Melanie Phillips: Boltonism must not be allowed to disappear
Even when Iran was killing American and British soldiers in Iraq, or when its proxy army Hezbollah bombed the US embassy in Beirut in 1983, and the Israel embassy, and a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires in 1992 and 1994, the West failed to treat these as acts of war.
It failed to do so even after Iran seized a British-registered oil tanker this summer in the Strait of Hormuz and harassed other commercial shipping there.
It was revealed this week that two British-Australian women and one man have been arrested and jailed in Iran, adding to a growing number of British nationals being effectively held as hostages in Iranian jails.
And yet, Britain has not only been a principal cheerleader for the Obama nuclear deal but, along with the European Union, is seeking ruses to get round the sanctions on Iran reimposed by America.
It is still possible that Trump will hold firm against Iran. If he does not, Israel will act alone to defend itself if that becomes unavoidable; and if that happens, the United States will find itself unavoidably sucked into a terrible war.
John Bolton’s steady and clear-minded focus on preventing this from happening was a standing rebuke to the feeble-minded West that has supinely stood by as this unconscionable threat by the Iranian regime has remorselessly increased.
Bolton has now left the West Wing; but Boltonism — the strategic grasp of how to defend the West against its mortal foes — must not be allowed to disappear with him.
With Bolton’s departure, the world has not become a safer place. It has become far more dangerous.
Caroline Glick: Israel and John Bolton’s departure
From the day he took up his duties a year and a half ago as Trump’s third national security adviser, Bolton was under assault. The campaign against Bolton was initiated by the Iranian regime.JPost Editorial: Fair-weather friend
Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif blamed poor US-Iran relations on Bolton, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. Zarif’s campaign was quickly joined by Obama administration officials who took to the US media parroting the same allegations. The Iranians, by their telling, were guileless lambs. The big bad wolves were Bolton, Netanyahu, and the crown prince.
In recent months, as Iran stepped up its aggression against international shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, the attacks against Bolton were joined by members of the isolationist wing of the Republican Party led by Fox News host Tucker Carlson and Kentucky Senator Rand Paul.
It is true that Bolton is known as a prickly policymaker, out of his element in the Trump world. But it is also true that Trump and Bolton agreed far more than they disagreed. Unfortunately, every time there was a dispute between the two men, former President Barack Obama's carry-overs in government and their allies outside government from the Obama administration and the media were quick to report those disagreements and angrily slander Bolton as a warmonger and a mercenary who had neither America’s nor the president’s best interests at heart.
The allegations were entirely false. But their force and volume transformed every normal and entirely legitimate disagreement between Bolton and Trump into a major, widely reported event.
Under the circumstances, it was probably a foregone conclusion that Bolton’s days would be numbered.
In other words, Bolton’s departure had more to do with the stress of working in the toxic environment in Washington than with a change in Trump’s basic predisposition regarding foreign policy.
Asked on Wednesday whether the US would ease up its “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran, Trump left open the possibility that he would ease sanctions, saying “We’ll see what happens.”
“I do believe they’d like to make a deal,” Trump added. “If they do, that’s great. If they don’t, that’s great too.”
Not long after, The Daily Beast reported that Trump is also open to a proposal from Macron to extend a $15b. line of credit to the Iranians if they comply with the Iran Deal.
These recent developments follow a trend that is extremely dangerous, and it appears that there is no longer someone in the White House fighting Iran.
Iran has never stopped cheating, and sanctions have been putting the necessary pressure on the regime. Lifting them now would squander all of Trump’s work before Tehran is ready to make real concessions. And a $15b. credit infusion would allow Iran to bolster its sponsorship of terrorism across the Middle East.
Trump has, thus far, been a good friend to Israel. Most of the Israeli political spectrum views his recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and of the Golan Heights as part of Israel to be extremely positive; and while he plans to present his “Deal of the Century” later this month, he is not expected to put undue pressure on Israel.
But if Trump were to repeat his performance with Pyongyang – talking tough about North Korea before negotiating weakly without following up – in the Iranian arena, he would be putting Israel in great danger.
Trump needs to be a true friend to Israel, and not a fair-weather friend that would pander to those who seek to destroy us. The Iranian threat not only endangers Israel; it is a matter of national security, and, as Netanyahu said, the way to handle it is through “pressure, pressure and more pressure.”





















