Last week, Iran confirmed to the world the existence of a secret nuclear site about 100 miles outside of Tehran. American intelligence agencies had known about the site for several years and Tehran only made the announcement after they realized the secret was out but it marked another confirmation to the world that Iran is definitely well on its way to becoming a nuclear power. Since officially announcing the new site, Iran test-fired another medium-range missile confirming their ability to attack US military forces in the region along with important American allies such as Israel. During President Obama’s first speech before the UN General Assembly, he offered lofty rhetorical nonsense such as “no nation can dominate another” before giving his most serious call to action for global leaders to address the largest, most urgent crisis facing the world – global warming. Later the same day, Iran’s psychotic leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took the podium to denounce the largest crisis he saw facing the world – Jewish domination. (Apparently, Ahmandinejad didn’t watch “An Inconvenient Truth.”) The next day, while becoming the first US president to chair a meeting of the UN Security Council, President Obama’s first order of business was to call a vote on a resolution to strengthen the Non-Proliferation Treaty aimed at leading nations possessing nuclear weapons to disarm them and encourage nations without them to forsake the technology. At no time during the discussion of this resolution was North Korea or Iran, the countries most egregiously violating the treaty, mentioned. After the drama of the UN meeting followed by a G20 conference, President Obama jetted off to Copenhagen to address the second-most pressing foreign policy issue facing America (after global warming, of course): lobbying for the 2016 Olympics to be held in Chicago. The trip to Copenhagen illustrates a large problem facing Obama’s credibility on issues; he loves to indulge in the ceremonial, ribbon-cutting events on the world stage to the detriment of serious issues at home and abroad.


President Obama doesn’t recognize any limit to his powers of charm and persuasion. After watching the Democrats’ health care proposals suffer continuous drops in public approval throughout the month of August, Obama’s initial reaction was to schedule yet another nationally televised speech which created a slight, temporary uptick in public opinion only to see it quickly resume its previous negative trend. Still undeterred, President Obama scheduled interviews on five network Sunday morning political roundtable shows. He topped off the Sunday blitz with a Monday night interview with David Letterman. A week later, Rasmussen found that support for Democrats’ health care proposals had hit an all-time low. The magic from the campaign is over. Americans no longer faint during speeches or walk away blindly chanting “yes we can.” Obama has gone to the well to draw on his charismatic capital far too many times. Richard Cohen of the Washington Post perfectly summarizes what’s happening. “Sooner or later, it is going to occur to Barack Obama that he is the president of the United States. As of yet, though, he does not act that way, appearing promiscuously on television and granting interviews like the presidential candidate he no longer is.” Since taking office, Obama has set many deadlines that he failed to enforce. Congress (thankfully) failed to meet Obama’s deadline for a final health care bill, the president’s cabinet missed the deadline to announce a paltry $100 million in spending cuts, and it’s
pretty certain that the deadline to close the Guantanamo Bay prison will not be met. Cohen argues that Obama’s addiction to media attention isn’t only hurting his domestic policy, it’s also damaging American foreign policy efforts regarding some of our most dangerous enemies.


Since taking office, Obama has worked to bring Iran to the table for negotiations as the ultimate goal regarding the rogue nation. He’s working on the assumption that, given time, he can convince Iran’s leaders to forsake their hateful ways. Paul Wolfowisz of the Financial Times writes, “Barack Obama has displayed extraordinary flexibility in his approach to Iran’s nuclear program. He has supported Iran’s ‘right to a peaceful nuclear energy program,’ declared his willingness to meet unconditionally, and extended his own deadlines for Iran to begin serious negotiations. He has maintained that position despite Iran’s bellicose rhetoric and despite congressional pressure for sanctions.” Since the US extended an open diplomatic hand to Iran, the world has seen no reduction in Ahmandinejad’s outrageous statements. Instead, missile tests have become common place.


Iran has repeatedly declared that their nuclear program is not open to discussion, citing Obama’s statements that they have every right to pursue nuclear power. Iran sits on large oil reserves and has the second largest proven natural gas reserves in the world, making it painfully obvious that any Iranian enrichment programs could only seriously be justified as part of a weapons program. Wolfowitz explains that considering Iran’s oil and gas reserves, nuclear energy makes no economic sense for the nation. Even purchasing reactor fuel would be much more cost-efficient than enriching uranium. Unless we are to believe that the Ahmandinejad and the Supreme Leader agree with Obama’s global warming fears, there is no peaceful excuse for Iran’s nuclear facilities.


Heading into the long-hyped negotiations with Iran this week, Obama and the rest of the world leaders need to remember that Iran has used all previous multiparty negotiations to delay inspections of their nuclear operations, leading to the dangerous situation the world is facing today. While this is one problem that President Obama did truly inherit from several previous administrations, a nuclear Iran cannot be excused merely because “Bush did it.” Once Iran develops a nuclear warhead, the question will not be if they attack the US or Israel - it will only be a question of when. Solving this problem will take diplomatic skill, uncompromising objectives, and a resolve to follow through despite any other nations’ protests. Threats of sanctions alone will likely not deter Iran’s nuclear ambitions and pure military actions could result in an all-out war throughout the region which would cost lives and cause disruptions in the world’s oil supply that could have devastating effects on the global economy. As Wolfowitz suggests, the best solution to this potential crisis could be to leverage sanctions with threats of military strikes in order to inspire the popular uprising that followed Iran’s contested elections earlier this year. Solving this problem likely require a delicate balance of power and persuasion.


This is a situation where B. Hussein Obama must decide on a course of action and follow through. He must be willing to deliver his message clearly and not overexpose himself in the press regarding his stance. While Obama is working desperately to shore up his positive place in American history through his health care plans and global warming initiatives, his legacy could be determined by his handling of the threat of a nuclear Iran. Solving this problem will require Candidate Obama’s ability to inspire individuals and nations that he displayed in last year’s election. However, that will require a President Obama that the world has not yet seen.