8, 2009

The Jewish Ethicist by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir: Merchant must take responsibility for careless shopper?

Mark Steyn: A superpower that feeds on mediocrity cannot survive for long on leftovers from the past

Richard Z. Chesnoff: How do you say 'kumbaya' in Arabic?

June 5, 2009

Rabbi Abraham J. Twerski: In quest of spirituality

Caroline B. Glick: Obama's Arabian dreams

Charles Krauthammer: The Settlements Myth

June 4, 2009

Paul Greenberg: The War Comes to Little Rock

The Kosher Gourmet by Judy Hevrdejs: Splash it on! Tap your inner jazz musician and improvise when stirring up a vinaigrette

June 3, 2009

The Jewish Ethicist by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir: Q. Should terrible teacher be exposed?

Jonathan Rosenblum: The Israel Lobby: Missing in Action

June 2, 2009

Dennis Prager: The Speech President Obama Won't Dare Give in Egypt

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.: Pressure on Israel raises war risk

Oct. 29, 2003
Mortimer B. Zuckerman: Graffiti On History's Walls (MUST-READ!)

Jewish World Review Nov. 6, 2007 / 25 Mar-Cheshvan 5768

We can't wait for Hillary

By Jonathan Tobin



Printer Friendly Version

Email this article



Imperative to stop Iran now is getting sidetracked by partisan politics


http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | This past summer during one of the last episodes of HBO's mega-hit "The Sopranos," A.J., the whiny suicidal son of the show's mafia boss anti-hero, was heard to worry about what he saw as the certain bombing of Iran by President Bush.


"You don't know that," his mafia princess sister responded.


Though this stray snippet, which was widely noted in reviews of the show, did not offer any clues as to the fate of the fictional leaders of the North Jersey mafia, it may have heralded the beginning of a new twist on what it means to be "anti-war" in 2007 America. The issue that the series' creators snuck into the public square is beginning to look more like one that will loom larger in the months to come.

HATING BUSH AND CHENEY
On the face of it, Iran ought not to be a source of much partisan strife.


Few on even the far left or far right are going to say anything nice about Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or his mullah masters, or be many willing to defend the Islamic republic's support for terrorism throughout the Middle East, including their sponsorship of Hezbollah and alliance with Hamas.


And what reasonable person is not scared to death of the idea of Tehran achieving its ambition of acquiring nuclear capability, in addition to the possibility that it would have within its grasp a weapon that would make its oft-stated goal of eradicating the State of Israel a very real possibility?


But that notwithstanding, the administration push to start putting pressure on Iran to back away from its nuclear program is not exactly generating across the board support.


That became apparent this month after President Bush's statement that a nuclear Iran could lead directly to World War III. Further reporting in many newspapers pointed to Vice President Dick Cheney as one of the main advocates in the administration of strong action to stop Tehran.


Yet rather than Bush's ultimatum being regarded as a sensible warning being sent to Ahmadinejad, the reaction from many in the chattering and political classes was close to panic.


In response, The New York Times editorial column spoke as if the nation's leaders needed to be committed to a mental institution, as it prayed for someone in Washington to step forward to stop "the crazies" from going to the brink with Iran.


And on the campaign trail, an unexceptional White House-backed measure to label the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist organization became the subject of a highly charged debate between the Democratic candidates for president.


When the Senate voted on the measure, Democratic front-runner Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.), acting like someone who actually believes that she will become our commander-in-chief, voted yes. But two of her challengers, Sens. Barrack Obama (D-Ill.) and Joe Biden (D-Del.) voted no. Former senator and fellow presidential hopeful John Edwards joined them in chiding Hillary because they consider it a first step toward granting Bush the power to wage war on Iran.


While Clinton stood her ground, she couched the defense of her vote in such a way as to possibly preclude any support for the future use of force against Iran.


That might be put down as just a tempest in a primary teapot, but there is every indication that anger over this vote is something that Clinton's opponents will be seeking to tap into, especially as her lead widens.


All of which means that rather than a point of consensus, the need to stop Iran is likely to become a wedge issue in the Democratic primaries and caucuses, since many of those who will soon vote are actually more afraid of Bush than they are of Iran.


Liberal Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen acknowledged this when he wrote recently to support the designation of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. Noting that Iran is responsible not only for terror in Iraq but for the massacre of scores of Jewish victims in the 1994 bombing of a Jewish Center in Buenos Aires, Cohen sees the growing opposition to a strong stance against Iran as a rerun of the crippling defeatism that sapped the will of Britain and France to resist Hitler in the 1930s. He blames this all on Bush and Cheney, whose pre-war statements on Iraq have engendered cynicism about intelligence matters and Middle East-based threats.


Yet whether or not the administration deserves all of the blame here (and breaking up the consensus on the war against Islamist terror must be attributed to his foes as much as anything Bush and Cheney did), what Cohen was acknowledging is that the demon-like status of Bush and Cheney that has become a cornerstone of partisan rhetoric is now the greatest obstacle to mobilizing support for action on Iran.


Like Cohen, you can dump on Bush all you want for the mistakes in Iraq and the stalemate in Afghanistan, while giving them no credit for anything. But for those who understand what a nuclear Iran will mean, accepting this situation is not an option. So long as many on the political left and even some in the center view anything that the administration supports as inherently evil, it's going to mean the campaign to pressure Iran will be a divisive issue that will inevitably fail.

2009'S TOO LATE
Knowledgeable observers see Clinton as being more than willing to support the use of U.S. power against a terrorist state, provided, that is, she's the one ordering the use of force and not Bush. If she wins next November, that will be a reasonable position once she's sworn in as president in January 2009. Yet Clinton will be pressed in the intervening 15 months to distance herself from anything Bush does.


But the problem, as Bush noted last month, is that the stakes involved in Iran being allowed to do what it likes involve the possibility of mass murder.


While all those interested in stopping Tehran, especially Israel, want desperately to avoid the use of force, the likelihood of meaningful U.N. economic sanctions being enacted are slim to none. With China and especially Russia backing him up, Ahmadinejad can cheerfully thumb his nose at Bush. The only hope that this can be changed is if our European allies — and our Russian and Chinese antagonists — no longer perceive Bush as isolated on this issue.


If Hillary Clinton were to stop apologizing for winding up on the same side as Bush on Iran, and instead begin talking more about the cost that American failure on this issue would entail, it might not only strengthen her future position as president, but could also serve to rally international support for sanctions now while they still have some small chance of working.


Waiting for 2009 to make Iran a consensus issue may appeal to some partisans, but the interests of the nation and international peace require that it be moved up on the agenda, even if it means that she may be spurned by some primary voters. Like it or not, both Clinton and pro-Israel Democrats need this to be one issue on which they are willing to support Bush now.

Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in Washington and in the media consider "must reading." Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.

JWR contributor Jonathan S. Tobin is executive editor of the Philadelphia Jewish Exponent. Let him know what you think by clicking here.

Jonathan Tobin Archives




© 2007, Jonathan Tobin