There is little chance of Israel bombing Iran because sanctions and other measures put in place by the international community will be enough to contain the Islamic Republic’s nuclear ambitions, former four-star general Wesley Clark tells Newsmax.
And in any case, President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad is in such deep domestic trouble that his own people could be the ones who turf him out, Clark predicted.
Watch the Exclusive Interview Here.
Clark — who ran for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2004 and is a firm supporter of President Barack Obama — also said Republicans are crying foul over the threat of military cuts under sequestration plans and defended the president’s comment that the murder of U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens in Libya was “a bump in the road.”
Clark spoke exclusively to Newsmax.TV in New York where he was attending the Clinton Global Initiative.
Urgent Poll: Romney or Obama to Handle Foreign Crisis? Vote Here!
He said he does not believe Israel will strike Iran. “Other measures will be brought to bear by the international community against Iran,” he said. “I mean tougher sanctions and other measures. Everything’s on the table.
“President Obama said he’s going to do everything that’s required. They will not get a nuclear weapon,” Clark predicted.
He also said imposing a no-fly zone over Syria in an attempt to wear down the Assad regime would also not be effective. Instead he said the response should be “to try to seal off the conflict from Iranian weapons and also to take care of the refugees and to provide humanitarian assistance and political development assistance for the Syrian opposition.”
Clark was NATO’s Supreme Commander Europe from 1997 to 2000 and led the allied forces in the Kosovo War in 1998 and 1999. After his retirement from the military he became active in Democratic politics. He won the party’s Oklahoma primary in 2004 but dropped out of the race soon after.
He told Newsmax the defense cuts of more than $50 billion, due in January under sequestration are “highly unlikely to kick in.”
“They were put there as a sort of unimaginable, awful consequence if there’s no agreement. They were designed to generate the agreement.
“In other words, they were to be so awful in contemplation that the Republicans and Democrats would have to agree, the Democrats because this cuts primarily the social side, the Republicans . . . on the military side.
“Now, the Republicans are out saying, ‘Well, the president did this,’ “ he added. “The President didn’t do this. The president set up an agreement for $4