Hint: It’s Not Just the 5 Letters
Obama’s Iran Doctrine
“I will stand with Israel if they are attacked. And this is the reason why, working with Israel, we have created the strongest military and intelligence cooperation between our two countries in history… But to the issue of Iran, as long as I’m president of the United States Iran will not get a nuclear weapon. I made that clear when I came into office.”
Iran will not get a nuclear weapon.
Those are the words of former President Barack Obama on the debate stage in October 2012. Sparring over foreign policy with Republican nominee Mitt Romney, President Obama underscored the importance of dissolving the Iran threat as to maintain peace within the global order. During this debate, President Obama spoke largely in favor of brutal sanctions against Iran, targeting their oil industry and crippling their economy.
“And the reason we did this is because a nuclear Iran is a threat to our national security, and it is a threat to Israel’s national security. We cannot afford to have a nuclear arms race in the most volatile region of the world,” Obama said. “Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism. And for them to be able to provide nuclear technology to non-state actors, that’s unacceptable. And they have said that they want to see Israel wiped off the map.”
A Bipartisan Understanding
Since 2012, nearly fifteen years ago, we have known that Iran poses an existential threat to not only the American people, but also the world. Although Mitt Romney and Barack Obama disagreed on many policy agenda items, they understood the importance of bipartisan consensus and hard action as a means of preventing evil global actors from wreaking havoc on the world. And since 2012, Iran has not listened. They won’t back down. They insist on having nuclear capabilities, which is most frightening now when our “greatest ally in the region” could cease to exist.
Destroying Iran’s ability to build a nuclear weapon isn’t only an agenda item from the political elite. 84% of the American people believe preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon either matters somewhat or matters greatly. Across issues of U.S. security and prosperity, Iran matters the most to the American public.
The Politics of Hypocrisy
Now, however, once Trump took decisive action on Iran, we see Democratic actors dogging and criticizing his move as something worthy of impeachment. A move that, according to progressive Democrats, needed congressional approval.
But, the President has authority to use military force, and President Obama used the same authorization–found in the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force–when he carried out military operations in the Middle East.
So, what changed? Politics. Even if the Iran threat has always been a matter of bipartisan consensus, progressive Democratic lawmakers choose petty politics over their principles, framing Trump’s actions as completely out of nowhere.
The Progressive Manipulation
What’s most appalling—and insulting to the American people—is this dishonest attempt by the progressives to portray Trump’s actions on Iran as reckless, misguided, and unprecedented, when Democratic leaders themselves have acknowledged the threat Iran poses for years. In doing so, these politicians hope to manipulate their constituents, engaging in activity that is much more reprehensible than destroying the nuclear ambitions of an evil ally.
In a post on X, Democratic representative Alexandria Ocazio Cortez (AOC) wrote, “The President’s disastrous decision to bomb Iran without authorization is a grave violation of the Constitution and Congressional War Powers.” She continued, “It is absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment.”
She and Trump then exchanged blows on the platform, ending with AOC writing, “Take it out on whoever convinced you to betray the American people and our Constitution by illegally bombing Iran and dragging us into war.”
Hating Trump Over American Security
The worst part? AOC hopes to mislead and misinform the American people to fulfill her political goals. Here lies another instance of new, progressive Democrats developing their policy agenda around one central idea: hating Trump. Of course, the biggest unifier is a common enemy, and in this case Trump is a great enemy for the Democratic party, but this comes at the expense of the root of our democracy: consensus-building and bipartisanship.
She hopes to convince the American people that the Commander-in-Chief wants to recklessly lead our nation to war, and in doing so, she emotionally manipulates the public and frankly, underestimates her followers’ intelligence. Needless to say, what AOC wrote is a dangerous oversimplification of constitutional wartime powers. And her goal isn’t to protect the American people–it’s to garner more progressive support, built entirely around hating the man in the Oval Office.
The Democratic Divide
What’s most revealing here is the continued split in the Democratic party between progressives and moderates. AOC, even other Democrats are “fuming” at you for using this as an opportunity to attempt to impeach Trump, when we should be building bipartisan consensus as we prepare to respond to increasing threats in the Middle East. Level-headed Democrats supported taking action against Iran, so why can’t progressives like AOC get behind supporting American security?
Country Over Party
Now, don’t get me wrong–I, like many Americans, can come up with a long list of everything President Trump has done that I’ve been incredibly frustrated by. But I can acknowledge, like the Democrats of the past could, that our American identity should be more salient than partisan affiliation.
In this case, upholding the global order and ensuring American safety should be more important than hating the President. Because if progressive Democrats can’t get beyond their disdain for our leader and fight for the American dream, then they’re not just failing the President–they’re failing their constituents they claim to represent.
