At the moment I’m not particularly upset that Britain’s Labour Party has chosen Jeremy Corbyn to be its leader.
Don’t get me wrong. His ascension is disconcerting. This is a man who after all calls Hamas and Hezbollah his friends. Corbyn invited Raed Salah, leader of Israel’s Islamic Movement, to Westminster for tea calling him “a very honored citizen.” This “very honored citizen” was charged and convicted of inciting anti-Jewish violence in Jerusalem back in January 2008. It was only a month ago that Corbyn hosted a reception at Westminster for Max Blumenthal (the son of Hillary Clinton confidante Sidney Blumenthal), who has compared Israel to ISIS. It would seem that Corbyn has never met an Islamic terrorist or apologist for Islamic terrorists he doesn’t love.
Yet I find myself far more perturbed with Tory Prime Minister David Cameron. Now it is a fairly safe bet that Cameron will probably never declare Hamas or Hezbollah to be his friends. Cameron will also probably never personally invite the leader of Israel’s Islamic Movement to tea nor host a reception for someone who compares Israel to ISIS.
David Cameron might never do any of these things. Nevertheless, he bears responsibility for helping to bring about the Iran nuclear agreement. If President Obama is to be criticized for making a nuclear agreement with Iran the centerpiece of his foreign policy, then some of this criticism must also be reserved for Mr. Cameron. Now there is certainly plenty of criticism to go around. French President François Hollande and German Chancellor Angela Merkel also deserve our derision. But Cameron actually worked the phones back in January to urge U.S. Senators against extending sanctions against Iran. Cameron’s Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond has accused Israel of wanting a “permanent standoff” with Iran. Her Majesty’s government has also seen fit to restore diplomatic relations with Tehran with much fanfare.
Under no circumstances should David Cameron ever be confused with Winston Churchill. If Churchill were somehow brought back to life, I believe he would have opposed Cameron signing on to the Iran nuclear agreement with the same vigor that compelled him to oppose Neville Chamberlain’s dealings with Hitler in Munich more than 75 years ago. I am certain Churchill would have described the Iran nuclear deal as “a disaster of the first magnitude”:
Our loyal, brave people… should know the truth. They should know that there has been gross neglect and deficiency in our defenses; they should know that we have sustained a defeat without a war, the consequences of which will travel far with us along our road; they should know that we have passed an awful milestone in our history, when the whole equilibrium of The Middle East has been deranged, and that the terrible words have for the time being been pronounced against the Western democracies:
Thou art weighed in the balance and found wanting.
And do not suppose that this is the end. This is only the beginning of the reckoning
I am equally certain that if Churchill had uttered those words today that they would have once again fallen on deaf ears as they did more than 75 years ago. When Cameron says the Iran nuclear deal “will help to make our world a safer place” surely it sounds like the 21st century version of “peace for our time.” It seems we must learn the hard way.
As for Corbyn, I would be far more worried about him if he were to move into 10 Downing Street. But I doubt this will come to pass. An overwhelming majority of Labour parliamentarians despise him on both ideological and personal grounds. It would come as no surprise if they removed him as leader before the next elections in 2020. It would be a very British coup indeed.
But let’s suppose Corbyn somehow becomes Britain’s next Prime Minister. Corbyn might call Hamas and Hezbollah his friends, but it is Cameron who helped make the Iran nuclear deal possible. It is Cameron more than any other leader, apart from President Obama himself, who wanted sanctions against Iran removed. With the sanctions removed Iran will find itself flush with cash. And who will be the recipients of this windfall? Why, Hamas and Hezbollah of course, and they can give thanks to Cameron for it.
It is quite conceivable that Corbyn would invite representatives from Hamas and Hezbollah to Number 10 for tea and sandwiches and grant them official legitimacy. Cameron would probably never personally extend such an invitation, but his actions would surely help make such an invitation more likely. Cameron owns the Iran nuclear deal every bit as much as President Obama. Where Iran is concerned, what more damage could Corbyn do than Cameron has already done?
Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://spectatorworld.com/.