Even some of Obama’s most staunch supporters are forced to concede that the Iran talks may result in a potential disaster for the world if Iran is allowed to produce nuclear weapons. 

Prominent Atlantic columnist Jeffrey Goldberg, known for his close ties with US President Barack Obama as well as his support for his policies, seems to have changed his stance somewhat on the issue of negotiations with Iran, adopting Israel’s approach, namely, that any compromise on its nuclear program would create an existential threat to the world.

Goldberg has not completely changed his attitude, though, and he did criticize Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in an article on Sunday for turning the nuclear negotiations into “a stress test of the US-Israel relationship.”

However, the journalist acknowledged that “Netanyahu has a credible case to make.”

“The deal that seems to be taking shape right now does not fill me – or many others who support a diplomatic solution to this crisis – with confidence,” Goldberg wrote in a piece titled: “Danger Ahead for Obama on Iran.”

“Reports suggest that the prospective agreement will legitimate Iran’s right to enrich uranium [a ‘right’ that does not actually exist in international law]; it will allow Iran to maintain many thousands of operating centrifuges; and it will lapse after 10 or 15 years, at which point Iran would theoretically be free to go nuclear,” Goldberg warns.

Goldberg’s points on the details of Iran’s nuclear program are remarkably similar to those made by Netanyahu.

‘A Very Dangerous Moment for the World’

“This is a very dangerous moment for Obama and for the world,” Goldberg states. The president has “made many promises, and if he fails to keep them – if he inadvertently (or, God forbid, advertently) sets Iran on the path to the nuclear threshold, he will be forever remembered as the president who sparked a nuclear-arms race in the world’s most volatile region, and for breaking a decades-old promise to Israel that the United States would defend its existence and viability as the nation-state of the Jewish people.”

“Netanyahu obviously believes that Obama doesn’t have his, or Israel’s, back,” the columnist says. “There will be no convincing Netanyahu that Obama is anything but a dangerous adversary. But if a consensus forms in high-level Israeli security circles (where there is a minimum of Obama-related hysterics) that the president has agreed to a weak deal, one that provides a glide path for Iran toward the nuclear threshold, then we will be able to say, fairly, that Obama’s promises to Israel were not kept.”

Paraphrasing Netanyahu, he poses questions to Obama: “Two issues in particular concern me with respect to the talks between the world powers and Iran: What happens if and when the Iranians violate the agreement, and what happens when the period of the agreement comes to an end and they decide to pursue nuclear weapons?”

“In the coming weeks, President Obama must provide compelling answers to these questions,” Goldberg asserts.

By: United with Israel Staff

Sign the Petition to Stop a Nuclear Iran

Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act

The US Congress must ensure that sanctions against Iran remain in force until the nuclear threat is completely eliminated.

I strongly oppose easing sanctions before the nuclear threat from Iran has been eliminated. Allowing Iran to enrich uranium without being subject to 'anytime, anywhere' inspections is extremely dangerous and unacceptable. Iran's nuclear program must be stopped.