Categories
Quick Analysis

New Iran Deal Even Worse

The original Iran nuclear deal was seriously flawed. The new version currently under consideration is even worse.

Robert Satloff, writing for the Washington Institute, described the first deal:

“Originally, diplomacy with Iran was supposed to be based on a straight trade-off: America (and its partners) would end nuclear-related sanctions while Iran would end its domestic nuclear program. Then, the United States conceded to Iran the right to have its own nuclear reactors but not to develop indigenous capacity to enrich nuclear fuel, which doubles as the core element of nuclear weapons. Then, the United States conceded to Iran the right to enrich but under strict limitations. Then, the United States conceded to Iran that the strict limitations on enrichment would expire at a certain point in the future. The result was that a deal originally conceived as trading sanctions relief for Iran’s nuclear program evolved, over time, into a deal trading sanctions relief for time-limited restrictions on Iran’s ambitious nuclear plans.”

The Obama White House glossed over the fact that the inspection regime was going to be inadequate, and that Iran would be free to develop nuclear weapons in about a decade. Since the deal was completed, Iran’s supposedly forbidden testing of extended range missiles proceeded unchallenged. Obama lied—there is no gentler way of stating this—about a “moderate” faction in the Tehran regime. It lied about the fact that Obama had a long-standing desire to conclude a deal, that would lift the economic sanctions on Iran.

Even news outlets normally favorable towards the White House criticized Obama’s deception. The NY Daily News, a pro-Democrat outlet, editorialized: “Iranian propaganda went as the mullahs hoped for relief from economic sanctions via a nuclear deal with the U.S. and Western powers. Why would anyone believe such obvious nonsense? One reason — in fact the key reason — is that Obama joined Iran in knowingly peddling the same false propaganda to America”

The Trump Administration rejected the measure due its lack of merit.

Then came its replacement, now being pursued by President Biden.  An open letter, signed by 46 retired generals and admirals, outlines the reason it is even worse than the already terrible version it replaces.

They note that the new deal is shorter and weaker than the original 2015 agreement. It could leave Iran twice as close to a nuclear weapon as its predecessor. It enables the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism to cast its own nuclear shadow over the Middle East. It is poised to instantly fuel explosive Iranian aggression and pave Iran’s path to become a nuclear power.

It will (foolishly) pay Russia to store Iran’s enriched uranium. It does not prohibit Iran’s development of intercontinental ballistic missiles, allowing it to acquire the means to target the American homeland with nuclear weapons.  It would, if Iranian demands are met, take the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Iran’s main terrorist wing responsible for the deaths of at least 600 American troops—off the U.S. terrorist list. It lifts sanctions, earning hundreds of billions of dollars for the radical regime in Tehran to fuel greater aggression against U.S. soldiers and our allies in the region.

The 46 retired top officers stated that “In Ukraine, we are bearing witness to the horrors of a country ruthlessly attacking its neighbor and, by brandishing its nuclear weapons, forcing the rest of the world largely to stand on the sidelines. The new Iran deal currently being negotiated, which Russia has played a central role in crafting, will enable the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism to cast its own nuclear shadow over the Middle East.”

Illustration: Pixabay