Kerry Wants Congress to Ignore Israel; It May Ignore Him Instead

by Jonathan S. Tobin, COMMENTARY

Secretary of State John Kerry and Vice President Joe Biden went to Capitol Hill to privately brief the Senate Banking, Housing and urban Affairs Committee about the nuclear negotiations with Iran and plead with them not to toughen sanctions on the rogue nation. But according to multiple sources that spoke to the press, their appeal went over like a lead balloon. As the New York Times reports:

    They faced extreme skepticism from lawmakers in both parties who worry the administration is prepared to give the Iranian government too much for too little.

The reaction from Democrats was scathing with, as the Times reports, even loyal administration soldiers in the Senate like Majority Leader Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer distancing themselves from Kerry’s position and later expressing doubt to reporters about his negotiating strategy. The reaction from Republicans was no less hostile, with Kerry being denounced in scathing terms by Senator Mark Kirk

Why the hostility to their former colleague? Part of it stemmed from what appeared to be Kerry’s less than candid approach. As Buzz Feed reported, Senator Bob Corker was incensed about the fact that Kerry gave no details about his talks with Iran and instead made only what he called an “emotional appeal” for them to back off on sanctions. But the negative reaction seemed to stem more from the nature of what Kerry said rather than what he didn’t say:

    “It was fairly anti-Israeli,” Kirk said to reporters after the briefing. “I was supposed to disbelieve everything the Israelis had just told me, and I think the Israelis probably have a pretty good intelligence service.” He said the Israelis had told him that the “total changes proposed set back the program by 24 days.”

    A Senate aide familiar with the meeting said that “every time anybody would say anything about ‘what would the Israelis say,’ they’d get cut off and Kerry would say, ‘You have to ignore what they’re telling you, stop listening to the Israelis on this.’”

If this is the kind of presentation Kerry thinks will convince the Senate to give a stamp of approval of a drift toward appeasement of Iran, it’s little surprise that there seems to be little trust on the Hill in his judgment.

Kerry’s remarks were in keeping with the tone of Kerry’s temper tantrum during a press interview last week in Israel during which he vented his frustration about Israel’s opposition to his proposed deal with Iran and placed all the blame for the failure of the peace talks he has pushed with Palestinians on the Jewish state and even seemed to rationalize Palestinian violence.

But the unwillingness to take Kerry at his word isn’t just a matter of being shocked at his animus toward America’s sole democratic ally in the Middle East. It’s also because senators who remember the U.S. missteps that led to North Korea getting a bomb have seen this movie before. As Kirk noted, Wendy Sherman, Kerry’s aid who is leading the U.S. participation in the P5+1 talks with Iran, has little credibility when it comes to nuclear negotiations:

    Kirk also criticized Sherman, whose “record on North Korea is a total failure and embarrassment to her service.” Sherman was part of the U.S. negotiating team that focused on North Korea in the 1990s.

    “Wendy wants you to forget her service on North Korea,” Kirk said. “You shouldn’t allow her.”

This is significant because Kerry wants the Senate to believe that he knows what’s he’s doing in advocating a deal that would have left in place Iran’s “right” to enrich uranium and did nothing to halt construction on its plutonium reactor. Those terms were so transparently weak that even the French couldn’t stomach the effort to appease Iran resulting in Kerry leaving Geneva last weekend without the accord that he’s so desperate to sign.

His claims that more restrictions on Iran’s ability to sell oil to fund terrorism and nukes would “break faith” with Iran are also puzzling and will only feed speculation that the U.S. has been conducting secret back channel talks with Tehran that have been predicated on Obama administration promises to give the ayatollahs the sanctions relief they want but getting little or nothing in return.

But by throwing down the gauntlet on Israel in this fashion in a Congress where a wall-to-wall bipartisan coalition in support for the Jewish state exists may have been a stunning miscalculation. Kerry has dared the Senate to call him out for a campaign of feckless diplomacy that seems motivated more by a desire to achieve détente with the Islamist tyrants of Tehran and resentment of Israel than concern about the dangers of a nuclear Iran.

Whatever little credibility the secretary had left after the foreign policy disasters concerning Egypt, Syria and the Middle East peace process that he has presided over this year, seems to have gone down the drain in another fit of temper. Kerry may want Congress to ignore Israel but judging by the poor reviews he got yesterday, it’s a lot more likely that it will ignore him and ratify more Iran sanctions.

November 14, 2013 | 7 Comments »

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

Leave a Reply

7 Comments / 7 Comments

  1. Looks like the US want to save at any cost the honor of “Khamenei” and allow just < 5%!!! regardless of the consequences.

  2. “An incompetent salesman like Kerry can’t make a bad deal look good.”

    Well said, Norman F. Reminds me of Yiddish proverbs.

  3. A vast majority of U.S. Jews stand with Obama-Kerry on their efforts to reach a détente with Iran and against grave concerns raised in that regard by Israel and both Houses of Congress.

    How do we know that? Well J Street has said so.

    Just 2 weeks ago, October 30/13 J Street’s support of the Obama-Kerry initiative was boldly declared on its blog under the title: J Street Backs Kerry’s Diplomatic Approach to Iran http://jstreet.org/blog/post/j-street-backs-kerrys-diplomatic-approach-to-iran_1

    Reacting to pointed rejection by Netanyahu and the U.S. Senate to the Obama-Kerry strategy to achieve a deal with Iran and the kind of deal Obama-Kerry have in mind, J Street has now prepared a petition to U.S. Senators, again claiming the vast majority of U.S. Jews support Obama-Kerry on the Iran deal initiative and demands that the Senate not undermine their efforts. http://act.jstreet.org/sign/iran_negotiations/

    Surely the vast majority of U.S. Jews that J Street claims to speak for must therefore know better than Netanyahu, his small Jewish Israeli and U.S. minority of hawks that support him and who J Street also disses and the U.S. Senators as to what is in Israel’s best interests.

    J Street’s brain trust and the vast majority of U.S. Jews they speak for should know better, shouldn’t they?

  4. The problem is that Kerry is selling appeasement towards a virulently anti-American regime. He wants goodwill shown towards Iran when Iran rejects any nuclear proliferation safeguards. That’s exactly the problem.

    A good deal doesn’t need a salesman. An incompetent salesman like Kerry can’t make a bad deal look good.

  5. “A Senate aide familiar with the meeting said that ‘every time anybody would say anything about “what would the Israelis say,” they’d get cut off and Kerry would say, “You have to ignore what they’re telling you, stop listening to the Israelis on this”…’

    “If this is the kind of presentation Kerry thinks will convince the Senate to give a stamp of approval of a drift toward appeasement of Iran, it’s little surprise that there seems to be little trust on the Hill in his judgment.”

    Perhaps they knew that the former Senator had already demonstrated such stellar judgment over THIS CHARMING LITTLE AFFAIR OF NOTSOLONG AGO. If they didn’t know, they could still be shown. . . .

  6. Even Alan Dershowitz finally woke up – Oppose the deal on Iran, he says
    http://madisdead.blogspot.co.il/2013/11/alan-dershowitz-finally-woke-up-oppose.html

    The quintessence of the US-Israel split on Iran
    http://www.madisdead.blogspot.co.il/2013/11/the-quintessence-of-us-israel-split-on.html

    The difference on Iran between Israel and the US is fundamental. Netanyahu understands that the Mutually Assured Destruction MAD doctrine is inapplicable to Iran and therefore the threat from Iran is global and orders of magnitude more severe than if this were not the case.

    The US apparently believes Bernard Lewis is some looney professor who has no idea what he is talking about.