Has Obama made a deal with Iran?

The Obama Administration Calls for More Study of Iran’s Human Rights Abuses

by Anne Bayefsky, Fox News.

The Obama administration’s U.N.-centered foreign policy reached new heights of incredulity today with the U.N. Human Rights Council adoption of a resolution on Iran. With the Obama team in Geneva at the center of it, the resolution calls for more study of the Iranian human rights record and the submission of a report one year from now.

Instead of blasting the ridiculous excuse for delaying serious action against a notorious regime currently engaged in heinous violations of human rights, the Obama administration actually masterminded the resolution.

Immediately following the resolution’s adoption, U.S.-U.N. Ambassador to Geneva Eileen Donahoe held a news conference in which she declared “what we have just witnessed is a seminal moment for this body – the Human Rights Council – with the establishment of a Special Rapporteur [investigator] on the human rights situation in Iran…Today we’ve seen the Council able to respond to a chronic, severe human rights violator which is Iran, and we’re very pleased with this development.”

The U.N. Human Rights Council’s predecessor, the Commission on Human Rights, had adopted an Iran resolution every year from 1984 to 2001. Those resolutions mandated a special investigator to report each year on the gross violations of human rights occurring in Iran. From 1997 onwards Iran refused to allow the investigator into the country to investigate. In 2002 the Commission eliminated the post of investigator. It is a certainty that whoever is appointed to fill the position now recreated by the Human Rights Council will also not be permitted into the country. So the information available to the new investigator will be the same information available to anyone else doing research outside the country. Assuming, of course, that more research is the right answer to tackling human rights violations by Iran.

Less than half the Council members voted in favor of the American-led resolution – the vote was 22 for, 7 against, 14 abstentions and 3 absent. Iranian friends China, Russia, Cuba, and Pakistan voted against. Saudi Arabia merely abstained. Qatar, Kyrgyzstan and Angola ran out of the room so as to avoid being counted. Even so, in order to win, the resolution was minimalist in the extreme. It contains no description of any human rights atrocities being perpetrated by Iran. In fact, a reference which would have “reaffirmed” a resolution from the General Assembly in 2010 criticizing Iran in detail, was deleted.

To recap, the Obama administration’s idea of doing something about the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, on the verge of acquiring the world’s most devastating weapon, currently holding American hostages, and now engaged in a brutal crackdown of Iranian democracy-seekers, is to pass a U.N. resolution calling for the appointment of some individual who will “submit a report for consideration by the Human Rights Council at its 19th session” in March 2012.

Donahoe ended her news conference by lauding what might be called the Obama administration’s my U.N.-do-or-die approach to foreign policy: “we believe the Council has shown itself able to deal more effectively than in the past with emergent crisis situations as in the case of…Libya.” To be clear, the only reason the Council had to “deal” with Libya was that until a few weeks ago Libya was happily ensconced by fellow U.N. states as a member of the U.N. Human Rights Council. Its membership was proving to be profoundly embarrassing to the U.N. and to President Obama, who decided to join the Council and lend it credibility in the first place.

Donahoe, in fact told the Council today that last September the U.N. General Assembly had a report before it which – in her words – “documents amputations, floggings, and acts of torture carried out by the Iranian government. The report further highlights Iran’s continued sentencing of both men and women to death by stoning.”

Knowing that already, what is the Obama administration’s solution to the ongoing crimes of Iran against its own people, Americans and freedom-loving people everywhere? One more U.N. report, one more year away.

March 25, 2011 | 5 Comments »

Leave a Reply

5 Comments / 5 Comments

  1. Yes, Soros plays a role. But I think that role is exaggerated. To me, I think Obama may be, in part, a “Soros puppet”, but I think this is more in terms of his domestic agenda than his foreign policy.

    Glenn Beck reports that Soros is the “35th richest man in the world”.

    OK, so what are the 34 richer men [or women, as the case may be], doing with their money right now?

    Are they just sitting around naked counting it?

    I’m sure they are also trying to influence events to their advantage or liking.

    I’ll also bet that among the very top four or five are Arab oil sheiks. What do you suppose they are doing?

    The Saudis alone have been spending approx. two billion dollars a year, year in and year out, since the early 1980s, on various lobbying/propaganda activities just in the U.S. alone. This includes endowing chairs at universities, propping up front lobby groups in D.C. that shill for their line, buying up stakes in media organizations, and so on.

    Glenn Beck makes a big deal when Soros writes a check for $100 million to NPR or whomever…that is chump change compared with what the Saudis do.

    Iran is in this game, too, but they are relative newcomers and don’t have pockets quite as deep as the Saudis.

    I hold up as evidence that Obama is a Saudi puppet on foreign policy the fact of relationship with Khalid Al Mansour, an American black Muslim who had been an advisor to the Saudi monarchy, and who had clearly played some kind of “mentor” role to Obama during his college days. Many speculate that Obama’s education at Harvard was financed by the Saudis, via this fellow. Then there is also the fact that Obama had, before becoming president, publicly endorsed the Saudi Peace [surrender] plan by name, and even his current policies towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are virtually indistinguishable from that of Saudia. What he demands Israel do is essentially the Saudi Plan, minus ROR, and even on that, he has not taken a firm public position either way (probably saving that for a ‘coup de grace’ humiliation for Israel even if they cave on everything else).

    But, then there is this article above. And there is Obama’s apparently extreme reluctance to deal decisively with the Iranian nuclear issue, or support Iranian democracy activists. In the former case, this, I am well aware, has caused great consternation among the Gulf states.

    I guess there is no such thing as a “perfect puppet”. Past a certain point, the “puppet”, once having the levers of power in his own hands, will do what he wants.

  2. Obama is neither an Iranian mole or a Saudi puppet. His strings are being pulled by the far kept whose main financier is Soros through all his One World organizations. The free world is being beset by two ordinarily mutually antagonistic forces — Islamism and Progessive transnational Secular Socialism. Each of these two groups feels that they can use the other for their initial primary purpose — the destruction of their prime enemy, the USA. Each feels that once this has been done they will easily deal with their erstwhile “ally”.
    Won’t that be an interesting thing to see.
    One thing I will admit though. We know so little about Obama that even after two years into his rule their is still debate as to whose side he is working for. He is the Great Cipher! Can you imagine such a situation? That the most powerful position in the world’s last superpower is a cipher?
    It boggles the mind.
    Any rate, for immediate practical purposes Western culture and Western supremacy are under assault and our enemies are implacable in their enmity. Both must be defeated — philosophically and physically — UTTERLY AND WITHOUT PITY.

  3. I have a friend who is an Israeli expat living in upstate New York.

    We have argued a long time over whose “stooge” Obama is.

    I’ve maintained that he’s a Saudi puppet, at least on foreign policy.

    My friend has said all along that he thinks Obama is an Iranian mole.

    I’m beginning to think my friend is right…..

  4. Obama accepts prospect of nuclear-armed Iran

    debkafile notes that all past references to the US nuclear shield for Europe referred to Iranian ballistic missiles – never a nuclear threat.
    Our military sources note that one of the key ground stations to which the Monterey’s radar is linked is the X-band forward radar station located in the Israeli Negev near the Egyptian border, which in turn is connected to Israel Arrow anti-missile missile batteries designed especially to shoot down Iranian ballistic missiles.
    The closer the Iranian nuclear menace comes to reality, the further it recedes from Israeli political and media rhetoric. Obama’s fundamental policy shift on the subject is bad news for Israel in general and at this time in particular, because his support for the Arab Revolt is seen by Israeli and moderate Arab rulers as further evidence of a White House decision to strengthen Iran, which profits hugely from their losses.

    Read more

  5. March 2012? Will Iran produce a few nukes by then?

    Israeli and Saudi leaders in Moscow as Palestinians ramp up missile strikes
    DEBKAfile Exclusive Report March 24, 2011, 6:19 PM (GMT+02:00)

    debkafile’s Jerusalem and Moscow sources note

    that this is the point at which Israel’s declining security situation becomes relevant to a possible Israeli-Saudi dialogue.

    Neither Jerusalem nor Riyadh is at ease with the US role in favor of the popular uprisings against veteran Arab regimes – and most particularly the US-UK-French military intervention in Libya. Both find this policy detrimental to the national and security interests of America’s foremost Middle East allies.

    They also share resentment for the benefits accrued from this wave of unrest by Tehran and the effect it has had to turn world attention away from its progress toward manufacturing a nuclear bomb.
    The Saudi king and Israeli prime minster are apprehensive, on the strength of their intelligence input, that Iran will eventually seize control of the popular uprisings in Arab lands, especially Egypt.

    Riyadh alone took a substantial precautionary step against this menace by sending military units into the Bahrain on Feb. 14 to pre-empt the Iranian-backed Shiite threat to King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa and the tiny kingdom’s financial and oil assets at the back door of the rich eastern Saudi oil center.

    Israel’s leaders in contrast have never struck any position or policy with regard to the turbulence around its borders, ignoring the perils they pose to its security.

    Netanyahu’s trip to Moscow, which opposes the US-British-French operation in Libya, is his first attempt to explore a diplomatic option outside Israel’s alliance with the United States. The Russians, the Saudis and the Israelis too see advantages in discussing such options and testing new paths of cooperation to renew the direct exchanges Riyadh and Jerusalem maintained in the past through back channels on the Iranian issue.