by Clifford D. May
Translated from Hebrew by Sally Zahav
Expanding on his remarks in written testimony, Flynn emphasized that Iran's increasing capabilities should be viewed in light of its intentions. But the White House, he said, has refused to "acknowledge the frequent warnings from our intelligence community, especially defense intelligence, regarding the hegemonic behaviors of the Islamic Republic of Iran."
Lt. Gen. Michael T.
Flynn (ret.) served 33 years in the U.S. Army. Being named President
Obama's director of the Defense Intelligence Agency in 2012 was the
culmination of his career. He thought his job was to relate facts, not
fables. It soon became clear that his superiors didn't agree.
Rep. Ileana
Ros-Lehtinen chairs the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle
East and North Africa. Rep. Ted Deutch is the ranking member. Last
week, they invited Flynn to testify. They -- and anyone else concerned
about the threats facing America and her allies -- should think hard
about what he told them.
Most pressing is the
nuclear deal with Iran's rulers that the president is attempting to
conclude by the end of this month. Flynn warned that it is shaping up
as "not a permanent fix but merely a placeholder. The 10-year time
frame only makes sense if the administration truly believes the Iranian
regime will change its strategic course." And that, he said, can only
be characterized as "wishful thinking."
Iran's rulers continue
to claim that whatever nuclear research they are conducting -- in
facilities buried under mountains and at military installations -- is
exclusively for generating electricity and other peaceful purposes. But
they also are developing missiles -- presumably not as a means for
keeping air conditioners humming in kindergartens. The missiles they
possess today can reach targets throughout most of the Middle East. The
missiles they will possess tomorrow, Flynn predicted, "will include
ICBMs capable of attacking the American homeland."
He is puzzled by the
fact that Iran's missile program has been excluded from the
negotiations: "I don't see how delivery systems (missiles or
sophisticated guidance) can be excluded from any 'deal.' Reach is as
important as force, just as in boxing."
Expanding on his remarks in written testimony,
Flynn emphasized that Iran's increasing capabilities should be viewed
in light of its intentions. But the White House, he said, has refused
to "acknowledge the frequent warnings from our intelligence community,
especially defense intelligence, regarding the hegemonic behaviors of
the Islamic Republic of Iran." In other words, Iran's supreme leader
and his Islamic Revolutionary Guards clearly mean to extend their
theocratic empire throughout Middle East.
Flynn told lawmakers --
more tactfully than I am about to -- that Obama's policies are failing
not just vis-à-vis Iran but also vis-à-vis the Islamic State group and
al-Qaida. The death toll in Syria since a civil war began there in 2011
and in Iraq since the U.S. withdrawal the same year is over 200,000
with no indication that the carnage will end any time soon. Libya and
Yemen are in chaos. Russia, China and North Korea are taking advantage
of what they perceive as American fecklessness. One could go on.
Not only isn't Obama
asking his advisors for an alternative policy, "anyone who proposes
one," Flynn told Congress, "is immediately exiled from the
establishment."
He knows whereof he
speaks. He was -- assuming I've read the evidence correctly and I'm
confident I have -- forced out as military intelligence chief last year
for refusing to toe the administration's line that the "tide of war"
is receding and that the terrorists are "on the run." Echoing those
memes would have been a career booster but it would have been dishonest
at a time when he and other top intelligence officers were well aware
that the conflicts initiated by those claiming to fight for the global
triumph of Islam are spreading, intensifying and accelerating.
The White House insists
that if Iran signs a nuclear agreement and then proceeds to violate it,
U.S. intelligence will not be blindsided. As someone who knows what
America's spooks can and cannot do, Flynn is skeptical. He cited a
recent Defense Science Board study concluding that "creative missile
and nuclear proliferators" have the upper hand "in the cat and mouse
game they are playing with the United States and the international
community."
Not long ago, Obama was
saying that no deal with Iran would be preferable to a bad deal with
Iran. Were that proposition were still operative, the American side
would walk unless Iran agreed to "open up all of its facilities,
scientific, military, and current nuclear facilities, for international
inspections."
Iran's rulers have been
saying they will never do that. The most they may permit is "managed
access" which lets them decide where inspectors go and when. Would that
give them an opportunity to hide what they don't want inspectors to
see? The question answers itself.
The president and his
supporters say if we don't go along with Iran's terms for an agreement
the consequence will be war. Flynn told Congress that a range of other
options should be considered and he suggested key components of some of
them. His main point, however, is that "we face a very radicalized
element in the likes of Islamic extremism, Sunni and Shia." That leads
him to this tough conclusion: "The administration's refusal to state
what we can plainly see is beyond irresponsible."
He worries that unless
there is a shift, the result will be "entropy on a scale not seen in
centuries. We would have no way of anticipating risk, much less
managing or containing it. Delusions abound these days, but anyone who
can argue for an ICBM- or nuclear-capable Iran is more a pyromaniac
than pragmatist."
If Flynn's warnings
have begun to resonate on Capitol Hill, I would expect a solid majority
of members of Congress -- Democratic and Republican alike -- to
vehemently oppose any agreement with Iran based on "wishful thinking."
But perhaps that's just wishful thinking on my part.
Clifford D. May is president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and a columnist for The Washington Times.
Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=12899
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment