What price appeasement?

The damage to America’s relationship with Israel caused by President Obama’s desperate quest for a deal with Iran has been well-documented. It’s of no concern to Obama, who would like to see our ties with the Jewish state weakened anyway. For him, the weakening is a collateral benefit of the appeasement.

But now, the U.S. relationship with France has been shaken by Obama’s accommodation of the mullahs. Adam Kredo of the Washington Free Beacon reports:

A series of conversations between top American and French officials, including between President Obama and French President Francois Hollande, have seen Americans engage in behavior described as bullying by sources who spoke to the Washington Free Beacon.

The disagreement over France’s cautious position in regard to Iran threatens to erode U.S. relations with Paris, sources said. . . .

Western policy analysts who spoke to the Free Beacon, including some with close ties to the French political establishment, were dismayed over what they saw as the White House’s willingness to sacrifice its relationship with Paris as talks with Iran reach their final stages. . . .

A recent phone call between Obama and Hollande was reported as tense as the leaders disagreed over the White House’s accommodation of Iranian red lines.

The opinion of the French is highly regarded by many on the American left, John Kerry for example. But chances are that Obama sees the French as former imperialists in decline — less despicable than Great Britain, but not a partner to be taken seriously. The future resides in Tehran, not Paris.

Obama’s arrogance aside, the French have good reason to be upset with the American president. Like other major European countries, France has paid a higher price than the U.S. for the economic sanctions against Iran. Now they fear that ten years of economic sacrifice are about to be for naught thanks to Obama’s capitulation to the mullahs.

Accordingly, France has made its unhappiness known. French officials say they want a deal, but see no reason to rush, given that Iran needs a deal more than the West does. For this reason, they disagree with fixing artificial deadlines that put more pressure on us than on Iran.

The French recognize, moreover, that Obama’s desperation for a deal has produced American weakness at the negotiating table. Benjamin Haddad, who has advised senior French political figures on foreign policy issues, says:

The French want a robust deal with clear guarantees on issues like [research and development] and inspections to ensure that Iranians won’t be able to reduce breakout time during the duration of the agreement (also an issue of discussion), or just after thanks to research conducted during the period. That is also why they disagreed on lifting sanctions.

In addition, the French “don’t trust Iran and believe an ambiguous deal would lead to regional proliferation,” says Haddad.

Obama is reacting to these concerns as he always does — not by listening to the message, but by attacking the messenger. Kredo reports:

There have been very harsh expressions of displeasure by the Americans toward French officials for raising substantive concerns about key elements of what the White House and State Department negotiators are willing to concede to Iran,” said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “That is because the clarifications expose just how weak the Americans’ deal is shaping up to be.”

In sum, Obama — as indifferent to French concerns as he is to those of Israel and Saudi Arabia — is prepared to harm relations with America’s oldest ally in order to get his “historic” deal with our leading enemy state.

Anyone who stands it the way of the deal will be attacked and demonized. Except for the mullahs. They will be appeased.

Responses