Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Neocons and Republican candidates go nuclear over historic Iran deal

American Israel Public Affairs Committee

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is mobilizing its infamous lobbying infrastructure to pressure members of Congress to revoke the Iran nuclear agreement. But why is AIPAC so adamantly opposed to the Iran nuclear deal? Comments by former AIPAC employees suggest that the lobby is motivated as much by its own survival as it is the survival of Israel. A recent Nelson Report newsletter quoted a former AIPAC official who stated that “Iran has been an enormously lucrative fundraiser for AIPAC” and that “without this cause AIPAC and this Israeli government” may have to “focus on more critical issue [sic], like peace with the Palestinians.”

Lindsey Graham

2016 Republican presidential candidate Sen. Lindsey Graham calls the Iran deal a “disaster” and a “death sentence for Israel.” Renowned for his hysteric rhetoric, Graham also claims that the agreement was the “biggest mistake any president of the United States could make.”

Citizens for a Nuclear Free Iran

Citizens for a Nuclear Free Iran (CNFI) is an offshoot of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee that was founded to “educate the public about the dangers” of the Iran nuclear agreement. The group has launched a multimillion-dollar ad campaign against the deal, primarily aimed at Democratic constituencies. One prominent nuclear expert has described CNFI’s TV ads as “very misleading.”

Ted Cruz

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), a 2016 Republican presidential candidate, wildly claims that the Iran deal has effectively made the “Obama administration the world’s leading financier of radical Islamic terrorism.” His comments have earned him criticism from across party lines, including from Mitt Romney who has said Cruz went “way over the line.”

Mike Huckabee

2016 Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee appears intent on making the craziest claims regarding the Iran deal among his fellow candidates, saying that Obama appears intent on marching the Israelis “to the door of the oven.” His comments were condemned by numerous Jewish organizations as well Israel’s ambassador to the United States, Ron Dermer, who said they were inappropriate.

Foundation for Defense of Democracies

Pundits at the neoconservative Foundation for Defense of Democracies have assailed the nuclear deal reached between Iran and major world powers. “Mr. Obama seeks to accommodate and appease Iran’s rulers,” argues FDD President Clifford, adding: “It would be an exaggeration to say that such policies always lead to major wars and holocausts. But can you tell me when such policies have led to good outcomes?”

Eli Lake

Eli Lake, the hawkish columnist for Bloomberg View and a strident critic of diplomatic efforts to resolve the Iranian nuclear dispute, has lambasted the Iran deal, calling it “an abandonment of traditional American leadership in the Middle East and in the areas of nonproliferation and terrorism.”

Leon Wieseltier

In a recent article, Atlantic columnist Leon Wieseltier, a proponent of U.S intervention abroad for purportedly liberal causes and a “pro-Israel” ideologue, lambasted the nuclear deal with Iran, saying it would “strengthen a contemptible regime.” He added that the United States should resume its “hostility to the Iranian regime” and “arm the enemies of Iran in Syria Iraq.” Responded one observer: “Does he know who Iran’s enemies in Iraq are? Let me give some hints: they don’t care much about the Freedom Agenda or the Iranian people—they like beheading Shiites.”

Scott Walker

Wisconsin governor and presidential candidate Scott Walker has denounced the nuclear deal with Iran, saying that he would “repudiate” it on his first day in office regardless of whether U.S. allies are on board for re-imposing sanctions on Iran. Walker has also doubled down on comments he previously made about not knowing whether President Obama was a Christian. “I don’t know. I presume he is. … But I’ve never asked him about that,” Walker recently said at a Koch network donor summit.

Marco Rubio

Sen. Marco Rubio, reportedly a favorite Republican candidate of “pro-Israel” GOP-donor Sheldon Adelson, has joined his fellow candidates in attacking the Iran nuclear deal. Rubio has misleadingly argued that the U.S. will have to protect Iran’s nuclear sites, claiming that “if any other country tries to undermine [Iran’s]nuclear program, we have to help them defend themselves against Israel, Egypt, Saudis, our own allies." Politifact has rated this claim as “false.”

Michael Doran

Michael Doran, a former Bush administration foreign policy advisor and proponent of interventionist U.S. policies in the Middle East, has denounced the diplomatic agreement between Iran and six world powers. He claims that it would be “irresponsible” for a future Republican president to do “anything else” other than terminate the deal on his “first day in office.” He characterizes the agreement as the “foremost foreign policy challenge of our time.”

Letters

Right Web encourages feedback and comments. Send letters to rightweb.ips@gmail.com or call at 202-234-9382. We reserve the right to edit comments for clarity and brevity. Be sure to include your full name. Thank you.

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Bernard Lewis was a renowned historian of Islam and the Middle East who stirred controversy with his often chauvinistic attitude towards the Muslim world and his associations with high-profile neoconservatives and foreign policy hawks.


John Bolton, the controversial former U.S. ambassador to the UN and dyed-in the-wool foreign policy hawk, is President Trump’s National Security Adviser McMaster, reflecting a sharp move to the hawkish extreme by the administration.


Michael Joyce, who passed away in 2006, was once described by neoconservative guru Irving Kristol as the “godfather of modern philanthropy.”


Mike Pompeo, the Trump administration’s second secretary of state, is a long time foreign policy hawk and has led the public charge for an aggressive policy toward Iran.


Max Boot, neoconservative military historian at the Council on Foreign Relations, on Trump and Russia: “At every turn Trump is undercutting the ‘get tough on Russia’ message because he just can’t help himself, he just loves Putin too much.”


Michael Flynn is a former Trump administration National Security Advisor who was forced to step down only weeks on the job because of his controversial contacts with Russian officials before Trump took office.


Since taking office Donald Trump has revealed an erratic and extremely hawkish approach to U.S. foreign affairs, which has been marked by controversial actions like dropping out of the Iran nuclear agreement that have raised tensions across much of the world and threatened relations with key allies.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Soon after a Saudi-led coalition strike on a bus killed 40 children on August 9, a CENTCOM spokesperson stated to Vox, “We may never know if the munition [used] was one that the U.S. sold to them.”


The West has dominated the post-war narrative with its doctrine of liberal values, arguing that not only were they right in themselves but that economic success itself depended on their application. Two developments have challenged those claims. The first was the West’s own betrayal of its principles: on too many occasions the self interest of the powerful, and disdain for the victims of collateral damage, has showed through. The second dates from more recently: the growth of Chinese capitalism owes nothing to a democratic system of government, let alone liberal values.


Falsely demonizing all Muslims, their beliefs, and their institutions is exactly the wrong way to make Americans safer, because the more we scare ourselves with imaginary enemies, the harder it will be to find and protect ourselves from real ones.


Division in the ranks of the conservative movement is a critical sign that a war with Iran isn’t inevitable.


Donald Trump stole the headlines, but the declaration from the recent NATO summit suggests the odds of an unnecessary conflict are rising. Instead of inviting a dialogue, the document boasts that the Alliance has “suspended all practical civilian and military cooperation between NATO and Russia.” The fact is, NATO was a child of the Cold War, when the West believed that the Soviets were a threat. But Russia today is not the Soviet Union, and there’s no way Moscow would be stupid enough to attack a superior military force.


War with Iran may not be imminent, but neither was war with Iraq in late 2001.


Donald Trump was one of the many bets the Russians routinely place, recognizing that while most such bets will never pay off a few will, often in unpredictable ways. Trump’s actions since taking office provide the strongest evidence that this one bet is paying off handsomely for the Russians. Putin could hardly have made the script for Trump’s conduct at the recent NATO meeting any more to his liking—and any better designed to foment division and distrust within the Western alliance—than the way Trump actually behaved.


RightWeb
share