Iran Showdown Postponed

The new Congress was prepared to pass a fresh set of sanctions on Iran intended to pressure that country’s leaders into negotiating in good faith and abandoning their nuclear dreams. But President Obama, still intent on pursuing détente with Iran, vowed to veto any sanctions bill. Though there appeared to be veto-proof majorities for increased sanctions in both the House and the Senate, the president seems to be getting his way.

The sanctions bill is co-sponsored by Senators Mark Kirk and Robert Menendez, and would provide exactly the pressure needed on Iran. But the president won a key victory before the bill even made it to the floor. Lawmakers agreed to include a presidential waiver in the bill that could allow Obama to ignore its provisions at will, rendering it meaningless even if it passed and survived a veto.

The president also managed to get Democrats to postpone a vote until late March. While the delay enables sanctions supporters time to get more votes for the bill, it also gives the president more time to pick off wavering Democrats and convince them that Iran sanctions are no longer a matter of bipartisan consensus. Though Senator Menendez stood up and personally challenged the president when Obama alleged that donors were buying sanctions votes—code words for manipulation by the pro-Israel community—it appears that many in his party are listening to Obama rather than their consciences about the Iran threat.

Obama Changes the Subject

President Obama diverted the discussion from his indefensible position on Iran with a controversy over House Speaker John Boehner’s invitation to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to speak to a joint session of Congress. Whether or not the decision to accept was wise, the president was able to shift the public’s focus to Netanyahu’s alleged breach of protocol. Though the Israelis were accused of siding with Republicans, it was the White House that turned sanctions into a partisan issue. Obama has insulted and picked fights with Netanyahu for six years, which makes his outrage at the prime minister’s supposed lack of manners patently hypocritical. But as bogus as the issue was, the debate served to polarize Congress on both Iran and the U.S. alliance with Israel.

Iran Turns Up the Heat

While Americans were arguing about Netanyahu’s proposed speech, Iran and its Hezbollah terrorist auxiliaries moved against the Jewish state. Using the chaos in Syria as a cover, they built a missile base near the Golan Heights in order to attack Israel without inviting retaliation inside Lebanon. When an Israeli strike on the site took out an Iranian general and several Hezbollah terrorists, the Lebanese group obeyed its Iranian masters and attacked across Israel’s northern border, killing two Israelis. While the exchange did not escalate, the signal was clear. Iran is prepared to use its Hezbollah allies against Israel to hold its gains in Syria and keep the region unstable. Its rekindled alliance with Hamas in Gaza also raised the prospect of Tehran’s being able to launch a two-front terrorist war on Israel if it chooses to do so. Yet despite this clear threat, Washington seems unable to connect the dots between Iran’s nuclear program and its deft use of allies and terror to back its bid for regional hegemony.

The Smoking Gun in Buenos Aires

For more than 20 years, the investigation of the terrorist bombing of a Jewish center in the capital of Argentina has been stalled. The involvement of Iran and Hezbollah in the crime ceased to be a secret years ago, but the Argentine government has been determined to either cover up or forget it. The one person keeping the probe alive was prosecutor Alberto Nisman, who died from a gunshot to the head under mysterious circumstances in January. Although foul play seems obvious, the surrounding investigation also seems to be headed nowhere. In Nisman’s apartment, investigators found a document in which the prosecutor requested the arrest of President Cristina Kirchman for shielding Iranian officials from prosecution. This discovery further deepens suspicions that the Argentine government is too close to Iran to allow justice to be done.

Anti-Semitism at UC-Davis

A vote on divestment from Israel at the University of California, Davis, in early February revealed the ugly face of anti-Zionist incitement on American campuses. During a student-government debate about a divestment proposal, Jewish speakers who opposed it were shouted down by abusive chants from pro-Palestinian students. No authorities intervened. The measure passed, but that didn’t end the ordeal for Jews at the school. Two days later, residents of a Jewish fraternity awoke to find their house defaced with swastikas. The incidents are, in and of themselves, outrageous. But they also illustrate that the line that supposedly divides anti-Zionism from anti-Semitism is a myth. It’s no surprise that those who seek to force institutions to join the economic war on the Jewish state would also employ traditional hate-speech and intimidation tactics against Jews on campus. But it should be a wake-up call for universities and the Jewish community that Jew-hatred disguised as criticism of Israel is spreading.

Brits Like Iran More Than Israel

The rise of anti-Semitism in Europe has been fueled largely by incitement against Israel. So it’s not surprising that a poll in Britain just revealed that Israel is unpopular. But it is shocking that a democratic country would hold the one democratic state in the Middle East in lesser regard than a brutal, terrorist-sponsoring regime. The poll revealed that the only country less popular in the United Kingdom was North Korea. A whopping 35 percent of Britons regarded Israel unfavorably compared with 33 percent who had similar feelings toward Iran. This testifies to the virulence of the hate directed at Jews and explains the steep rise in anti-Semitic incidents in the U.K.