RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18232/israel-europe-gas-pipeline

Biden’s decision — reportedly coordinated with Turkey but reached without consulting Israel, Greece or Cyprus, the main countries involved in the project — undercuts three of the strongest American allies in the Mediterranean region.

EastMed’s cancellation — variously described as a “disastrous decision,” a “strategic mistake” and an act of “appeasement” of Erdoğan — represents a major geopolitical victory for the Turkish strongman.

The EastMed pipeline has been in the works for more than a decade. The Israel-Greece-Cyprus project — joined by Bulgaria, Hungary, North Macedonia, Romania and Serbia — has long been seen as a way to diversify natural gas supplies to Europe.

The Turkish government has always insisted that Israeli gas can only be sold to Europe through Turkey.

“The Americans do not want the pipeline because Ankara might ‘get angry.'” — Theofrastos Andreopoulos, defense analyst, defensenet.gr.

“If Erdogan perceives the non-paper as some form of appeasement by Washington, he will simply double down on his gunboat diplomacy in the Eastern Mediterranean and play the role of spoiler in the region.” — Richard Goldberg, a member of the U.S. National Security Council during the Trump administration.

Is the Biden administration truly concerned about climate change, or does it want to prevent Israel from becoming a strategically important supplier of natural gas to Europe?

“The reversal on the EastMed pipeline becomes only more hypocritical and offensive given the fact that President Biden continues to clear the path towards completion of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline.” — U.S. Representatives Gus Bilirakis (R-FL) and Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY), in a letter to U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken.

“This is a disastrous decision that imperils European security and opens the door for further Russian energy hegemony in European gas markets. It should be reversed.” — Ariel Cohen, veteran energy analyst, The Hill.

“Turkey is not looking to participate in Eastern Mediterranean initiatives, it wants to dominate them. Ankara’s goal is not one of cooperation but of regional primacy if not hegemony.” — Endy Zemenides, Executive Director, Hellenic American Leadership Council.

The Biden administration has abruptly withdrawn American support for the Eastern Mediterranean (EastMed) pipeline, a project aimed at shipping natural gas from Israel to European markets. The White House said the project was antithetical to its “climate goals.”

https://thehill.com/opinion/international/594104-stick-with-sanctions-in-iran

“Society is in a state of explosion,” an official from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) warned in a leaked seven-page state document that Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty recently reported on, and “social discontent has risen by 300 percent in the past year.”

Iran’s clerical army has good reason to be worried. Rising public discontent, officials acknowledge, is driven by its sinking economy, which has been battered by tough U.S. sanctions related to Iran’s nuclear program as well as Tehran’s economic mismanagement.

All of which raises an important question or two for Washington: Why push so hard for an agreement that would revive the 2015 global nuclear deal with Iran and lift those crippling sanctions? Why not let the sanctions, which seem to be threatening the stability of Iran’s dangerous theocracy, keep working?

The talks over reviving the 2015 deal — officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, from which President Trump withdrew the United States in 2018 — resumed last week in Vienna, and U.S. and other officials suggest that a deal may be in sight.

The Biden administration certainly seems eager for that to happen. Secretary of State Antony Blinken signed waivers last week that will lift some sanctions on Iran’s “civilian” nuclear program, enabling foreign countries and companies to work on civilian projects at various Iranian nuclear sites.

U.S. officials say that the waivers do not represent up-front concessions to Tehran as part of the Vienna negotiations. “We did NOT provide sanctions relief for Iran and WILL NOT until/unless Tehran returns to its commitments under the JCPOA,” State Department spokesman Ned Price tweeted.

https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/lets-talk-about-american-foreign/comments?token=

Ever since the end of World War II, America has been the dominant world superpower. But there has always been a tension in this country about how we should use that power. Between those among us who think we should maintain an active role in world affairs—and those who want to pull back and focus on our myriad problems here at home.

This week on Honestly, we invited Matt Taibbi and Bret Stephens to revisit this long standing debate in light of escalating tensions at the Russian-Ukrainian border. Since recording, Biden has urged Americans to evacuate Ukraine immediately, warning of an imminent invasion, and the Pentagon has ordered 3,000 more troops to Poland.

In the episode, Matt contends that “we’ve gotten ourselves into quagmires all over the world that have been enormously expensive, both in terms of money and in lives. And the decision not to get involved would have been the right one almost exclusively in the last 20 years.” On the other hand, Bret encourages us to appreciate the benefits of the American-led world order: “A lot of our lives as Americans is intrinsically connected to a broader view of the world in which a militarily strong and morally confident American power pushes the world imperfectly, stupidly, sometimes incompetently and sometimes even criminally, but by fits and starts pushes the world in the direction of a little more freedom, a little more prosperity, a little more liberality in the way in which we conduct life.”

I wonder where you all stand in this debate. When should we use our military might on the world stage? Has recent history proven that we do more harm than good? Would we be better off pulling back and focusing on our many domestic problems? And should America try to wrestle back the superpower status that it feels is waning…or should we just let it go?

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/02/what-about-iran-mullahs-close-bomb-bruce-thornton/

While we try to figure out Russia’s intentions for Ukraine, Iran is getting closer to a deal that will leave it a nuclear power. Discussions in Vienna are back on, and hopeful dispatches are sent out by Western diplomats. But given Iran’s maximalist demands, and the Biden administration’s fetish of “diplomatic engagement,” things aren’t looking good for the region’s stability.

Ever since Biden rejoined the talks to restart the deal Trump wisely walked away from, Iran has shown patent contempt for this country and its diplomats. Meanwhile, the advanced centrifuges keep spinning weapons-grade uranium. What else explains the arrogant, dismissive tone Iranian negotiators take with the U.S., particularly the demand that we lift punitive sanctions before the real talks begin? When Biden’s team restored the sanctions waivers on European nations, “Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian called it ‘good but insufficient’ on Sunday, while Foreign Ministry spokesperson Saeed Khatibzadeh went further, calling sanctions relief a ‘red line’ in the talks.”

You don’t need a degree in foreign relations to see what Iran’s game is––keep talking until they can present their bomb as a fait accompli. North Korea successfully played that game for 30 years. With Biden’s team so eager for a deal that they’ll stand for this contempt, no wonder Iran thinks they can pull off that scam once again. In fact, they’re even more confident now that Russia and China are playing big-brother to the regime. China’s money and oil purchases have taken the sting out of U.S. sanctions. So of course, Biden restores the waivers so Europeans, faced with mounting energy costs, can contribute to Iran’s fisc as well.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18223/middle-east-us

Despite multiple attacks on Abu Dhabi, which include an air base that hosts American military personnel, the current American administration seems unwilling to designate the Houthis as the terrorist organization it is. At the same time, however, it wants to put constraints on the use of weapons the U.S. might sell to the United Arab Emirates, whose civilian population has been targeted by the Houthis… For Yemen, this is no longer acceptable.

While the Biden administration has made clear its desire to restart nuclear talks with Iran, why not try doing it from a position of strength, for instance deterrence? One of the pillars of strength would be presenting a united front against Iran, with our Gulf allies and Israel at its core. Iran recognizes and responds to strength. It also recognizes weakness and responds by taking advantage of it.

It is vitally important the Biden administration stabilize relationships with key U.S. allies in the Middle East before Iran and Russia destabilize them, or it will justly receive the blame for the chaos that will ensue. The Middle East is one area where the U.S. is a dominant power-influencer, and we must make clear to our friends that we will stand by them and to our enemies that they are endangering only themselves.

We are seeing our adversaries exploiting perceived U.S. weakness and lack of resolve in other parts of the world. We cannot let that happen in the Middle East. We must have a long-term, strategic plan that does not rely on hope but instead on determination and strength. Let us go all-in: anything less will be perceived as not being in at all.

It is time for the Biden administration to come to terms with the challenging situation in Yemen. It seems that the administration is trying to pick a middle ground, but the Houthis’ ongoing terrorist attacks and the massive scale of the humanitarian crisis rules out staying the course of strategic compromise.

https://bit.ly/3HH60av

On February 1, 2021, Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee articulated his decisive opposition to US policy on Iran, delivering a thundering message to President Biden:

*The current policy-makers seem to repeat the self-destruct errors of the 2015 nuclear accord (JCPOA), “which it appears the Biden Administration is seeking to reestablish;”

*The policy toward Iran must be based on the well-documented rogue track record of Iran’s Ayatollahs, not on unsubstantiated hopes;

*Iran’s Ayatollahs are preoccupied with missiles, not with butter;

*The Iranian threat is not limited to nuclear weapons, but includes a massive proliferation of terror and ballistic missile technologies and hardware;

*The Iranian threat is not limited to the Persian Gulf and the Middle East, but extends globally;

*A credible military option should be introduced into the negotiation process, in order to give diplomacy a chance. It should go beyond the evasive statement that “all options are on the table;”

*The Biden Administration should realize that Iran’s Ayatollahs are not good-faith negotiators.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18187/iran-persecution-religious-minorities

In 2021, Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi signed two alarming amendments to Articles 499 and 500 of its Penal Code, making it easier for the authorities to crack down on religious minorities. The amendments impose prison sentences and fines on whoever insults “divine religions or Islamic schools of thought recognized under the Constitutions with the intent to cause violence or tensions in the society,” as well on whoever conducts “any deviant educational or proselytizing activity that contradicts or interferes with the sacred law of Islam.”

Persecution of Christians in Iran has especially been on the rise. While Iranian leaders celebrate and publicize those who convert to Islam, those who convert to Christianity are severely punished.

Another religious minority that faces persecution in Iran is the Baha’i faith… [Others] include Zoroastrians, Sufi Muslims, Sunni Muslims and Yarsanis.

Meanwhile, the European powers are not only failing to hold the Iranian regime accountable, they are busy appeasing the ruling mullahs of Iran and doing business with them.

Since the Biden administration lifted the “maximum pressure” imposed by the previous administration, the ruling mullahs have only escalated their persecution of religious minorities. Instead of incessantly lecturing the world on human rights, the EU and the Biden administration would sound more credible if they would stop appeasing the human rights catastrophe that Iran’s regime has become, and hold the ruling mullahs accountable.

While turning a blind eye to the Iranian regime’s increasing persecution of religious minorities, the Biden administration and the European Union are focusing only on lifting the sanctions against the Islamic Republic. The move will help to revive the disastrous nuclear deal that will empower the ruling mullahs to race toward nuclear weapons breakout; strengthen Iran’s internal militia, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), and expand the country’s proxy militias abroad: the Houthis in Yemen, and the designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza Strip. That does not even include any plans Iran might have to expand its operations, which threaten America, in Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua.

https://amgreatness.com/2022/02/08/blinkmanship/

Because of increasing specialization, most of today’s top government officials have spent their entire lives in government service. They lack the gentleman-amateur chops of a Dean Acheson or the business background of someone like Donald Trump. The results are not encouraging. 

One thing you learn in business is that bluffing is dangerous. It’s easier to make promises than to keep them, and that often it’s better to be ambiguous, to say nothing, or, if necessary, to communicate only in private. 

A good counterexample would be Barack Obama with his infamous “red line” in Syria. He said the Syrian government’s use of chemical weapons against civilians would cross a red line resulting in serious consequences and retaliation. Yet when Bashar al Assad allegedly approved the use of chemical weapons against a rebel civilian enclave, Obama did nothing. 

Setting aside the merits and demerits of our Syria policy, this is just bad business. It is the type of thing a coddled academic with no real life experience would think is a great idea, but something an ordinary real estate agent, bar manager, or car salesman knows is a bad idea. Threats box in the speaker and are only as effective as his perceived ability and willingness to back them up.

Biden’s life experience has done little more than Obama’s to prepare him for the moment. While he has been bloviating in the U.S. Senate since the 1970s, he has not covered himself with glory. His contributions to foreign policy typically have revealed him to be thoughtless and unsophisticated, opposing the mission to kill Osama bin Laden, among other things, while supporting the Iraq War. 

https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/02/the-afghanistan-debacle-looks-worse-and-worse/#slide-1

The more we learn about the administration’s Afghanistan withdrawal, the more it becomes clear that its decisions were driven by political considerations and panic.

A s the Biden administration’s chaotic and inept withdrawal from Afghanistan was unfolding in August 2021, a suicide bomber murdered 13 American servicemembers, and at least 170 Afghans, at the Abbey Gate outside Kabul’s Hamid Karzai International Airport. It was one of the deadliest attacks on our troops in our 20 years in that nation.

“Know this,” Biden said after the bombing. “We will not forgive. We will not forget. We will hunt you down and make you pay.” This turned out to be face-saving political theater. Three days later, an air strike killed ten Afghans, seven of them children. Not one of the dead, as far as we know, was an “ISIS facilitator,” as the administration had alleged.

In fact, the Pentagon now says that the bombing was the work of a lone terrorist rather than a “complex” network, as the Biden administration had initially maintained. At the time, General Mark Milley not only referred to the strike as “valid” and “righteous” — let’s concede for a moment that he was basing this on the best available information — but went further to describe a “secondary explosion” and a supposed plethora of evidence justifying the bombing. None of that, it seems, was true. It seems increasingly likely that Biden was going to blow someone up to project his toughness.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18204/do-not-open-nord-stream

The Russian threat… was very clear — that Russia would then be able to shut off its gas to Europe in the middle of winter [by means of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline], if it chose to, as a form of blackmail, at which point the US might then be expected to save Europe from its own deal….

The warnings to Europe went unheeded.

How should the U.S. respond? The U.S. needs to continue to speak clearly and firmly. NATO is the most important military alliance that the U.S. has. We need it to be strong and effective. The only path forward is for all of the members to recommit themselves to investing in NATO’s future. Combined with a commitment to our shared political and economic values, NATO will remain a force for the good: to protect the Free World from predators. It is still not too late for the U.S. to reverse its catastrophic decision and stop the opening of the Nord Stream 2.

This project [Nord Stream 2] poses a direct threat to the security and stability of Ukraine. It removes any motivation for Russia to engage good faith negotiations in regards to Ukraine — negotiations which would contribute to political stability in Ukraine and in the region. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Russia continues to threaten its neighbors and attempts to destabilize Western governments in multiple additional ways.

Nord Stream 2 would give Putin a new tool to continue these nefarious actions. Russia has already used energy as a lever to achieve its foreign policy objectives. In 2009, Russia cut off energy supplies to Europe. With Nord Stream 2 in place it would have an even more powerful “economic tool” to threaten European economies, and even their national security. Nord Stream is a commercial project with major geo-political overtones.

This week, Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte and Foreign Minister Wobke Hoekstra (no relation) met with Ukrainian leaders in Kiev. The visit was intended to signal Dutch support to the government of Ukraine in the face of Russian build-up provocations on its border. As with other European national security moves, the meeting may be too little too late.