Today the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) ran what it describes as a full-page ad in the New York Times, attacking Congressional Republicans for inviting Benjamin Netanyahu to address Congress. NIAC, a mouthpiece for the Iranian regime, says:
Today, the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) ran a full-page ad in the New York Times highlighting John Boehner and Benjamin Netanyahu’s outrageous political stunt that could kill diplomacy with Iran and start a war.
“The U.S. and its closest allies are on the brink of a historic deal that will both prevent an Iranian bomb and war with Iran, and Congressional hawks are orchestrating political stunts with foreign leaders to try to kill it,” said NIAC President Trita Parsi. “The American people do not want another senseless military adventure and certainly don’t consider Benjamin Netanyahu to be their commander in chief.”
Let’s note a couple of basic points. First, what is all this talk about war? The mullahs insist that the proposed deal, the details of which are still unknown, is the only alternative to war. But why? Who will start this hypothetical war? Iran? There is no faction here in the U.S. advocating war. Second, why is it an “outrageous political stunt” to hear from an opponent of the proposed nuclear agreement? Perhaps Netanyahu’s arguments against the proposed deal, to the extent its outlines are known, will be persuasive; perhaps not. But why is Iran so afraid of the prospect that Congress might hear both sides of the argument? The mullahs are perhaps unaware that this is how things are generally done in a democracy.
Here is Iran’s ad:
The ad asks, who is our commander in chief, Barack Obama or Benjamin Netanyahu? Is that a trick question? Do we actually get that choice? Don’t get your hopes up, we don’t. But why are the Iranians talking this way? If Barack Obama were on the brink of negotiating an agreement that would prevent them from achieving their long-cherished goal of obtaining nuclear weapons, would they be his biggest fans?
And once again we see the binary choice: what is the best way to “prevent a nuclear-armed Iran,” a diplomatic agreement or “another war”? Is this a push poll, or what? The problem is that the agreement the Obama administration is secretly negotiating is not intended to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons. Rather, it will amount to a de facto acceptance of Iran as a nuclear power. This is why the mullahs are so enthusiastic about the agreement–and about Barack Obama–and why Netanyahu opposes it, as do many Republicans and some Democrats.
The mullahs’ disingenuous ad is another reminder of how important it is for Americans to hear what Netanyahu has to say, and to understand the real purposes behind the administration’s overture to Iran’s theocratic regime.