In March
2015, US President Hussein Obama called for Iran to release three US citizens
held hostage by Iranian officials (Emma Hinchliffe, “Obama calls for release of
Americans held in Iran”, USAToday, March 20, 2015). One of the hostages
has been held for three years. In addition, a fourth US citizen was (and is
still) considered ‘missing’ in Iran. Obama also called on Iran to help find
him.
That call
for release occurred during nuclear talks with Iran. But the call wasn’t linked
to the talks. It was simply a plea for mercy as a way for Iran to honor the
Persian New Year celebration which was taking place at that time.
A couple of
weeks later, however, after negotiations officials announced that the talks
would continue after a March 30, 2015 deadline, US TV personality Montel
Williams, who had been trying to secure the release of one of the hostages,
severely criticized the Obama administration for contemplating signing a deal
with Iran without bringing home these US citizens (“Fiery Montel: How Dare We Make a Deal With Iran
While Americans Are Still Held?!”, FoxNewsInsider, April 3, 2015). Williams
said that Obama had just announced that his ‘deal’ with Iran had satisfied the
United States' ‘core objectives’. But Williams’ reaction to that was, how could
Obama do that while these Americans remained imprisoned? (ibid).
US Secretary
of State John Kerry, meanwhile, had declared that ‘conversations are continuing
on the release of American prisoners’ (ibid). But, Williams added, based on his
personal interactions with the US State department, he had ‘no idea what Kerry
meant with that statement’ (ibid).
He said the
State Department had told him he was ‘pompous’ for speaking out about this
issue.
He seemed
particularly upset that Kerry hadn’t even called the family of the hostage he
(Williams) was concerned about to tell them what was happening. His comments
suggested that he believed the State Department wasn’t doing anything for this
hostage; he suggested Kerry lying.
Two months
later, a couple of US Congressman announced that the White House should link
the success of the Iran negotiations to the fate of the Americans who remained
in Iran (Felicia Schwartz, “Lawmakers: Americans Held In Iran Complicate
Nuclear Talks”, Wall Street Journal, June 2, 2015). Their attitude was,
there should be no agreement, period, until the hostages were released (ibid).
The State
department said negotiators had raised this issue in every round of nuclear
negotiations, but “those discussions aren’t working” (ibid). One inference from
this assertion was, the US simply wasn’t persuasive enough to move the Iranians
on this point. A second inference was, the US simply wasn’t interested in
hostages while it focused on Iran’s nuclear program.
We learned
more about the true US position on these captives after the July 14-15, 2015
agreement was completed. During a post-deal news conference, Obama was asked
how he could celebrate the deal while abandoning hostages who were imprisoned and
reportedly tortured (Brian Hayes, “After
Leaving American Hostages to Rot in Iran, Obama Just Did the UNTHINKABLE”, TopRightNews,
July 18, 2015). Obama justified his neglect of the captive Americans by
suggesting that the US had deliberately not tied the nuclear negotiations to
the Americans’ release (ibid). The US didn’t do that because, he said, Iran
would then have seen the hostages as a chance to get ‘additional concessions
from the Americans’ (ibid).
That’s an
interesting statement. It suggests that the US had no courage whatsoever in
these negotiations. It was afraid of Iran.
But that
wasn’t the end of the story. After abandoning the hostages, the US ‘did the
unthinkable’ (ibid). Obama ordered the release of a top Iranian scientist who had
been arrested in California (in 2011) for attempting to acquire equipment for
Iran’s military nuclear program (ibid). The US explanation for this release was
that a series of prisoner releases had been done through ‘secret back-channel’
talks that had begun long before. These talks had led to the current nuclear
negotiations.
That
suggested that prisoner/hostage releases were in fact connected to the nuclear
talks. Brian Hayes (above) wrote, “I
thought Obama said any talk of releasing our hostages would kill the
deal. But his ‘negotiators’” had instead arranged the release of their
prisoners [emphasis his]” (ibid).
Hayes couldn’t
believe this had happened. He felt Obama had betrayed America (ibid).
Of course, the
US suggested that these secret talks were about “a series of prisoner releases
by both sides” (ibid). But no one has stepped forward to identify any Americans
who had benefitted from this arrangement.
The only
prisoners connected to these ‘back-channel’ talks to be released were Iranians
held by the US.
A week after
the ‘agreement’ was announced, Obama gave a speech at a Pittsburgh, Pa.
Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) Convention (Andrew Husband, “Obama Demands
Release of Detained Americans While Defending Iran Deal”, mediaite, July
21, 2015). Obama said, “We are not going
to relent until we bring home our American who are unjustly detained in Iran”
(ibid).
Such post-deal
determination rings hollow. During the talks, Obama had a bargaining position
against Iran. Iran wanted a deal. It wanted its frozen 100+billion dollars.
But Obama hadn’t
been relentless about the hostages. He’d caved in. Becoming relentless now
seemed irrelevant.
Hussein
Obama fails to help America. He fails to help Americans. He helps Iran.
He’s the
anti-Churchill. America—and these four Americans—will suffer.
If you’re
thinking about making aliyah, do it now. America will betray your trust.
The time has come to pick up, pack up and leave.
No comments:
Post a Comment