[Peace-discuss] Diplomatic revolution (one in a series)

[C. G. Estabrook]

Borrowing a phrase from 18th c. European history, I suggested a while ago that, 
unlikely as it seems, the USG may soon seek an entente with Iran, even if it 
means impairment of the US-Israel alliance.

For fifteen years in the 1950s and '60s America's chief client in the Mideast 
was Iran, not Israel.  The replacement of the former by the latter, which began 
in the late sixties, was not complete until the  overthrow of the US puppet in 
Iran in the seventies.

The overriding goal of US policy in the Mideast for more than fifty years has 
been and continues to be control of Mideast energy resources -- not the support 
of Israel.  (It's because Mearsheimer and Walt ignore the former point that they 
get the latter wrong.)  It may happen, and soon, that a new alliance with Iran, 
like that which existed for a generation, will serve that constant American 
interest.

If the new Netanyahu government in Israel shows itself recalcitrant in following 
orders (or even if not), the USG may move towards a rapprochement with Iran 
(which will soon have a new government too).  A friendly Iran will

    (a) add its own energy resources to those influenced/controlled by the US;

    (b) aid in the administration of a pacified, Shia-governed Iraq;

    (c) supply logistic, diplomatic, and even military aid in the geopolitical 
control of Afghanistan and hence Pakistan -- the chief US concern a the moment;

    (d) solidify the alliance with India via the Iran–Pakistan–India gas 
pipeline ("Peace pipeline"); and

    (e) prevent the incorporation of the region into the Asian energy and 
defense grid promoted by the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

It will also dampen the much-trumpeted concern -- mostly propaganda -- about 
Iranian nuclear power (which the US supported under the Shah).

The new Israeli government (like the old) is alive to the threat  -- and on the 
edge of hysteria in trying to prevent it. Today's evidence is below. --CGE

=======================================
	Netanyahu's Ultimatum to Obama:
	Either You Take Out Iran's Nukes Or We Do
	By M.J. Rosenberg - March 31, 2009, 12:58PM

On Friday, I wrote that I thought that incoming Prime Minister Netanyahu may 
have moderated over the years.

Not for the first time, I was wrong. Big time.

Check out this interview Netanyahu gave the Atlantic's Jeff Goldberg today. 
Netanyahu says flatout that either the Obama administration deals with Iran's 
nuclear development or Israel will have no choice but to act unilaterally (i.e, 
with bombs).

Pretty incredible. An Israeli attack on Iran would jeopadize a myriad of 
American interests in the region, starting with 130,000 US troops but Netanyahu 
talks as if he can call the shots without any regard for our interests. The fact 
is that, in the eyes of Iran (and the world), there is essentially no difference 
between an Israeli attack and one by us. Israel is viewed as our client. In 
other words, any blowback from an Israeli attack is as likely to be against us 
as against Israel. Americans in Iraq, or here at home, could pay the ultimate price.

President Obama needs to get on the phone and let Netanyahu know that Israel can 
take no action vis a vis Iran without full consultation with Washington. Obama 
is pursuing diplomacy which means, whether it lkes it or not, that Israel is 
too. And that, quite simply, means that Israel cannot act unilaterally as if it 
is a free agent. It isn't. Like the Britain, Germany, Canada, or France, it 
cannot take unilateral actions that would endanger Americans.

That is a message Obama needs to deliver not diplomatically but directly and 
unambiguously.

In this week's New Yorker, Seymour Hersh reports that, just before leaving 
office, Dick Cheney told the Israelis that Obama is a wimp and could be ignored.

Netanyahu appears to have bought into the Cheney thesis and is now testing it by 
insulting the President on the day he is sworn in as Prime Minister. Let's see 
if Obama let's him get away with it. My guess is that Bibi just made the first 
major blunder of his tenure.

It is also not a coincidence that Netanyahu trash talked Iran while US Special 
Envoy Holbrooke was holding the Obama administration's first face-to-face 
meeting with an Iranian official in The Hague. This is in keeping with the 
pattern set by President Shimon Peres who sent a nasty greeting to the Iranian 
people simultaneously with Obama's friendly overture. The name of the game is to 
make it impossible for Obama to achieve a breakthrough with Iran by always 
leaving the impression that America is in thrall to Israel. Clever. And dangerous.

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/03/31/netanyahus_ultimatum_to_obama_either_you_take_out/