Washington, D.C. is a town not exactly known for its common sense. So when a notable political figure in the nation’s capital takes it upon himself to defy the mealy-mouthed bipartisan consensus and bluntly state the unvarnished truth, it can be refreshing.
The most recent instance of this phenomenon is National Security Advisor John Bolton, who just this week made headlines for a seemingly non-headline-worthy event: Confirming that the terrorist regime that governs the Islamic Republic of Iran is, despite willful leftist obfuscations to the contrary, in the pursuit of nuclear weapons.
Per USA Today:
Donald Trump’s national security adviser said Wednesday there was “no reason” for Iran to back out of its nuclear deal with world powers other than to seek atomic weapons, a year after the U.S. president unilaterally withdrew America from the accord …
Bolton said that without more nuclear power plants, it made no sense for Iran to stockpile more low-enriched uranium as it now plans to do. But the U.S. also earlier cut off Iran’s ability to sell its uranium to Russia in exchange for unprocessed yellow-cake uranium.
Iran has set a July 7 deadline for Europe to offer better terms to the unraveling nuclear deal, otherwise it will resume enrichment closer to weapons level.
Bolton declined to say what the U.S. would do in response to that but he criticized Iran’s actions.
“There’s no reason for them to do any of that unless that’s part of an effort to reduce the breakout time to produce nuclear weapons,” Bolton said. “That’s a very serious issue if they continue to do that.” …
“This is just more graphic evidence that it hasn’t constrained their continuing desire to have nuclear weapons,” Bolton added. “It certainly hasn’t reduced their terrorist activities in the region that we just discussed or their other malign behavior in their use of conventional forces.”
Omri Ceren, national security advisor to Bolton’s fellow Iran hawk Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), sarcastically tweeted: “Take a moment and ponder how dumb our foreign policy debate has become. Iran got caught with blueprints for nuclear weapons and the response from DC’s best & brightest continues to be ‘well, we can’t really tell if they want nukes []!.'”
Although many foreign policy doves may look askance at Bolton, Washington Free Beacon Editor in Chief Matthew Continetti recently made a persuasive argument that Bolton’s recent anti-Iran rhetoric and posturing is actually exactly what those in the pro-peace camp ought to hope for:
[Iran’s recent behavior] isn’t diplomacy. It’s nuclear blackmail. And it’s a sign of desperation. The Iranians are in a box. U.S. sanctions are crushing the economy, but if they leave the agreement with Europe they will be back to square one. To escape the box you try to punch your way out. That’s why Iran has assumed a threatening posture: Provoking an American attack could bolster waning domestic support for the regime and divide the Western alliance.
America faces a challenging international environment, with trouble spots in Venezuela, North Korea, China, Ukraine, Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, and Iran. The breadth and depth of the crises requires dispassionate analysis and prudent judgment. It also requires us to remember the differences between deterrence, retaliatory strikes, and regime change and ground invasion. Only the first two things are under consideration, as Iran’s behavior in the Middle East grows worse. Guess what: We’ve got a peace fever. And the only prescription is more Bolton.
As dramatically unveiled last year by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, following a staggering Israeli Mossad intelligence operation in Tehran, it has been confirmed that Iran has long had an illicit nuclear weapons program.