Israel Matzav: Obama and pro-Israel community differ on sanctions

Obama and pro-Israel community differ on sanctions

With sanctions against Iran looking more and more likely, differences are emerging between the pro-Israel community and much of the US Congress on the one hand, and the Obama administration on the other hand, regarding what sanctions should be implemented.

With the backing of many Jewish groups, Congress appears to be pressing ahead with a package that targets Iran's energy sector.

While the White House appears to support new congressional sanctions, it appears to favor more narrow measures targeting the Iranian leadership and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, considered especially vulnerable because of the recent anti-government turmoil.

In part the debate is over which approach would do more to help opposition forces in Iran. But also playing a role is the Obama administration’s continuing emphasis on securing international backing for tougher measures against Tehran, the idea being that sweeping U.S. sanctions aimed at the Iranian energy sector could turn off several key nations.

Additionally, the Obama administration has not counted out the prospect of engagement with Iran, although the Mahmoud Ahmadinejad government has put to rest any notion that it will entertain the West's offer to enrich Iran's uranium to medical research levels in exchange for transparency about the Islamic Republic's suspected nuclear weapons program.

While I sympathize with the idea of doing as much as possible to help the Iranian opposition, given the limited time available for sanctions to have a chance of working, stopping the nuclear weapons program has to be the top priority.

I have no sympathy for the goal of trying to 'engage' with Ahmadinejad and Khameni. The notion that those two will seriously negotiate over Iran's nuclear capabilities is laughable (but not funny), and attempting to leave the door open to Ahmadinejad means unjustifiably tempering any backing given to the opposition.

Similar sanctions packages passed by Congress in the 1990s also were never implemented by Presidents Clinton and Bush, yet they had an almost immediate effect because of the threat of being implemented. Major Western traders pulled out of Iran, which is partly why the country’s refinement capabilities are in disarray. Iran, a major oil exporter, still must import up to 40 percent of its refined petroleum.

The principals in shaping the previous sanctions -- in Congress, the Clinton administration and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee -- now openly admit that they were playing a coordinated "good cop-bad cop" game: Republicans who backed the sanctions would quietly shape their criticisms of the Clinton administration in consultation with administration officials; Clinton officials then would cite that "pressure" in getting European nations to join in efforts to isolate Iran.

It's not clear now whether a similar dynamic is at work between the White House and Congress. Some insiders say it is; others say the Obama administration is genuinely wary of punishing sanctions and is unhappy with the pressure from Congress and the pro-Israel community.

Sorry but there is nothing in the Obama administration's dossier that would indicate that they are playing a good cop, bad cop routine with Congress. I'd be surprised to hear that Obama is even discussing this with any Republicans. This 'post-partisan' administration has turned into the most partisan administration since Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal.

The sanctions passed the House with a veto-proof margin. Let's hope they do the same in the Senate.

Israel Matzav: Obama and pro-Israel community differ on sanctions