WarSclerotic

Column one: The disappearance of US will, Jerusalem Post,  Caroline B. Glick, April 17, 2014

(A good summary of the foreign policy “successes” of the United States of Obama. — DM)

In Europe, in Asia, in the Middle East and beyond, the America’s most dangerous foes are engaging in aggression and brinkmanship unseen in decades.

Obama on Passover Photo: REUTERS

The most terrifying aspect of the collapse of US power worldwide is the US’s indifferent response to it.

In Europe, in Asia, in the Middle East and beyond, the America’s most dangerous foes are engaging in aggression and brinkmanship unseen in decades.

As Gordon Chang noted at a symposium in Los Angeles last month hosted by the David Horowitz Freedom Center, since President Barack Obama entered office in 2009, the Chinese have responded to his overtures of goodwill and appeasement with intensified aggression against the US’s Asian allies and against US warships.

In 2012, China seized the Scarborough Shoal from the Philippines. Washington shrugged its shoulders despite its mutual defense treaty with the Philippines. And so Beijing is striking again, threatening the Second Thomas Shoal, another Philippine possession.

In a similar fashion, Beijing is challenging Japan’s control over the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea and even making territorial claims on Okinawa.

As Chang explained, China’s recent application of its Air-Defense Identification Zone to include Japanese and South Korean airspace is a hostile act not only against those countries but also against the principle of freedom of maritime navigation, which, Chang noted, “Americans have been defending for more than two centuries.”

The US has responded to Chinese aggression with ever-escalating attempts to placate Beijing.

And China has responded to these US overtures by demonstrating contempt for US power.

Last week, the Chinese humiliated Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel during his visit to China’s National Defense University. He was harangued by a student questioner for the US’s support for the Philippines and Japan, and for opposition to Chinese unilateral seizure of island chains and assertions of rights over other states’ airspace and international waterways.

As he stood next to Hagel in a joint press conference, China’s Defense Chief Chang Wanquan demanded that the US restrain Japan and the Philippines.

In addition to its flaccid responses to Chinese aggression against its allies and its own naval craft, in 2012 the US averred from publicly criticizing China for its sale to North Korea of mobile missile launchers capable of serving Pyongyang’s KN-08 intercontinental ballistic missiles. With these easily concealed launchers, North Korea significantly upgraded its ability to attack the US with nuclear weapons.

As for Europe, the Obama administration’s responses to Russia’s annexation of Crimea and to its acts of aggression against Ukraine bespeak a lack of seriousness and dangerous indifference to the fate of the US alliance structure in Eastern Europe.

Rather than send NATO forces to the NATO member Baltic states, and arm Ukrainian forces with defensive weapons, as Russian forces began penetrating Ukraine, the US sent food to Ukraine and an unarmed warship to the Black Sea.

Clearly not impressed by the US moves, the Russians overflew and shadowed the US naval ship. As Charles Krauthammer noted on Fox News on Monday, the Russian action was not a provocation. It was “a show of contempt.”

As Krauthammer explained, it could have only been viewed as a provocation if Russia had believed the US was likely to respond to its shadowing of the warship. Since Moscow correctly assessed that the US would not respond to its aggression, by buzzing and following the warship, the Russians demonstrated to Ukraine and other US allies that they cannot trust the US to protect them from Russia.

In the Middle East, it is not only the US’s obsessive approach to the Palestinian conflict with Israel that lies in shambles. The entire US alliance system and the Obama administration’s other signature initiatives have also collapsed.

After entering office, Obama implemented an aggressive policy in Pakistan, Yemen and elsewhere of killing al-Qaida operatives with unmanned drones. The strategy was based on the notion that such a campaign, that involves no US boots on the ground, can bring about a rout of the terrorist force at minimal cost human cost to the US and at minimal political cost to President Barack Obama.

The strategy has brought about the demise of a significant number of al-Qaida terrorists over the years. And due to the support Obama enjoys from the US media, the Obama administration paid very little in terms of political capital for implementing it.

But despite the program’s relative success, according to The Washington Post, the administration suspended drone attacks in December 2013 after it endured modest criticism when one in Yemen inadvertently hit a wedding party.

No doubt al-Qaida noticed the program’s suspension. And now the terror group is flaunting its immunity from US attack.

This week, jihadist websites featured an al-Qaida video showing hundreds of al-Qaida terrorists in Yemen meeting openly with the group’s second in command, Nasir al-Wuhayshi.

In the video, Wuhayshi threatened the US directly saying, “We must eliminate the cross,” and explaining that “the bearer of the cross is America.”

Then there is Iran.

The administration has staked its reputation on its radical policy of engaging Iran on its nuclear weapons program. The administration claims that by permitting Iran to undertake some nuclear activities it can convince the mullahs to shelve their plan to develop nuclear weapons.

This week brought further evidence of the policy’s complete failure. It also brought further proof that the administration is unperturbed by evidence of failure.

In a televised interview Sunday, Iran’s nuclear chief Ali Akhbar Salehi insisted that Iran has the right to enrich uranium to 90 percent. In other words, he said that Iran is building nuclear bombs.

And thanks to the US and its interim nuclear deal with Iran, the Iranian economy is on the mend.

The interim nuclear deal the Obama administration signed with Iran last November was supposed to limit its oil exports to a million barrels a day. But according to the International Energy Agency, in February, Iran’s daily oil exports rose to 1.65 million barrels a day, the highest level since June 2012.

Rather than accept that its efforts have failed, the Obama administration is redefining what success means.

As Strategic Affairs Minister Yuval Steinitz noted, in recent months US officials claimed the goal of the nuclear talks was to ensure that Iran would remain years away from acquiring nuclear weapons. In recent remarks, Secretary of State John Kerry said that the US would suffice with a situation in which Iran is but six months away from acquiring nuclear weapons.

In other words, the US has now defined failure as success.

Then there is Syria.

Last September, the US claimed it made history when, together with Russia it convinced dictator Bashar Assad to surrender his chemical weapons arsenal. Six months later, not only is Syria well behind schedule for abiding by the agreement, it is reportedly continuing to use chemical weapons against opposition forces and civilians. The most recent attack reportedly occurred on April 12 when residents of Kafr Zita were attacked with chlorine gas.

The growing worldwide contempt for US power and authority would be bad enough in and of itself. The newfound confidence of aggressors imperils international security and threatens the lives of hundreds of millions of people.

What makes the situation worse is the US response to what is happening. The Obama administration is responding to the ever-multiplying crises by pretending that there is nothing to worry about and insisting that failures are successes.

And the problem is not limited to Obama and his advisers or even to the political Left. Their delusional view that the US will suffer no consequences for its consistent record of failure and defeat is shared by a growing chorus of conservatives.

Some, like the anti-Semitic conservative pundit Patrick Buchanan, laud Putin as a cultural hero. Others, like Sen. Rand Paul, who is increasingly presenting himself as the man to beat in the 2016 Republican presidential primaries, indicate that the US has no business interfering with Russia’s aggression against Ukraine.

Iran as well is a country the US should be less concerned about, in Paul’s opinion.

Leaders like Sen. Ted Cruz who call for a US policy based on standing by allies and opposing foes in order to ensure US leadership and US national security are being drowned out in a chorus of “Who cares?” Six years into Obama’s presidency, the US public as a whole is largely opposed to taking any action on behalf of Ukraine or the Baltic states, regardless of what inaction, or worse, feckless action means for the US’s ability to protect its interests and national security.

And the generation coming of age today is similarly uninterested in US global leadership.

During the Cold War and in the immediate aftermath of the September 11 attacks, the predominant view among American university students studying international affairs was that US world leadership is essential to ensure global stability and US national interests and values.

Today this is no longer the case.

Much of the Obama administration’s shuttle diplomacy in recent years has involved sending senior officials, including Obama, on overseas trips with the goal of reassuring jittery allies that they can continue to trust US security guarantees.

These protestations convince fewer and fewer people today.

It is because of this that US allies like Japan, South Korea and Saudi Arabia, that lack nuclear weapons, are considering their options on the nuclear front.

It is because of this that Israeli officials are openly stating for the first time that the US cannot be depended on to either secure Israel’s eastern frontier in the event that an accord is reached with the Palestinians, or to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

It is because of this that the world is more likely than it has been since 1939 to experience a world war of catastrophic proportions.

There is a direct correlation between the US elite’s preoccupation with social issues running the narrow and solipsistic gamut from gay marriage to transgender bathrooms to a phony war against women, and America’s inability to recognize the growing threats to the global order or understand why Americans should care about the world at all.

And there is a similarly direct correlation between the growing aggression of US foes and Obama’s decision to slash defense spending while allowing the US nuclear arsenal to become all but obsolete.

America’s spurned allies will take the actions they need to take to protect themselves. Some will persevere, others will likely be overrun.

But with Americans across the ideological spectrum pretending that failure is success and defeat is victory, while turning their backs on the growing storm, how will America protect itself? 

Kerry : Ukranian Anti-Semitism Allegations ‘Grotesque’ – YouTube.

Secretary of State John Kerry calls allegations that Jews were required to register by pro-Russian forces “grotesque,” as he also condemned threats against the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine.

Making a case for space | JPost | Israel News.

By REUVEN BEN-SHALOM

04/17/2014 15:51

Israel must lead in space exploration for maintaining its qualitative military edge, for national prestige, for promoting technological innovation and for leading humanity in pushing the boundaries of the next frontier.

Last week, Israel successfully launched the Ofek 10 satellite, adding another essential intelligence asset and reinforcing Israel’s place in the prestigious club of space exploration leaders. Besides military applications, Israel is also involved in many space exploration initiatives with commercial and scientific goals.

Space exploration is a highly debatable issue. Here are some questions, addressing the matter from an international, as well as Israeli perspective.

Why invest in space? Aren’t there enough problems here on earth requiring our tax money?

Space is important for defense applications, such as reconnaissance and communication satellites. Missile defense requires operating in space in order to detect and shoot down threats even before they reenter the atmosphere. In the future, we may have other space-based capabilities, such as the ability to strike targets, either by laser or by dispensing precision guided munitions.

As for civilian uses, without satellites there would be no cell phones, no internet, no weather forecasting and no navigational data for WAZE. The need for cutting-edge technology aboard spacecrafts has stimulated progress and innovation, making life on earth easier and better, through a multitude of technologies adapted from spaceflight to everyday use.

It is difficult to predict what other implementations or spin-offs space exploration may someday produce. We may eventually master the ability not only to forecast, but to alter weather systems. We may solve the earth’s energy deficits by harvesting sustainable energy in space. We might need to protect earth from an existential threat such as an inbound asteroid or sun flare. Maybe we will dispose of our waste in some remote planet. And of course, we may simply want to take a vacation on Mars.

The pursuit of pure science and abstract knowledge also motivates us. We need to satisfy our curiosity, and deepen our understanding of the universe, our planet and ourselves. We are inspired by space exploration. Steven Hawking said it best: “To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.”

So operating in space is important. But why risk the lives of astronauts, when robots could do it safer, better, and cheaper? Life support systems built to withstand the harsh and unforgiving environment in space make spaceships bigger and much more expensive. Unmanned platforms would give us much more science for the same money.

In his book Breakout Into Space, George Henry Elias presents a detailed argument on why the human race, led by the United States, must develop and settle space as the next frontier. Our species may someday need to leave earth and find a new habitat, due to overpopulation, natural catastrophes such as an asteroid impact, or if we render the planet inhabitable by nuclear or environmental disasters.

His case may sound somewhat apocalyptic, but in my opinion it is sadly very realistic.

Since we are a generation that has grown into relative stability, it’s hard for us to grasp this, but reviewing global trends, and even looking across the border at our neighbors, teaches us how vulnerable our world really is.

In order to enable this human migration, we had better work on acquiring the means and methods for establishing a self-sufficient interplanetary civilization.

Data accumulated by scientists from the biomedical aspects of extended human presence in microgravity at the International Space Station (ISS) will someday enable long duration trips, such as to Mars and beyond.

Some prosperous and popular areas in the world were uninhabited and dangerous not too long ago, but people moved there, seeking a new life. We humans must always push the boundaries and boldly go where no man (or woman) has gone before. It’s who we are, it’s what we’re about, and history has taught us that this explorative attitude ultimately pays off.

But even before we leave earth, human spaceflight is essential for promoting life on earth. It is a fact that human space flight has significantly contributed to aviation safety. NASA has had an enormous influence on world aviation, introducing safety methodologies and technological improvements which were developed for space flight but found their way to passenger planes.

Seeing spaceflight and aviation as two separate entities is a mistake. There is no doubt that suborbital flight will eventually replace current methods for flying long distances, facilitating a trip from Israel to Australia in about one hour.

Why should Israel invest in space? Shouldn’t we leave this for countries with more resources? First and foremost, it is crucial for our defense. A country as challenged as Israel must utilize and dominate space in order to keep its qualitative military edge, as we do on land, at sea and in the air.

Israel is a world leader in technological innovation, and it is only natural that we lead humanity in pushing the boundaries of the next frontier. The world needs our spirit and skills and we have a responsibility to contribute to making the world a better place. We know how to invent stuff. We believe in breaking ground and breaking the rules. We think outside of the box. We are explorers, inventors, entrepreneurs, pioneers and settlers.

Recent development of private space initiatives also opens up enormous markets and business opportunities.

Leading in space is also a matter of geopolitical leverage and national prestige. Prime Minister Netanyahu recently announced that Israel would send another astronaut to the ISS within a few years. Some commentators mentioned as-a-matter-of fact that it would be another Air Force pilot.

Colonel Ilan Ramon, the first Israeli astronaut, tragically perished along with his crewmembers aboard the Space Shuttle Colombia. He proved to be a wonderful ambassador for Israel, demonstrating not only remarkable professionalism, but a captivating personality.

The Mercury astronauts selected by NASA in 1959 were all military test pilots. The idea was to select people who had already proven their ability to withstand extreme physical and mental challenges.

In the novel Space, James Michener described the selection process of his imaginary “solid six” astronauts, where great emphasis was put on their public image.

PR was, and still is, an essential tool in garnering public support for the promotion of space exploration.

However, I believe that the next Israeli astronaut should be a scientist, not a pilot.

The advantages of an aviator’s skills are vastly outweighed by the need to choose someone who can promote scientific objectives. Moreover, this would be a wonderful opportunity for showing a side of Israel that is detached from defense aspects. If it were up to me, I would choose a woman scientist.

There is another aspect of space exploration which I find most appealing. It can serve as a collective human endeavor, characterized by neutrality, harmony and peace. The ISS is an incredible international collaboration, serving not only as a scientific lab, but as an experiment in multicultural coexistence and partnership.

It is fascinating to hear astronauts describe their feelings as they gaze down at earth.

Ilan Ramon wrote: “We are working this mission for the benefit of all mankind, and from space our world looks as one unity with no borders. So let me call from up here in space – let’s work our way for peace and better life for everyone on Earth.”

The writer is a former pilot in the IAF, founder of Cross-Cultural Strategies Ltd. and International Project Manager at CockpitRM.

www.CCSt.co.il

Former Iran atomic agency head tells about sabotaged material, deceiving IAEA | JPost | Israel News.

By HERB KEINON

04/17/2014 20:45

Israeli official says comments “should serve as a wake-up call to anyone who has any doubt about the duplicity of the Iranian regime.

The former head of Iran’s anomic energy organization admitted in a recent interview to an Iranian paper that Tehran lied to the International Atomic Energy Agency, and also described the ways the west subverted the country’s nuclear program by selling sabotaged parts.

Fereydoon Abbasi, who headed the Iranian agency under former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, told the Khorasan newspaper that at one point Iran stopped submitting the Design Information Questionnaire that the IAEA routinely requested to chart the planning and progress of Iran’s nuclear facilities.

This decision was taken, he said, because of Iran’s concern that the information of what parts Iran was seeking was transferred to western intelligence agencies which would then ensure that faulty or sabotaged parts were supplied.

“The IAEA inspector would honestly report, for instance, that a certain part or a certain pump had yet to arrive [in Iran], or to be installed,” he said, according to a translation of the interview by MEMRI, the Middle East Media Research Institute.

“As a result, the intelligence agency receives this information [from the IAEA and then] searches the globe for companies that make the pump, and pressures them. They would pressure that country or company not to transfer the parts or equipment to Iran, or would allow them to do so [only] after sabotaging [the parts]… For instance, if it was an electronic system, they would infect it with a virus, or plant explosives in it, or even alter the type of components, in order to paralyze [Iran’s] system.”

Abbasi said that this was the way in which western intelligence agencies infected Iranian computers with the Stuxnet worm, which set back the country’s nuclear program for months.  He said that western intelligence agencies closed Iran’s purchasing channels so that “no one [besides them] could sell us anything. [At the same time, they] opened the channels that they [personally] control, in order to provide Iran with equipment that would also benefit them. This, for example, [is how]… they got the Stuxnet virus [into Iran]. They planted it in equipment that Iran purchased.”

Abbasi said that on the basis of the information that Iran provided the IAEA, “they knew how many centrifuges we intend to install, and what parts we need, and therefore they prevented this equipment [from getting to Iran] – for instance, a hollow pump that was supposed to be purchased from AEG. The company itself is [probably] not at fault – these intelligence agencies carry out the sabotage and then transfer the equipment to Iran via that [company].”

This was the reason, he said, why Iran stopped providing information to the IAEA. “[We] would give the DIQ [to the IAEA] but only after the fact [in violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty and IAEA regulations],” he said. “When we wanted to move the Arak reactor’s main warehouse, we concealed it, so that [IAEA inspectors] would not notice which workshop [the activity was being conducted in], since they might have carried out assassinations or sabotage there. [So] for several years we concealed warehouse, so that that company could do its work…”

With negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program continuing, one Israeli government official said that Abbasi’s comments “should serve as a wake-up call to anyone who has any doubt about the duplicity and mendacity of the Iranian regime, and their desire to hoodwink the international community.”

Israel Hayom | The Ukrainian exodus, let it be so.

Dan Margalit

Jordanian air strike destroyed Al Qaeda raider force heading for US military base.

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report April 17, 2014, 12:20 PM (IDT)

The Jewish Press » » Jews Ordered to ‘Register’ in Donetsk, Ukraine.

Flyers with instructions to “register” were handed to Jews as they left synagogue following holiday prayers.

By: Hana Levi Julian

Published: April 17th, 2014

Text of anti-Semitic flyer distributed to Jews in Donetsk, Ukraine on Passover 2014.
Photo Credit: Courtesy, Israel Matzav blog 

It is said that those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.  For some Jews in Donetsk, Ukraine on this Passover holiday of “freedom,” concern and even fear is lurking in their thoughts, making them wonder about the lessons of the past.

On the first day of Passover this week, three armed men in the eastern Ukrainian province of Donetsk distributed flyers warning Jews to “register” themselves and their assets with the new pro-Russian government, according to the novosti.dn.ua website.

The flyers were handed out next to a synagogue as people were leaving following holiday prayers. They read as follows:

“Dear Ukraine citizens of Jewish nationality,

Due to the fact that the leaders of the Jewish community of Ukraine supported (Stepan) Bendery Junta, and oppose the pro-Slavic People’s Republic of Donetsk, [the interim government] has decided that all citizens of Jewish descent age 16 and older, residing within the territory of the republic, are required to report to the Commissioner for Nationalities in the Donetsk Regional Administration building and register by May 3.

(Ed. Note: Stepan Bander was a Ukrainian nationalist leader in Kiev who fought with Nazi Germany in the 1940s against Soviet troops before switching sides and taking up arms against the German occupation.)

“ID and passport are required to register your Jewish religion, religious documents of family members, as well as documents establishing the rights to all real estate property that belongs to you, including vehicles. Evasion of registration will result in citizenship revocation and you will be forced outside the country with a confiscation of property. A registration fee of $50 is required.”

Pro-Russian separatists are occupying the building where the Jews were told the register.

The flyer was written in the Russian language and bore the symbol of Mother Russia at the top of the page and that of the Donetsk People’s Republic at the bottom. It was allegedly signed by Denis Pushilin, chairman of the Donetsk interim government but no ink signature is seen on the paper.

Donetsk was recently declared an independent “people’s republic” by pro-Russian activists. In response to a query by a Ukrainian Jewish website, Pushilin confirmed the flyers were indeed distributed by his organization. However, he was quoted by the tvrain.ru news site on Wednesday as denying any connection to the content, and called the flyers a ‘provocation.’

Nevertheless, Jewish Agency Chairman Natan Sharansky told Voice of Israel government radio on Wednesday that aliyah from the Ukraine is likely to double by the end of 2014.

The flyer – authentic or not – constitutes the 17th anti-Semitic incident to have taken place in Ukraine since the beginning of 2014. Most were violent attacks. Several were aimed at Chabad-Lubavitch emissaries and a few were life-threatening. Five took place in Kiev alone, according to statistics gleaned from the Coordination Forum for Countering Antisemitism (CFCA) website.

A reader on the Israel Matzav blog warned in a number of posts that the situation in Ukraine is becoming extremely dangerous for Jews.

Wisely, a Jewish resident of Donetsk told Ynet that she does not intend to register, although she said that she had never encountered any form of anti-Semitism until she saw the flyer. “Though I take it very seriously, I am uncertain of its authenticity,” she said.

Plutonium in the Islamic Republic: Make-or-break issue or simply a decoy? | JPost | Israel News.

By YONAH JEREMY BOB

04/17/2014 02:43

Iran will sway West to allow it permanent near nuclear break-out capability, if it exchanges reduced plutonium production capacity, dilution of medium-level enriched uranium for enrichment capabilities of low-level uranium.

The latest reports from the negotiations between the P5+1 powers and Iran over the latter’s nuclear program indicate that the Islamic Republic might be ready to make a key concession on slowing its path toward producing a nuclear weapon using plutonium.

The specific issue is what will happen with Iran’s Arak nuclear facility. If it is completed and operates as it is currently designed, it could produce enough plutonium for a nuclear weapon within eight months, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

There are many other issues that could mean a longer waiting period, but Arak is considered a serious enough issue to be a deal-breaker for the US, and was the issue that almost torpedoed the interim deal.

Iran’s decision to halt construction – at least internally – of the plutonium facility as part of the interim deal, and its recent announcement that it might be willing to redesign it to greatly decrease the speed at which it produces plutonium, indeed mark a potential negotiating victory for the West and a deal-breaker in a final agreement.

The latest issue of Arms Control Today, a publication of the Arms Control Association, features some of these compromise solutions. But has Iran used the matter of Arak as a decoy to distract the West from negotiating hard on the primary issue of uranium enrichment? With all the highly complex nuclear issues to negotiate regarding the country’s multiple nuclear capabilities, the interim and final deals in many ways will come down to old-fashioned bargaining.

While there are certain issues that are deal-breakers, the West’s negotiating position has shifted much closer toward that of Iran in recent years.

This is mostly a function of Iran successfully breaching past red lines without having faced consequences.

The shift is so prominent that some of those red lines might now be less important to the West than the goals of avoiding an overt Iranian weapons capability and being able to claim victory by at least extracting some high-profile concessions from Tehran.

For example, only a short time ago the West’s demands were for no more uranium enrichment by Iran at any level, the shipment abroad of much of the country’s enriched uranium stockpile, the dismantling of its long-secret underground Fordow facility, and the dismantling of the Arak facility – in a nutshell, eliminating both the present and future paths to a bomb.

Now it appears that the red lines amount to keeping Iran at least 6-12 months away from “break-out capacity” – where it could produce a bomb – and under heavy monitoring while at least reducing the threat presented by the Arak facility (without touching the Fordow facility).

This is where the Arak concession comes into play.

It is absolutely a serious concession and a deal-breaker on its own. But if Iran successfully trades a reduction of its plutonium production capacity and the dilution of its medium-level enriched uranium for being able to permanently continue enriching low-level uranium, it will have succeeded in having the West agree to it maintaining a permanent near-break-out capability (6-12 months, maybe less if clandestinely).

At the same time, the West will be able to truthfully claim it halted Iran’s path to a plutonium bomb and froze its path to using uranium, with the plutonium halt being the biggest proof it “won” and got the Islamic Republic to back down.

Many say that had the West not raised the stakes, Iran would have undoubtedly gone down both paths. But another, more likely possibility – since several basic aspects of the plutonium path to a weapon still do not exist, and most of what does exist is half-baked – is that the plutonium path is nothing more than a decoy.

Iran may have planned from the start that it would “concede” its plutonium path to prove its intentions were not weapons-related, while using it to at least keep its uranium option open, something that a few years ago the West would not have agreed to. If this is true, any future public dispute between Iran and the US over whether to reduce the Arak facility’s plutonium production, fully convert it to a light-water reactor (not usable for weapons-grade material) or totally dismantle it could be seen from this vantage point as being somewhat staged.

Regardless of whether or not it was a grand strategy from the start, even if the final deal stops Iran’s path to a plutonium weapon but preserves both a “modest” (a term used by US President Barack Obama) Iranian “right” to uranium enrichment and lets Iran keep some of its stockpile, the outcome would likely be a permanent near break-out capacity – which Secretary of State John Kerry essentially has confirmed to Congress.

Surprise Attack on Iran: Can Israel Do It?.