Soccer Dad

When yousef al-otaiba is in israel's amen corner

Joel Brinkley on a recent announcement made by Yousef al-Otaiba, ambassador of the United Arab Emirates to the United States:

That's why Ambassador Yousef al-Otaiba's remarks were so remarkable. Asked during the Aspen Ideas Festival whether he wanted the United States "to stop the Iranian nuclear program by force," he answered exuberantly: "Absolutely. Absolutely!"

He said his view was the result of "a cost-benefit analysis."

"Despite the large amount of trade we do with Iran, which is close to $12 billion ... there will be consequences, there will be a backlash and there will be problems with people protesting and rioting and very unhappy that there is an outside force attacking a Muslim country.

"If you are asking me, 'Am I willing to live with that versus living with a nuclear Iran?' my answer is still the same: 'We cannot live with a nuclear Iran.' I am willing to absorb what takes place."

But of course:

The ambassador spoke the truth, but he also broke the rule. So a few hours later, his country's foreign minister said al-Otaiba's remarks, as quoted in news stories, "are not precise" and were "taken out of their context."

It's a fascinating bit of news referred to by Charles Krauthammer in Iran feels the heat:

"They [the United States and Israel] have decided to attack at least two countries in the region in the next three months."

-- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, July 26

President Ahmadinejad has a penchant for the somewhat loony, as when last weekend he denounced Paul the Octopus, omniscient predictor of eight consecutive World Cup matches, as a symbol of decadence and purveyor of "Western propaganda and superstition."

But for all his clownishness, Ahmadinejad is nonetheless calculating and dangerous. What "two countries" was he talking about? They seem logically to be Lebanon and Syria. Hezbollah in Lebanon has armed itself with 50,000 rockets and made clear that it is in a position to start a war at any time. Fighting on this scale would immediately bring in Syria, which would in turn invite Iranian intervention in defense of its major Arab clients -- and of the first Persian beachhead on the Mediterranean in 1,400 years.

Arguing that Ahmadinejad has no basis for this charge. (Well, recently Defense Minister Barak did say that if Hezbollah attacked Israel, Israel would strike back at Lebanon. So the charge is a distortion of something that an Israeli official said.)

Krauthammer argues:

It is a sign that he is under serious pressure. Passage of weak U.N. sanctions was followed by unilateral sanctions by the United States, Canada, Australia and the European Union. Already, reports Reuters, Iran is experiencing a sharp drop in gasoline imports as Lloyd's of London and other players refuse to insure the ships delivering them.

Second, the Arab states are no longer just whispering their desire for the United States to militarily take out Iranian nuclear facilities. The United Arab Emirates' ambassador to Washington said so openly at a conference three weeks ago.

It does appear that Iran is facing a more united front against its acquisition of nuclear weapons. So Krauthammer argues that Ahmadinejad is making the charge to deflect attention from himself channeling Pat Buchanan from 20 years ago:

Shortly before the 1991 Persian Gulf War, Pat Buchanan famously said that the "only two groups" that wanted the United States to forcibly liberate Kuwait were "the Israeli Defense Ministry and its amen corner in the United States." . . . Twenty years later, the libel returns in the form of the scurrilous suggestion that the only ones who want the United States to attack Iran's nuclear facilities are Israel and its American supporters.

So to defend his position Ahmadinejad effectively says that Yousef al-Otaiba is in Israel's amen corner. Krauthammer says that it's because he feels desperate; I hope there's something to that and that maybe it will induce him to stand down.