Obama is a Shia?

While the world burns and there is a major war between the Shia and the Sunnis, given all the Obama love for Iran, I said to myself he must be a Shia or least a Shia loyalist. Low and behold this below…..What the heck?

 

Top Dubai Policeman Says Obama has “Shia Roots”: The Internet Laughs Back // Global Voices Online » Iran

Barack and Michelle Obama photoshopped in Islamic attire in front of the Imam Redha shrine, in Mashhad, Iran, a revered Shia site. The text, in Persian, reads “Very soon..” Image source unknown

The Internet has been in stitches ever since Dubai’s deputy chief of police Dhahi Khalfan announced on Twitter that US President Barack Obama has “Shia roots” and is likely to visit Shia religious centres in Iran soon.

The tweets, seen by many as reeking with Shia-phobia, were made following the lifting of sanctions imposed on Iran, agreed upon during the nuclear negotiations between Iran, the P5+1 and the United States in July.

In his words, Khalfan tweets:

أوباما الذي يعود لأصول شيعية انتخب لتقريب وجهات النظر بين إيران وأمريكا لإيقاف برنامج إيران النووي العسكري.نجحت الخطة .

— ضاحي خلفان تميم (@Dhahi_Khalfan) January 19, 2016

Obama, who has Shia roots, was elected to bridge the gap between Iran and the US to stop Iran’s military nuclear programme. Mission accomplished.

In another tweet, he adds:

من المتوقع أن يزور أوباما قم ومشهد وكبرى الحسينيات في إيران. !!

— ضاحي خلفان تميم (@Dhahi_Khalfan) January 19, 2016

It is expected that Obama visits Qom, Mashhad and all the big Shia religious congregation halls

Many responded to Khalfan with mockery. AIfie shares this photograph with Khalfan:

Embedded image permalink

@Dhahi_Khalfan pic.twitter.com/QQOCao84fw

— Alfie (@AIfie_Twit) January 19, 2016

Faisal Alhbabi asks:

@Dhahi_Khalfan انت كيف صرت رئيس شرطة دبي وهذا فكرك

— FAISAl (@faisalalhbabi) January 19, 2016

How did you become chief of police when this is the level of your thinking?

And Abbas Zahri shares this photograph of a Photoshopped Obama performing Shia rituals mourning the death of one of their Imams:

Embedded image permalink

معك حق والدليل هذه الصورة @POTUS @BarackObama @Dhahi_Khalfan pic.twitter.com/WtPb8t7ZYE

— عباس زهري (@zahri_abbas) January 19, 2016

You are right and this is proof!

More photoshopped pictures follow. Ammar Ali shares another doctored photograph of the US president, this time performing in a Shia mourning ritual, associated with Ashura:

Embedded image permalink

صورة له و هو يقري لطمية ف حسينية @Dhahi_Khalfan pic.twitter.com/ZZfKd1BFkw

— عمّــــاار عليّ (@ammar_ali94) January 19, 2016

This is a photograph of him mourning in a Hussainiya

A Hussainiya is a Shia congregation centre, used for gatherings to mark Shia rituals.

Hussain M shares this photograph of Obama, saying its a leaked photograph from a religious learning centre in Qom, the epicentre of Shia learning in Iran:

Embedded image permalink

@Dhahi_Khalfan صور مسربة لاوباما عند تخرجه من حوزة قم في ايران . pic.twitter.com/fBgNy9NJJZ

— hossien m. (@69mansourM) January 20, 2016

 

Here’s a leaked photograph of Obama after his graduation from a Shia learning centre on Qom, Iran

Iranians have documented different reactions to Obama’s relationship with Shia Islam. One Iranian blogger posted a picture from a November 2015 anti-U.S. rally in Tehran. Here protesters carried pictures of Obama, where his likeness is compared to that of Shemr, a villainous figure in Shia Islam.

Embedded image permalink

#Obama depicted as Shemr, the most evil figure in history for #Shia followers today’s anti-US rallies pic.twitter.com/tGO8zPvkFb

— potkin azarmehr (@potkazar) November 4, 2015

Other Iranians who shared the news on their social media illustrated their amusement at such far fetched theories. One Iranian-American blogger, Holly Dagress, attached the news to the hashtag #ShiaScare.

Dubai’s ex-police chief says US President Barack #Obama is of Shia origin due to #IranDeal #ShiaScare https://t.co/TuZJ6DK9t5

— Holly Dagres (@hdagres) January 20, 2016

Mohsen Milani, an Iranian academic based in the United States shared the news with a laughing emoji.

Ex head of Dubai Police Khalfan:#Obama is of #Shia origin elected to bring #Iran & US closer. https://t.co/TZQEwkBdGB via @DrAbbasKadhim

— Mohsen Milani (@MohsenMilani) January 20, 2016

Various conspiracy theories have circulated about Obama’s Shia background in the past. During the 2008 elections, Iran’s state run newspapers ran unsubstantiated claims about Obama’s Shia past and connections to southwestern Iran. In June 2015, Iraqi member of parliament Taha al-Lahibi released a YouTube video explaining Obama’s Shia background to be part of the conspiracy of Iran’s Shia forces fighting the Islamic State in Iraq, alongside the evolving nuclear negotiations between Iran and the United States.

These theories are typically commented on by Iranians on social media with ridicule. In response to the al-Lahibi conspiracy, one Iranian Twitter user @sobhan348 sarcastically exclaims the nuclear negotiations were turning Obama into a Shia.

مذاکره با ایران اوباما را شیعه کرد! +فیلم http://t.co/T7XUdNPjJS

— علمی مذهبی کوثر (@sobhan348) June 10, 2015

Nuclear negotiations with Iran have made Obama into a Shia! +film

Dubai’s deputy chief of police’s statements come after the United Arab Emirates backed Saudi Arabia in the recent conflict with Iran that led the two nations to end diplomatic ties. In reaction, the Emirates downgraded their relationship by reducing the number of diplomats in Iran and recalling its ambassador. They have not severed ties however, due to a long history of trade with Iran.

Written by Amira Al HussainiWritten by Mahsa Alimardani

Obama is of Shi’ite origin: Dubai former police chief

EgyptIndependent: US President Barack Obama is of Shi’ite origin, according to former Dubai police chief and current head of the General Security for the Emirate of Dubai, Dahi Khalfan, who is known for his controversial tweets.
“Obama, who has a Shi’ite origin, was elected to converge between the points of views of Iran and the US to stop the Iranian nuclear military project. The plan succeeded,” Khalfan wrote in a series of tweets on his account Tuesday.
He added: “The US elections are led by undercover hands that achieve Israel’s security in the first place. Bravo sons of Zion!”
“In Anthroposophy, people study how to ward off danger, and this is what the sons of Zion did after studying the nature of Iranians. They brought them someone of a Shi’ite Kenyan origin. Bravo!”
Khalfan continued: “Will Obama visit Iran before leaving presidency?” “(Hassan) Rouhani could invite Obama to visit Iran”.
Khalfan pointed out that he was expecting Obama’s moves toward the Iranian nuclear project since the first day he was sworn in.
Khalfan was Dubai’s police chief until late 2013. He has 1.24 million followers on Twitter and over 65,000 tweets.
He caused diplomatic tensions between Egypt and the UAE back in 2013 when he attacked toppled President Mohamed Morsi on Twitter, after which Egypt’s Foreign Ministry summoned the ambassador of the UAE to demand a “clarification from the United Arab Emirates about statements that do not go along with the nature of the special relationship between the two countries,” according to Reuters.
Khalfan wrote on Twitter after Morsi won the presidential bid: “An unfortunate choice. The repercussions of this choice will not be light for poor ordinary people.”
Khalfan also said that Morsi would “come to the UAE crawling to request pardon and forgiveness,” adding that the UAE would not receive him on a red carpet. He accused Morsi of winning the presidential elections with the aid of Iran.
In July 2013, he accused the Muslim Brotherhood of posing a greater threat to Arabs than Israel.

Russian Testimony on Executions

Former Commander Of Pro-Russian Separatists Says He Executed People Based On Stalin-Era Laws

RFE: For most of his 42-minute appearance on a radio talk show, former Russia-backed separatist commander Igor Girkin sounded like nothing more than a fanatic discussing a dream now widely dismissed as fantasy.

Igor Girkin, also known as Igor Strelkov, was a key commander in the Russia-backed separatist forces in the early stages of the war against Ukrainian government troops in the east of the country. (file photo)

He spoke of hopes for the creation of a “Novorossia” — a New Russia stretching across much of Ukraine, from Kharkiv to Odesa, and one day joining a Russian empire including all of Belarus and Ukraine.

It wasn’t until the last minute that the interview with Girkin went from surreal to chilling.

Referring to his time commanding separatists in the eastern Ukrainian city of Slovyansk in 2014, a host asks him how he stopped the rampant looting.

“With executions,” Girkin said matter-of-factly.

According to Girkin, separatist “authorities” installed a military court and introduced 1941 military laws implemented by Soviet dictator Josef Stalin.

“Under this legislation we tried people and executed the convicted,” Girkin said.

“While I was in Slovyansk four people were executed. Two among the military for looting, one local for looting, and one for killing a serviceman,” he said on the Radio Komsomolskaya Pravda, which is affiliated with a leading pro-Kremlin Russian tabloid.

One of the people killed was an “ideological” supporter of the Ukrainian nationalist group Right Sector, he said.

Key Separatist Commander

Girkin, also known as Igor Strelkov, was a key commander in the Russia-backed separatist forces in the early stages of the war against Ukrainian government troops that has killed more than 9,000 civilians and combatants since April 2014.

Ukraine’s government has called Girkin a Russian agent and accused him of war crimes. He resigned as a rebel commander in August 2014 amid reports that he had been wounded in battle.

Later that year, he told an interviewer that he was a colonel in the Russian FSB, or Federal Security Service — a statement that was edited out of the interview published by state-run Rossia Segodnya.

In October 2015, the Brussels-based International Partnership for Human Rights provided the International Criminal Court with more than 300 testimonies about alleged military crimes and crimes against humanity that it said had been committed by Russian-backed separatists and Ukrainian forces in Eastern Ukraine.

It said that “while crimes committed by both sides of the conflict have been documented, the collected evidence primarily concerns crimes committed by separatists because of security issues related to accessing separatists-controlled territories of Ukraine.”

In the radio appearance, Girkin said he was not concerned about the possibility of international prosecution.

“I am not at all bothered by international law, because it’s a tool in the hands of winners,” he said. “If we are defeated, well then, the norms of these laws will be applied to me.”

Fighting has lessened since a February 2015 deal on a cease-fire and steps toward peace, but the Russia-backed separatists still hold large parts of Ukraine’s Donetsk and Luhansk provinces.

Girkin, a former military reenactor, appeared to have the support of both the hosts and those calling in.

“God forbid,” one host said, referring to the possibility of Girkin being sent to an international court for prosecution on war crimes charges.

As for his feelings about Stalin, Girkin said he dislikes the dictator as he was in his younger days, but believes that he was a great statesman at the end of his life.

“You can discuss for a long time how much blood and where Stalin spilled it, but at least you can confidently say that he did it not for himself but for the sake of an idea,” he said.

Meanwhile, what happened to these people and why?

Russian generals who died mysteriously: hanged, shot themselves, jumped out of windows, died in car accidents.. …

Embedded image permalink

Obama/Kerry’s New Friend Iran, a Normal Middle East Power?

With all the many months of negotiations between the P5+1 members with Iran, a verbal deal was reached on the Iranian nuclear program. John Kerry and State Department representatives were asked often why was a condition to Iran to release the Americans in prison part of the talks, the response was always, those talks are underway and separate from the JPOA talks. Now we find that was never the truth. Furthermore, a designation Swiss delegation was heading the prisoner swaps but did the Iran Foreign Minister, the Swiss or anyone else involved bother to ask questions about the conditions by which the Americans were held in prison? Additionally, with what you will read below, you must ask yourself how could the United States be the grand marshal for a country, placing Iran on the world stage as a legitimate power and encourage foreign investment?

There is no bigger shame, than that of Barack Obama, John Kerry and the rest who willfully chosen to ally with Iran.

Family: The ‘Inhumane’ Conditions Amir Hekmati Survived in Iranian Prison

ABCNews: When ex-Marine Amir Hekmati addressed reporters Tuesday for the first time after being released from an Iranian prison, he said that he stayed strong through “very inhumane and unjust” “pressures” in detention because he “didn’t want to let any of my fellow Marines down.”

The happy and now-healthy-looking 32-year-old Hekmati did not get into what exactly he meant by the “pressures” that had been put on him, but a post on a website managed by the Hekmati family in March 2015 paints a grim picture of the trials Hekmati allegedly suffered while in Iran’s infamous Evin Prison. Hekmati had been arrested in August 2011 and accused of espionage. He was convicted in a secret court and sentenced to death. Though that ruling was later overturned, he stayed in prison.

The list of alleged abuses during his time in detention, “gathered from accounts by [Hekmati’s] family in Michigan, his extended family in Iran and from Amir himself,” includes what the family described as “torture, abuse and mistreatment” at the hands of prison officials.

PHOTO: The Evin prison in Tehran and the Elburs mountains.

Solitary Confinement, Sleep Deprivation, Forced Drugging, Electric Shocks

On their website, the Hekmati family alleges that for the first four months of his detention, Hekmati was held in a cell that was just three feet by three feet. His hands and feet were “constantly shackled.”

For more than a year, they claim, Hekmati was kept in solitary confinement – so long that he developed “severely limited vision.” He was also placed in “stress positions for extended periods” and cold water was poured in his cell to keep him from sleeping, the family wrote.

“Amir was forcibly given drugs, such as lithium, by prison officials. Officials would intentionally and abruptly stop this medication to induce a painful withdrawal response,” they wrote.

Hekmati was also interrogated by Iranian officials and subjected to electric shocks to his kidneys, whips to his feet and the young man “endured mental torture through threats, insults and humiliations.” The family said he was told at least once, falsely, that his mother had been killed in a car wreck.

‘It Breaks Our Heart’

The conditions became so bad as the years dragged on that Hekmati twice went on hunger strike.

“It breaks our hears to know our brother has suffered through torture, abuse, and mistreatment for committing no crime,” the family wrote in a May 2015 post. “It hurts us even more knowing that he is risking solitary confinement for choosing to starve himself in hope that action will finally be taken and his case will finally move forward and he will be one day closer to coming home and being reunited with our family.”

An official at the Interests Section of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the Pakistani Embassy in Washington, D.C. declined to comment beyond saying, “as you said, these are all allegations made by his family member[s].” A representative from Iran’s Permanent Mission to the United Nations in New York did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Hekmati was freed over the weekend along with four other Americans held in Iranian prisons. In return, the U.S. released seven Iranians either in American prisons or awaiting trial for sanctions violations and withdrew its campaign to extradite and try 14 other Iranians abroad. Iran also promised in the deal to help locate and return former FBI agent Robert Levinson, who disappeared from Iran’s Kish Island in March 2007.

PHOTO: Dr. Ramy Kurdi, Sarah Hekmati, Congressman Dan Kildee, Amir Hekmati and Leila Hekmati. This was the first time the Hekmati family met in person with Amir Hekmati at the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany.

Demoting Petraeus to a 3 Star, Spells Trouble for Hillary?

General Petraeus is still not out of the realm of more disciplinary action when it comes to his troubles. The ‘all-in’ for Obama, Defense Secretary Ash Carter is considering additional punishment for Petraeus and if this demotion happens, it could set a standard for how Hillary should/could be punished as her crimes were much worse.

Exclusive: Pentagon May Demote David Petraeus

TheDailyBeast: The Pentagon is considering retroactively demoting retired Gen. David Petraeus after he admitted to giving classified information to his biographer and mistress while he was still in uniform, three people with knowledge of the matter told The Daily Beast.

The decision now rests with Secretary of Defense Ash Carter who is said to be willing to consider overruling an earlier recommendation by the Army that Petraeus not have his rank reduced. Such a demotion could cost the storied general hundreds of thousands of dollars—and deal an additional blow to his once-pristine reputation.

“The secretary is considering going in a different direction” from the Army, a defense official told the Daily Beast, because he wants to be consistent in his treatment of senior officers who engage in misconduct and to send a message that even men of Petraeus’ fame and esteemed reputation are not immune to punishment.

Pentagon spokesperson Peter Cook told The Daily Beast that Carter had requested more information on the matter before reaching a final decision.

“The Department of the Army is still in the process of providing the Secretary with information

relevant to former‎ Secretary McHugh’s recommendation,” Cook told The Daily Beast, referring to ex-Army Secretary John McHugh, who had recommended taking no action against Petraeus. “Once the Secretary‎ has an opportunity to consider this information, he will make his decision about next steps, if any, in this matter.”

Carter could also recommend other actions that don’t result in Petraeus losing his fourth star. Or the Defense Secretary could simply allow the Army’s previous recommendations to stand.

Petraeus, arguably the most well-known and revered military officer of his generation, retired from the Army in 2011 with the rank of a four-star general, the highest rank an Army officer can achieve. If Carter decides to strip Petraeus of his fourth star, he could be demoted to the last rank at which he “satisfactorily” served, according to military regulations.

Reducing Petraeus’ rank, most likely to lieutenant general, could mean he’d have to pay back the difference in pension payments and other benefits that he received as a retired four-star general. That would amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars over his retirement. According to Pentagon figures, a four-star general with roughly the same years of experience as Petraeus was entitled to receive a yearly pension of nearly $220,000. A three-star officer would receive about $170,000.

Petraeus didn’t respond to a request for comment.

But the financial pain to Petraeus isn’t likely to be severe. He has confided to friends and acquaintances that he’s making a hefty sum from his job at a private equity firm and through speaking fees.

The demotion in rank would be a bigger, lasting blow, and take from Petraeus the rare achievement he’d set his eyes on many years ago.

At any given time, there are only 12 four-star generals in the Army, the largest of the services. By the time he was a colonel, in the mid-1990s, many thought Petraeus was destined to be one of them.

The U.S military has, on several occasions, demoted generals, increasingly for improper personal contact and not for poor battlefield decisions. But rarely does it demote four-star generals, in part because there are so few of them. It’s also more common to reduce the rank of more junior officers than of top generals.

If Petraeus were demoted, it would mark another spectacular fall. Petraeus stepped down as director of the Central Intelligence Agency in 2012 after his affair with Paula Broadwell, a writer and current Army reservist, was revealed. At the time, Petraeus had been frequently mentioned as a possible Republican presidential candidate in 2016.

Petraeus pleaded guilty last year to giving Broadwell eight notebooks that he compiled while serving as commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan and that he knew contained classified information. The notebooks held some of the most sensitive kinds of military and intelligence secrets, including the identities of covert officers, intelligence capabilities, quotes from high-level meetings of the National Security Council, and notes about Petraeus’ discussions with President Obama.

After leaving Afghanistan, Petraeus brought the books back to his home in Virginia and gave them to Broadwell just three days before he retired from the Army. She later returned them. No classified information appeared in her biography, All In: The Education of General David Petraeus, officials have said.

Petraeus could have faced felony charges, including for lying to FBI investigators, but was allowed to plead guilty last year to a misdemeanor count of unauthorized handling classified information. He avoided and avoid a prison sentence and received two years probation and a $100,000 fine.

But that was not the end of the matter. Last year, the FBI gave Army investigators information that the bureau had come across as it was closing up its own investigation of Petraeus, the defense official and one former U.S. official told The Daily Beast.

The information, the FBI believed, might be of interest to the Army, the defense official said. The Army investigated and decided “there was nothing new here that should change his retirement” and “recommended that there be no change” to his four-star rank, the official said. Last month, it went to the Secretary of Defense for final approval.

Army personnel regulations say that an officer doesn’t automatically retire with the highest rank he or she achieved while in uniform. And even though Petraeus had already been officially retired, through a process known as grade determination the Army can retroactively reopen his case and consider whether to demote him “[i]f substantial new evidence discovered contemporaneously with or within a short time following separation could result in a lower grade determination.”

The regulations also state that if “an officer’s misconduct while still on active duty is documented,” including by “conviction after retirement,” a new grade determination may be completed. Petraeus hadn’t yet retired when he gave Broadwell the classified information.

The Army received the information from the FBI that prompted this new review more than four years after Petraeus had retired. The Defense Department was also running its own investigation into Petraeus’ relationship with Broadwell and what classified information he gave her at the same time the FBI and federal prosecutors were pursuing their case. That may explain why the Army decided it had seen nothing new in the information it received last year from the FBI and decided not to recommend a demotion.

But Carter is said to be concerned that because he has recommended other generals be reduced in rank for actions not becoming an officer, he’ll be seen as inconsistent if he doesn’t do the same for Petraeus. The decision is as much about timing and politics as it is Petraeus’ own transgressions.

“This is about Ash Carter, not David Petraeus,” the defense official said.

Last November, Carter removed his senior military aide, Lt. Gen. Ron Lewis, for personal misconduct, and referred the matter to the Pentagon’s inspector general for investigation. Lewis was demoted a rank, to a major general.

Lewis was a long-time and influential aide to the secretary, and his removal and punishment signaled Carter’s commitment to maintaining upstanding behavior among of the military’s generals. The exact nature of Lewis’ misconduct has not been announced, but military officials have suggested he was involved in an improper personal relationship.

While few are familiar with Petraeus’ potential demotion, those who are aware of it said they were surprised that he could be punished years years after the scaNdal was presumably put behind him and after Petraeus pleaded guilty to mishandling classified information. No general in recent history has been demoted years after scandal swirled around him or her.

Those who know and have worked with Petraeus describe him as a man of extraordinary capabilities and ambition. He received his fourth star in 2007 and then served in several prestigious and demanding assignments, including commander of U.S. Central Command, the commanding general of all ground forces in Iraq, and later as commander of ground forces in Afghanistan.

Petraeus’ unorthodox thinking and willingness to buck conventional strategy was seen as key to the U.S. victory over insurgents and jihadists in Iraq during the so-called troop surge of 2007 and 2008. His reputation was so esteemed that there was talk of giving him a fifth star–a largely symbolic gesture that was highly unlikely–or renaming the road to Petraeus’ alma mater, the U.S. Military Academy, after him.

Should Carter choose to knock Petraeus down to the rank of a three-star general, he will have a chance to appeal his case to the secretary, but Congress doesn’t have to be informed of the decision, the official said.

There is no deadline on Carter to make a decision.

The last commander to lose rank for professional misconduct was Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, who was demoted to colonel in 2005 for the Abu Ghraib prison scandal in Iraq. The last four-star general to be demoted was Gen. William Ward who retired as a three-star in 2012 amid allegations he misspent government money on himself and his family.

Where is Barbara Boxer on the Iran Deal Now?

Inspectors will monitor Iran’s key nuclear facilities 24 hours a day, 365 days a year,” President Obama promised yesterday. Praising the Iran deal’s implementation, he asserted that Iran cannot build a nuclear weapon and that the Middle East has been made safer. Tellingly, the president also referenced Iran’s detention of U.S. sailors last week: “We worked directly with the Iranian government and secured the release of our sailors in less than 24 hours.” These two quotes illustrate President Obama’s kidnapping of realist international-relations theory, which, as he sees it, involves balancing U.S. interests with the realities of a complicated world. Or, as he puts it, “Don’t do stupid sh**.”

The president believes that, with a mix of hard compromise and unwavering leadership, he has prevented a nuclear-arms race and facilitated Iranian political moderation. But this isn’t realism; it is delusion.
First off, it’s willfully ignorant. Consider again President Obama’s remark on inspecting “Iran’s key nuclear facilities.” It’s relevant because it reminds us that the deal in fact prevents timely inspections of other Iranian military sites. And by describing only some nuclear facilities as “key,” President Obama is tacitly accepting Iran’s obstruction of non-key facility inspections. Iran will simply use military sites for nuclear-weaponization research and then claim those facilities are off limits or clean them up before inspections. This isn’t really debatable; after all, Iran’s ongoing ballistic-missile tests prove its public determination to build a nuclear-weapons delivery platform. Of course, announcing new sanctions yesterday on eleven individuals and organizations connected to Iranian ballistic-missile research, the president said he will “remain steadfast in opposing Iran’s destabilizing behavior elsewhere.” He neglected — as do most in the media — to mention that these new sanctions are so weak that they’re functionally irrelevant. Iran will simply use new cut-out entities and further evasion to continue its ballistic activities. The Obama administration knows this, the Sunni monarchies know this, the Iranians know this, and the Europeans — who cannot wait to get their hands on Iranian business contracts — are banking on it.

The second way in which this deal distorts realist theory is in its fatally narrow-minded strategic vision. As I noted recently at National Review Online, Iran’s unchallenged dissection of U.S. credibility on inspections, missile tests, support for regional terrorism, etc., is fueling reciprocal escalation by the Sunni-Arab monarchies. As a consequence, opportunities for political moderation in the Middle East are rapidly being displaced by sectarian extremism. Making matters worse, as attested by President Obama’s failure to meet with Jordan’s King Abdullah in Washington last week, the president seems to have decided to simply ignore America’s Sunni allies. This preference for a short-term perceived win (the Iran deal) over long-term U.S. influence with the Sunni kingdoms (promoting political reform and restraining their sectarian impulses) further exemplifies the president’s defective realism. Yet the president’s realist delusion is enabled by many in the international-relations community. Just contemplate how his Twitter supporters mobilized this weekend. Professor Daniel Drezner of Tufts University gleefully tweeted: “All US negotiations with Iran this week have been a win-win. Which, if you believe relations with Iran’s regime are zero-sum, is infuriating.” Drezner also claimed that the Iranians released in exchange for Jason Rezaian and Amir Hekmati and two other Americans were largely insignificant actors. Vox’s Max Fisher tweeted: “Amazing fact: Iran surrenders the bulk of its nuclear program, and it is considered a partisan issue in America whether that is good or bad.” From the Council on Foreign Relations, Micah Zenko tweeted that every Joint Staff and Central Command defense planner is “elated.” All these claims deserve great scrutiny. First, while defense planners hope the Iran deal will hold, they also know it fuels second- and third-order risks of sectarian escalation. Moreover, although I support the deal to release Rezaian and company, we shouldn’t pretend that the released Iranians are insignificant. They were variously involved in supporting Iran’s satellite communications capability, in stealing U.S. technology for the Iranian military, and in hacking into the U.S. power-grid and airline-service databases. According to an American cyber-investigations firm, the airport hacking involved Iranian attempts to access ground-crew credentials. It doesn’t take a genius to understand why Iran wants access to civilian aircraft and power infrastructure: the capability to launch spectacular attacks on U.S. and allied interests. Again, realism demands our assessment of the facts in the context of Iran’s previous actions. For one, we should remember Iran’s 2011 attempt to blow up a packed Washington, D.C., restaurant. Oh, and as Josh Rogin reports, two other Iranian suspects the Obama administration has agreed to stop pursuing are involved in the drowning and starving of Syrian civilians. Related: Assad Is Deliberately Starving Sunni Muslims in Syria Finally, any true realist must also accept what this deal means for hard-liners aligned with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard (IRGC). Holding dominion over key sectors of Iran’s economy and controlling foreign commercial access to the economy, the IRGC is getting a big payday. Realism also requires our objective assessment as to where the IRGC will spend its money: exported death. Consider that in the past five years, the IRGC has plotted an attack on the U.S. capital, supported the Taliban, assassinated U.S. allies in cities such as Beirut, and kidnapped U.S. citizens. And upon presenting these tests of U.S. resolve, the IRGC has witnessed two distinct Obama-administration responses: silence and, as in the case of last week’s sailor kidnap, gratitude. Yesterday, we learned of another Iranian test: Within the past few days, several Americans were kidnapped by a militia in Baghdad. I would confidently venture that an IRGC-proxy such as Kataib Hezbollah is responsible. As I warned back in December, “if the IRGC leadership senses American weakness, it will take hostile action (directly, via KH, or via covert subgroups) against U.S. interests.” Don’t get me wrong; realism demands that we actively pursue diplomacy with Iran. Iran’s youthful population is an existential threat to the theocrats and a source of major internal political pressure. We must not alienate these future leaders with a leap to military action. Yet by our failure to deter Iran’s hard-liners, we only encourage them further. And in their empowerment, political moderation perishes. Foreign-policy realism demands that we sometimes deal with unpleasant people. But it also requires our commitment to honest policy.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/429907/obamas-realism-iran?utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+Trending+Content&utm_content=569ce98d04d3012242625e14&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter