July 17^th

No right wing columnists in today’s paper so it’s a free day for the detritus; so many targets, so little time. The topic pro tem seems to be this potential agreement with Iran that has all of the conservative honchos near apoplexy. Why in ten or fifteen years Iran could have the bomb; meanwhile even if the agreement goes through and sanctions are lifted Iran can start shoveling all matter of weapons to some very naughty actors…and besides all that, Bibi Netanyahu and the Israeli lobby are very pouty about this deal.

This is nowhere more true than at AIPAC, the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee. This is Israel’s ultra-powerful lobbying group. These people visit the office of every newly elected Representative and Senator just to be sure that they have no questions about the Middle East; if they have AIPAC is available with answers 24/7. Naturally there is a contribution to the politician’s campaign but the amount of that sort of nicety is severely limited by law. Other incentives to tractable politicians are not so limited; perhaps a child is applying to college; a full scholarship to a good school might be arranged. A wife has lost her job so a new job at a somewhat better salary might be found. These are very effective methods for controlling our legislators and other politicians.

 The CEO of “J Street,” Jeremy Ben-Ami, on the other hand is devoted to a more sane policy of Israeli support. James A. Baker 3^rd recently spoke at a J Street function and used it to rip into to Netanyahu and the current Israeli policy. Baker has never been an uncritical fan of Israeli expansion into the “conquered territories” and the Israelis don’t take kindly to any criticism, particularly criticism from a distinguished American like Secretary Baker. Bibi hasn’t learned that the more his AIPAC pushes the more some whose primary allegiance is to this country will push back!

The issue is whether or not this agreement should be pursued. Congress can vote against it but the President can veto that vote. Then we will find out if Congress can override the President’s veto. Some conservative politicians were reflexively against the agreement; they were opposed to it so quickly that it was improbable that they had bothered to read it. No matter, President Obama and Secretary Kerry were for it so of course they were against it.

It is vanishing unlikely that the six countries (Five members of the Security Council plus Germany) involved on our side in these negotiations will agree on these issues again. This means that it’s this agreement or no agreement at all; that’s the choice. If there is no agreement then Iran has a clear track to the bomb unless we take military action. Critics claim that Iran might have the bomb in ten years under this agreement; they might have the bomb in eighteen months without it. Which is better?