Obama may trust Iran but America should not

President Obama’s proposal in Geneva to the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council allowing Iran to enrich some uranium violates previous U.N. resolutions demanding the Islamic Republic stop “all” uranium enrichment activity.

To avoid a violation of current U.N. resolutions, the permanent members must ask the entire Security Council to vote to weaken and supersede their previous demands.

The U.N.’s four rounds of hard-fought sanctions on Iran and several other resolutions demanding compliance call for a full suspension of all enrichment activities, including research and development, then full verification of that suspension before negotiations on a permanent diplomatic solution begin.


The sequencing was strategic.  It was designed to build international confidence in a secretive country’s deceitful past.

More On This...

But in Geneva, President Obama's diplomatic team scuttled previous work and abandoned skepticism. He offered Iran diplomatic negotiations without meeting the U.N.’s demands.

Their offer violated current Security Council resolutions by allowing the Islamic Republic to forego full and verified suspension before negotiations even begin.

President Obama and his team caved further to the Iranians by agreeing to a deal that rewarded sanctions relief and other benefits without getting any actions from Iran first.

In trusting the Iranians to stop their secret enrichment activities and come clean to the IAEA inspectors at a later date, Obama shows his naivety.

Previous U.N. Security Council demands were clear:

1. Demands, in this context, that Iran shall suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and development, to be verified by the IAEA;

2. Expresses the conviction that such suspension as well as full, verified Iranian compliance with the requirements set out by the IAEA Board of Governors, would contribute to a diplomatic, negotiated solution that guarantees Iran’s nuclear programme is for exclusively peaceful purposes, underlines the willingness of the international community to work positively for such a solution, encourages Iran, in conforming to the above provisions, to re-engage with the international community and with the IAEA, and stresses that such engagement will be beneficial to Iran;

President Obama has simultaneously undercut and promoted the U.N.

His schizophrenic views have destroyed the credibility of the Security Council by demanding that the global body be used only to not use it himself.

His overall foreign policy is manic and nauseous and highlights his failure to develop a real national security strategy.

Our friends can’t count on us and our enemies don’t fear us.

World leaders recognize that President Obama is winging it in the Middle East, a far cry from his Cairo speech.

Today, his inconsistencies on Syria and Iran serve as dramatic and emotional disappointments from his lofty speeches.   

Candidate Obama ridiculed President Bush for not getting enough international approval for the Iraq war in Resolution 1441; President Obama failed to get Russia behind his Syria policy.

Candidate Obama promised to make the U.S. Ambassador to the UN a cabinet position; President Obama calls UN resolutions hocus-pocus.

What’s said publicly is never actual policy.  It’s like finding out that Ryan Seacrest hates music.

The Obama Doctrine is the first presidential strategy in history that is exclusively about communicating -- not implementing -- policy.  The Obama Doctrine seems to be "tweet with overwhelming force."

Obama has created a new world where countries ignore the U.S. without consequence.  It’s so bad that Saudi Arabia doesn’t even want to serve on the Security Council with the U.S. because it might ruin their reputation.  It makes you long for the days when President Bush was clear but roundly ridiculed by Democrats and the media for saying the U.N. was in desperate need of reform.

The world has watched Obama say one thing and do another on Egypt, Libya and Syria.  While supporting human rights in another country is important, fighting for our own safety is crucial.

When it comes to Iran, we must not accept Obama’s inconsistencies and weakness.

We must demand he put aside his incessant self-reflection and personal political calculations.  We can’t afford his trust in Iran.

A version of this op-ed originally appeared in Spanish on the website elmedio.com.