First lady Melania Trump, second from right, and Brigitte Macron, second from left, watch as President Donald Trump and French President Emmanuel Macron participate in a tree planting ceremony on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, Monday, April 23, 2018. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

Unfortunately, for many in Western Civilization, French President Emmanuel Macron is not the fix-all the North Atlantic Trade Organization (NATO) needs. Macron, much like Barack Obama, is something to be projected upon, not something that projects upon time or history. He is an ether-soaked rag over the mouths of the resistance and Iran’s longshot for keeping the United States in the Iran deal, but nothing more.

Macron was hailed as the “Trump whisperer” by Yasmeen Serhan in The Atlantic and was set to swoop in like a Roman god and save us all which, oddly enough, was a theme started by the alt-right. That, dear readers, is not the case. Emmanuel Macron has no more leverage to influence events than his French predecessor did and is even less equipped.

The French president wanted the Western world, particularly the American left, to believe he waved his hand over the troubled waters of the Iran Deal and those waters would instantly be at peace. Again, please understand, not a single fact on the ground changed. Once reality set in and he returned to Europe, Macron clarified that he had no control over President Donald Trump. The tone has now changed; Macron went from being the “Trump whisperer” to “urging” and “warning” President Trump.

Western progressives, like in so many other policy debates, have no other alternatives than resisting Trump. That is insanity. Specifically, in regards to Iran and the Iran Deal. It is accurate to say the United States is at odds with their European allies over this one policy, but it is suicide to make the alliance of the strongest coalition in human history contingent upon it.

The myth that this will isolate the United States from Europe and the rest of the world is an outright lie being fed to the public by people who tried to inject “social justice” into geopolitics. That is what the Iran Deal is: By any means necessary. It is “leveling the playing field” in the Middle East in favor of the Iranians by relieving sanctions and allowing more economic growth.

What the whole world is arguing about is what  Iran will do with that economic growth. Will it invest in its own infrastructure and domestic quality of life or will it invest in its military operations in Syria and Yemen? If behavior is any indicator, Iran will invest in missile systems in Syria and that is something Israel will not abide idly. The problem isn’t with the United States and Iran it’s with Iran and its neighbors who were ignored when Iran was handed this deal.

This is something one of the Iran Deal’s biggest fans and most fierce defenders, Jeffrey Lewis knew and told Vox in 2015. Concluding the interview with Max Fisher by saying “I interpret [Iran] as being interested in sanctions relief, and that’s I suppose a way in which they’re becoming less of a pariah, that they can trade. So I guess in a narrow sense that’s not being a pariah. But until they stop supporting [Lebanese terrorist group] Hezbollah, doing what they’re doing in Syria and Iraq and Yemen, I don’t think there’s going to be a transformation in the relationship.”

Lewis went on to say that Iranians should manage their expectations a “little better.” Perhaps the progressive left should take its own advice and manage their expectations of Iran better . Democratic Senator Bob Menendez, ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee, chided State Department officials for not having “a coherent strategy” when they said the quickest way to end the crisis in Yemen was to get Iran out of there. But what the Senator from New Jersey failed to realize is that the Iran Deal is that strategy and is failing miserably.

Tommy Vietor, left, former National Security Council spokesman, and Ben Rhodes, deputy National Security Adviser. ASSOCIATED PRESS

As recertification day approaches, we should not let the likes of Obama bros Tommy Vietor or Ben Rhodes guide the debate, but rather be honest and direct about our concerns and expectations with our allies like Macron on how to move forward with Iran. Perhaps we should hear from Iran’s neighbors who see them, according to the expert Jeffrey Lewis, as “pariahs”. Whether the deal is nixed, fixed, or kicked down the road for another 90 days, the media should stop treating this like a public relations game because what is a stake is very real.