Radio America Online News Bureau

Iran

Crippling Iran Sanctions, Gun Control vs. Facts, Blankenship Won’t Go Away

by


Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America cheer Secretary of State Mike Pompeo for inflicting punishing sanctions on Iran, making it clear the Trump administration does not think the Iranian regime can be partners on anything. They also sigh as the gun control movement tries to advance its agenda again after the Santa Fe High School shooting, even though their proposed legislation would have done nothing to prevent this horrific shooting. Jim also asks why so few are interested in finding out why teenage boys are now lashing out and killing people when they are bullied or rejected by girls. And they discuss Don Blankenship’s pathetic attempt to keep running for U.S. Senate in West Virginia despite getting thrashed in the GOP primary and a West Virginia law that prevents losers in primaries from running again in the general election.

Share

Nauert vs. Clueless Cuomo, WH Aide Mocks McCain, Sleazy NY Pols

by


Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America applaud State Department Spokeswoman Heather Nauert for shredding Chris Cuomo’s suggestion that Iran is suddenly a problem in the Middle East because President Trump withdrew the U.S. from the nuclear deal.  They also scold White House communications aide Kelly Sadler for suggesting Sen. John McCain’s opposition to CIA nominee Gina Haspel didn’t matter because “he’s dying anyway.”  And as the media conveniently forget about the scandalous downfall of New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman just a couple of days after his resignation over allegations of abusing multiple women, Jim notices how a disturbingly high percentage of such scandals involve politicians from New York City.

Share

‘Israel Will Never Accept Iranian Bases on the Border’

by

Israeli Defense Forces responded to an Iranian missile attack in northern Israel with an immediate barrage against Iran’s command and control infrastructure inside Syria, and a retired Israeli general says he hopes Iran got the message that its meddling near the border will not be tolerated.

Iran fired 20 missiles into Israel.  Reports suggest the Iron Dome missile defense system worked well and that no Israeli citizens were injured.  On the contrary, reports also suggest Israeli airstrikes did considerable damage to Iranian assets.

“I hope after the lessons they have been taught last night…they will change their attitudes,” said retired Israeli Brigadier Gen. Elihu Ben-Onn.  “Israel will never accept any Iranian bases on the border between Israel and Syria on the Golan Heights.  There is no way Israel will accept that from them.”

He says it’s bad enough that Iran already bankrolls and supplies terrorist groups like Hezbollah and Hamas with threaten Israel on a daily basis from Lebanon and Gaza respectively.

Ben-Onn is also not surprised that Israel is being criticized more harshly for the extent of its response than Iran is for initiating the hostilities.

“Unfortunately, whenever we are winning, we are to apologize for that.  I don’t know why.

“Those people are a little bit ignorant and don’t understand what it means to live in the Middle East, what kind of enemies we have, what kind of struggles we are facing every day for our security.  We are talking about our lives.  This is not a movie.  This is not cinema.  This is not Hollywood,” said Ben-Onn.

“We don’t like the idea that they don’t understand the situation, but we know that we are the good guys and they are the bad guys,” added Ben-Onn.

Ben-Onn is encouraged that Iranian leadership got the message from the Israeli counter-strike.

“Just a couple of minutes ago, I heard that the Iranian president, Hassan Rouhani, said he didn’t want to open a new front in the Middle East.  That was kind of soft language by the Iranians saying, ‘OK, maybe we tried but we learned our lesson and we’re going to stop this policy,'” said Ben-Onn.

Israel and Iran have never been directly at war.  In fact, Ben-Onn says before the Islamic Revolution, the two countries had a productive relationship.

“Before 1979, when (Ayatollah) Khomeini came to power, Israel and Iran had a daily flight from Tel Aviv to Tehran.  Many Israeli businesses worked in Iran and built the infrastructure in many fields: agriculture, construction, and they had many good times between the two countries.

“We never had a fight or any conflict.  The only conflict is that the Iranians are supporting the enemies on the borders of Israel.  The moment they are getting closer to the border and using missiles, this is something the Israeli government will never accept,” said Ben-Onn.

 

Share

‘Undue Concessions from the West Are Ending’

by

President Trump’s decision to withdraw the United States from the Iranian nuclear deal leaves Iranian leaders with the grim realization that the era of endless concessions from the West is over and that their own grip on power continues to slip.

On Tuesday, Trump announced he was exiting the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA.  In the hours since, Iranian officials have alternately vowed to keep honoring the deal with the remaining partners and to exit the JCPOA themselves and begin openly enriching uranium again.

Some official burned a paper American flag inside the Iranian parliament.

“It’s very important to realize that after several decades of appeasing the regime in Tehran…finally we see that the President of the United States is actually declaring that all the lavish money that was made (available) to the regime by the previous administration was actually disastrous,” said Alireza Jafarzadeh, deputy director of the Washington office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran.

The NCRI has played a key role in uncovering details of Iran’s nuclear ambitions.  And Jafarzadeh says the contrast in response to Iran from the past two administrations ought to be obvious.

“[Trump] has said [Iran] has funded its long reign of chaos and terror by plundering the wealth of its own people.  That is, of course, a sharp contrast with what we have seen before.  I think that’s what the regime is sensing,” said Jafarzadeh.

“That era of gaining undue concessions from the outside world, from the West, is actually ending.  They were pretty much getting away with everything they were doing and gaining concessions for their terrorism and development of nuclear weapons, and their missile program, all of that,” he added.

Unrest is raging in Iran, mostly over rapidly deteriorating economic conditions.  Unemployment is high and so is inflation.  Just two weeks ago, Jafarzadeh said the regime was desperate to keep the U.S. in the JCPOA.

Now he says, the pressure inside Iran will intensify.

“The regime was already frightened.  They were afraid of their own population, and then comes this new position by the United States that simply adds fuel to the fire that is already burning the regime through the uprisings in Iran.

“The regime’s economy is in shambles.  There’s a huge amount of corruption going on.  It’s very institutionalized corruption from top to bottom.  The regime has not been able to contain its own population, who want nothing but change,” said Jafarzadeh.

Jafarzadeh says the policies and excuses offered by the regime are also falling on deaf ears.  He says protesters want Iran out of Syria, chanting slogans such as “Leave alone Syria, think about us” and “Neither Gaza nor Lebanon, I give my life for Iran.”

Even blaming “The Great Satan” doesn’t work anymore.  Jafarzadeh says Iranians in rural areas – typically the places that most strongly support the regime – are chanting lines such as “The enemy is right here, they wrongly say it’s America.”

Jafarzadeh says pressure is clearly building on the regime and that American sanctions will add even more.

“That simply makes things a lot worse.  It just gives a picture for the future of the regime, much more bleak than it was before,” he said.

Standard Podcast [ 11:24 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Iran Decision ‘Right and Overdue’

by

President Trump announced Tuesday that the United States will withdraw from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal on May 12, citing the ineffectiveness of the agreement in stopping development of a nuclear weapon and announcing tough new economic sanctions to put the pressure back on the Iranian government.

In 2015, President Obama, through then-Secretary of State John Kerry, signed on to the JCPOA without consulting Congress.  The stated conclusion of the deal was that the U.S. and five key allies would ease sanctions and return frozen Iranian assets in exchange for Iran allowing international inspections at its admitted nuclear sites.

By labeling the plan an executive agreement rather than a treaty, Obama and Kerry were able to bypass Congress.  But they also set the stage for a future president reversing the policy unilaterally.

Obama administration veterans, the media, and America’s partners in the agreement, known formally as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA, are very critical of Trump decision, but he is earning wide praise from most congressional Republicans and conservative policy experts.

“The thing that you’ve got to admire about President Trump is that he makes a decision.  He move forward with it.  We will deal with it and the rest of the world will deal with this,” said Rep. Ted Yoho, R-Fla, who chairs the House Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific.

Center for Security Policy President Frank Gaffney, who served as Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy in the Reagan administration, is also very happy with the move.

“I think the decision was both right and overdue.  I’m thrilled he has taken this step,” said Gaffney.  “It finally denies legitimacy to this heinous regime, which could just mean that the people of Iran are able to achieve freedom as well as us achieving a measure of security that would otherwise be denied us.”

Gaffney points out Iran is not only the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism but has proven it cannot be trusted to honor agreements.

“It has cheated on every agreement that it has participated in.  It has pursued weapons of mass destruction.  It continuously says that it seeks death to America.  It has gotten an enormous amount of money (from the nuclear deal), which it has used to further endanger our interests and those of our friends and allies in the region and beyond,” said Gaffney.

Yoho also cited Iran’s bad faith on the world stage.

“Right after it was agreed to by those entities, not us in Congress, Iran fired ballistic missiles and that was against the clause of exercising good faith and Iran broke that the next day,” said Yoho.

But even if Iran had abided by the terms of the JCPOA, Yoho says there are still terrible flaws, including the gaping holes in the inspections.

“They were supposed to be able to check anywhere, anytime, any place per John Kerry.  I was in the hearing when he said that.  Then it turned out it was 24 hours notice and (no access) to places like military bases.  Those places are off limits.  Then we can only inspect those places we know.  We can’t inspect places that we may hear of,” said Yoho.

Where Yoho and Gaffney strongly disagree is what should happen once the sanctions put Iran in a vulnerable spot again.

“Let those start to work.  Let the dust settle.  Then we’ll see how earnest and sincere Iran is, wanting to come to the table and put this nuclear business behind everybody,” said Yoho.

Gaffney believes there should never be a table to return to when it comes to Iran.

“There is clearly no point in having a deal with people who can’t be trusted – not only can’t be trusted but can be trusted to violate any obligation they make,” said Gaffney.

He says the only permanent solution to Iranian nuclear ambitions is for the Iranian people to kick the mullahs to the curb.

“I think the only solution to this is for the people of Iran to remove this regime that enslaves and brutalizes them and threatens us.  And I think that is clearly the desire of the people of Iran,” said Gaffney.

“We will end the threat of an Iranian nuclear weapon by once and for all seeing this regime removed from power,” added Gaffney.

Standard Podcast [ 7:35 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Standard Podcast [ 7:21 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Iran Desperate for U.S. to Keep Nuke Deal

by

President Trump’s instinct is to scrap the Iran nuclear deal while French President Emmanuel Macron is willing to amend it but not rescind it without another plan in place, but a leading figure in the Iranian resistance says the deal doesn’t stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons but does help the radical mullahs stay in power.

President Trump has until May 12 to declare whether Iran is in compliance with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, and whether the U.S. will remain a party to the seven-nation agreement.

Alireza Jafarzadeh, deputy director of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, says despite Tehran’s bluster about exiting the deal if the U.S. does, the Iranian leaders badly need the agreement to continue.

“There’s no way the Iranian regime wants to lose this agreement.  They want to do everything possible to keep it, because the regime knows that absent this agreement, there’s really not too many other options left for them,” said Jafarzadeh, who says threats to the contrary are nothing but “hot air.”.

He says that’s because internal unrest is reaching a boiling point.

“The regime is facing tremendous problems domestically, particularly on the economic side of it.  We’ve seen the uprising going on since December that were built around the economic corruption in Iran and the high rise in prices for very basic food.  Inflation is so high.  Inflation is skyrocketing,” said Jafarzadeh.

Iran is clamping down on media outlets and social media, so reports of the ongoing protests are hard to find, but Jafarzadeh says they are still going strong and are appearing in many different parts of the country.

“The protests are continuing ever since they started.  It expanded to 142 cities starting back in December,” said Jafarzadeh, listing off a number of cities seeing major protests in the past several days.

“Every week there is a new hot spot in Iran.  People are chanting with the same intensity against the regime, making significant demands, none of which the regime can really meet,” said Jafarzadeh.

He says some chants even explicitly scold the government for blaming its problems on America and stating that only the Iranian regime is to blame.

Keeping the deal in place is critical for the Iranian leaders because the money that flowed back into Iran from the agreement has been trumpeted as the solution to Iran’s economic problems.

However, even that good fortune could soon backfire on Iran’s leadership.

“Once the people realize that all the money that was given to the Iranian regime ended up in the pocket of the mullahs, the ayatollahs, and the Revolutionary Guard.  It was basically the military structure and the clerical structure that benefited from that.

“Imagine if there’s more pressure built against the regime what kind of political problems it’s going to create for the Iranian regime,” said Jafarzadeh.

The more pertinent issue for Trump, Macron, and other world leaders is whether the JCPOA is actually preventing the advancement of Iran’s nuclear program.  Jafarzadeh is convinced it doesn’t.

“The agreement has kept almost all of the nuclear infrastructure of the Iranian regime intact.  It has allowed the research and development of more advanced centrifuges that could actually enrich uranium much faster and more efficiently further down the road.

“It hasn’t put any meaningful restrictions on the missile program of the Iranian regime, which is really marching forward with more missile tests on nuclear-capable ballistic missiles.  And it has this ridiculous sunset clause.  In a few years, all those restrictions on the nuclear program are removed,” said Jafarzadeh.

And he says the hurdles to inspections make enforcement of the existing deal virtually impossible.

“Most importantly, there’s no serious access and inspection of a number of nuclear sites where the core of the nuclear program of Iran is.  It’s not just the enrichment but the weaponization part of the program.  We exposed at least six nuclear sites we believe need to be inspected,” said Jafarzadeh.

He says the bottom line is the JCPOA doesn’t stop Iran from getting nukes.

“As of now, the current restrictions are not sufficient enough to prevent the Iranian regime from developing nuclear weapons further down the road,” said Jafarzadeh.

Standard Podcast [ 7:45 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

McInerney: Russia Probe Makes Syria Policy Much Tougher

by

Retired U.S. Air Force Lt. General Tom McInerney suspects any response to apparent chemical attacks in Syria may be on hold while the Trump administration tries to build a coalition for any action and he says solving the problem in Syria is much more difficult because partisan sniping over Russia is hampering our ability to find common diplomatic ground with Moscow.

Earlier in the week, reports suggested a military response could come by the end of the week.  On Thursday, President Trump made it clear a more deliberate approach may be in the works.

“Never said when an attack on Syria would take place. Could be very soon or not so soon at all!” tweeted Trump.

McInerney says there is likely a very good reason for a delayed response.

“I think his national security advisers have advised him to get a coalition involved with this, to include the UK, French, perhaps the Jordanians, the Egyptians, Israelis, Saudis and Emirates – a coalition of the willing that can represent a very broad front,” said McInerney.

“When you have a coalition like this, it means they’re all in agreement and they’re willing to use their forces.  And you have Arab forces.  I believe it’s important to use Arab forces,” he said.  “It makes us define the problem more.”

McInerney says another critical element is to confirm the chemical attack actually came from the Syrian government.

“We’ve got to confirm with the most precise accuracy that it was the Assad regime that did this.  The reason I say that is because Al-Nusra was looking for chlorine stocks a number of months ago and it would be in their interest to want to keep the U.S. involved and for the U.S. to attack the Assad forces,” said McInerney.

He says there may be an easy way to determine blame in this case.

“Was it an airplane with barrel bombs or was it an IED?  Because we know the Al-Nusra forces do not have aircraft,” said McInerney, who adds that U.S.-led surveillance ought to provide critical evidence on whether the attack came from the air, although it may take time to comb through the intelligence.

If Assad is responsible, McInerney favors a big response?

“I think we need to eliminate his air force.  Is that difficult to do?  Yes, it is, because he has moved his forces on Russian bases with Iranians.  I’m not worried about killing Iranians.  I think they need to be pushed back and of course the Israelis are very concerned about this Shia Crescent that is sweeping across,” said McInerney.

In addition to the Syrians, Russians, and Iranians, U.S. policy must also consider how any action impacts the Kurds, ISIS, the Free Syrian Army and other groups in the area.

McInerney says the complexity of the issue is immense, and he says it’s now far more complicated because of the ongoing Russia probes here in the U.S.

“Because the Democratic Party laid out this false narrative, this fake news about Russian collusion, it has soured the diplomatic relations with the U.S. and Russia.  It’s difficult to communicate with them in a reasonable way.

“That’s why the Mueller investigation must be terminated as quickly as possible.  Clearly Russia is a great power.  Still, it’s got lots of nuclear weapons which concern us.  They are modernizing their nuclear forces, and we do not want to let this get out of control,” said McInerney.

McInerney says the region is also more complex as a result of the Obama administration pulling the U.S. out of Iraq entirely and failing to honor the red line it set for chemical weapon use in Syria.

“Unfortunately, because of Obama’s ineptness, he helped create the vacuum that the Russians were able to move in on,” said McInerney.

Standard Podcast [ 11:46 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Saudi Crown Prince: Israel Has Right to Its Own Land

by

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud says that Israel has a right to its own land, and although there’s no immediate change in official Saudi policy, a former Clinton administration official says that position could lead to a tidal shift in the region and the quest for Middle East peace.

In an interview with “The Atlantic,” reporter Jeffrey Goldberg asked the crown prince, who is effectively running Saudi Arabia, whether he believes the “Jewish people have a right to a nation-state in at least part of their ancestral homeland?”

“I believe that each people, anywhere, has a right to live in their peaceful nation. I believe the Palestinians and the Israelis have the right to have their own land. But we have to have a peace agreement to assure the stability for everyone and to have normal relations,” said bin Salman.

When pressed about whether he has any religious objection to the existence of a Jewish state, the prince gave a more detailed answer.

“We have religious concerns about the fate of the holy mosque in Jerusalem and about the rights of the Palestinian people. This is what we have. We don’t have any objection against any other people,” said bin Salman.

Bin Salman also made it clear that the threat posed by a nuclear Iran is a critical factor in warmer relations with Israel, stating that Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khameini “makes Hitler look good.”

The crown prince also gave some reasons for cooling the optimism.  In the same interview, bin Salman also said there is not an anti-Semitism problem in Saudi Arabia and that “there is no Wahhabism. We don’t believe we have Wahhabism.”  He also does not recognize Israeli territory gained since 1967

Nonetheless, American Foreign Policy Council Senior Fellow Lawrence J. Haas says the prince’s comments on Israel could be earthshaking.

“This statement is, potentially, monumentally important.  It is, in essence, a recognition of the right of the Israeli state to exist,” said Haas, who served as communications director for Vice President Al Gore in the Clinton administration and staunchly opposed the Iran nuclear deal negotiated by the Obama administration.

After 70 years or Arab refusal to recognize the modern state of Israel, Haas says this kind of gesture by bin Salman provides at least a flicker of hope for that hostility to change.

“If this leads to a more formal recognition and peace deal between those two countries, this could really have tremendous effects that stretch across the entire region.  So I think it’s terribly important,” said Haas.

Bin Salman has been cracking down on corruption, relaxing restrictions on women in Saudi society, and he permitted an Israeli flight to use Saudi airspace.  Haas says the slow thaw has been happening for a while.

“This is part of a gradual warming of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia that has really taken place over the course of the last five to ten years.  Lots of back channel communications, appearances by Saudi officials and Israeli officials at the same events.  I believe there was even a handshake at one point,” said Haas.

While bin Salman is working to modernize Saudi Arabia, Haas says the obvious point of agreement between the two nations is the need to confront a massive, mutual threat from Iran.

“There’s no question that that’s the overwhelming driver for Saudi Arabia,” said Haas.  “The enemy of my enemy is my friend and Israel and Saudi Arabia probably have the most to lose when it comes to the rise of Iran,” said Haas.

Iran has repeatedly threatened to wipe Israel of the face of the earth, while Saudi Arabia is the is leading Sunni Muslim power while Iran is the clear leader among Shia Muslims.

According to Haas, teaming up against Iran gives Israel and Saudi Arabia the opportunity to coordinate strategies, share intelligence, and rally more of the region to their side.

Haas believes Saudi Arabia warming towards Israel could have a major impact on other nations in the Middle East.

“It would be a pretty important signal to other countries that don’t have relations with Israel that at the end of the day, this is a long-running dispute we’ve had with Israel.  Israel isn’t going anywhere.  We’ve got bigger problems and maybe the rest of you need to get on board,” said Haas.

There is a major concern for Haas and others who hope there can be meaningful progress toward stability in the region.  They fear bin Salman may not live to achieve his goals.

“Anytime you’re in a conversation about what the crown prince is doing in Saudi Arabia and how significant it may or may not be, you don’t have to be speaking very long before someone says, ‘If he survives,'” said Haas.  “The threat being that he will suffer the same fate perhaps as (former Egyptian President) Anwar Sadat, who was assassinated by radical forces within his own country after making peace with Israel.”

“He’s moving pretty aggressively and you do have to wonder how successful he will continue to be as he pushes the envelope more and more.  We’ll have to see but people do worry about his fate,” said Haas.

Standard Podcast [ 10:56 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Saudi Arabian Renaissance? The Perils of Populism, Trump vs. Amazon

by


Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America are pleasantly stunned to hear Saudi Arabia’s crown prince publicly state that Israel has a right to live in peace on its own land and wonder if things are truly changing in the Middle East or whether this is a temporary thaw in order to confront Iran.  In the wake of the very public feud between Fox News host Laura Ingraham and gun control activist David Hogg, they also discuss how the rise of populism leads to political debates becoming a referendum on the people in the debate rather than the ideas involved in the debate.  And they wonder why President Trump is spending so much time blasting Amazon and the rate it pays to mail packages, suspecting it might have something to do with another business venture headed by Jeff Bezos.

Share

Tillerson ‘Pretty Well Failed’

by

President Trump fired Secretary of State Rex Tillerson Tuesday, in a decision that ends months of speculation about Tillerson’s future, and former Pentagon official Jed Babbin believes it also ends a disappointing tenure for the nation’s top diplomat.

Babbin also urges President Trump to make concrete demands before going forward with face-to-face meetings with North Korea.

News of Tillerson’s firing came from Trump’s Twitter account Tuesday morning.

“Mike Pompeo, Director of the CIA, will become our new Secretary of State. He will do a fantastic job! Thank you to Rex Tillerson for his service! Gina Haspel will become the new Director of the CIA, and the first woman so chosen. Congratulations to all!” tweeted Trump.

News reports later indicated Tillerson learned of his firing from the tweet, but reports had circulated for months that Trump and Tillerson might go their separate ways and that Pompeo was the leading candidate to replace him.

Babbin says it was time for a change.

“I hate to say it, but I think he pretty well failed,” said Babbin, who served as deputy undersecretary of defense in the George H.W. Bush administration and is now a contributing editor at the American Spectator.

Babbin says Tillerson was ineffective because he mishandled some of the biggest national security issues facing the U.S.

“In December, he basically begged the North Koreans to come to the negotiation table.  He said, ‘We’ll talk about the weather.  We’ll talk about the shape of the table.  We’ll talk about anything you want without preconditions.’  That was precisely the wrong thing to do,” said Babbin.

“He has been opposing the president on getting rid of the Iran deal that Obama made.  I think that’s the prescient reason why Mr. Trump fired him,” said Babbin.

And Babbin believes Iran policy might be a key reason Pompeo is Trump’s choice to replace Tillerson

“I think he’s going to be much more on President Trump’s wavelength.  He certainly has the president’s confidence, which Tillerson did not, and I think that speaks well for his relationship with the outside world.  After all, he’s going to be our top diplomat and someone in that position has to be on the president’s wavelength and Tillerson certainly wasn’t,” said Babbin.

Pompeo is likely to win Senate confirmation without much trouble.  The same cannot be said for Gina Haspel, the deputy CIA director whom Trump is tapping to replace Pompeo.

“She going to have a very rough time getting confirmed and she may not be confirmed.  The Democrats are going to go completely ape about the fact that she supervised the enhanced interrogation program.  She was heavily involved in the extraordinary renditions business.  She’s not going to get a warm reception on Capitol Hill by any means,” said Babbin.

Babbin says the early reviews on Haspel are mixed.

“She’s been head of the clandestine service.  She’s gotten a lot of top awards at the CIA.  She’s a CIA career professional.  It seems like she could work out.  On the other hand, I’m hearing from a lot of my sources in that community that she pretty much is a Brennan clone and that’s not a good thing,” said Babbin, referring to controversial Obama-era CIA Director John Brennan.

“I think that Mr. Trump would not have selected her if he was not confident that she would support him on things like getting out of the Iran deal,” said Babbin.

The White House has explained that the Tillerson-Pompeo switch is happening now so that the new diplomatic team can be running at full steam heading into the talks with North Korea in May.

Babbin says regardless of who is on the negotiating team, President Trump needs to insist upon some preconditions before ever meeting with Kim Jong-Un.

“There has to be preconditions to any such negotiation.  There almost always are.  Any major summit is set up with the other side meeting some preconditions that we establish.  The fact that the president jumped into this without setting preconditions is something that’s a really big mistake,” said Babbin.

However, Babbin believes Trump can correct that mistake with very specific demands.

“The only real precondition, the only thing that means anything, would be for them to verifiably mothball their nuclear testing and their missile testing.  That means we would have to have inspectors in North Korea, which frankly I think they’ll never allow,” said Babbin.

While hopes rise for some sort of easing of nuclear sanctions as a result of the upcoming talks, Babbin is pouring the cold water of reality over the event.  He says every North Korean leader has reneged on their promises.

“They have broken every single agreement that they have ever entered into.  They renounced the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.  Heck, they’ve even renounced the armistice agreement that ended the Korean War in 1953.  So you can’t trust these guts in any way unless you have immediate, intrusive, and at-will inspections of everything in North Korea there’s not going to be a basis for any agreement,” said Babbin.

And that’s just fine with him.  He says no deal is probably the best outcome from the summit.

“I think there’s no room for agreement here.  There is room for our sanctions to continue to work and President Trump needs to have considerable praise and credit for that.  That’s the only reason they’re coming to the negotiation table right now and we need to keep [the sanctions] up indefinitely,” said Babbin.

Standard Podcast [ 7:03 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share