The Iran nuclear deal allows continued uranium enrichment, a bunkered centrifuge center and no snap inspections. Lucky Iran.

By: Lori Lowenthal Marcus

Published: April 3rd, 2015

via The Jewish Press » » Iran Deal: US and Allies are the Junior Varsity (Little League?).

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seen giving a press statement regarding a nuclear agreement between Iran and world powers, April 03, 2015.
Photo Credit: Kobi Gideon/GPO

They can’t even coordinate their public descriptions of what the deal entails, that’s how bad it is.

The sort of, kind of nuclear agreement between the P5+1 and Iran makes concrete the previous understanding that U.S. President Barack Obama has been dead wrong about almost every major terrorist threat he has encountered: Al Qaeda is not, as he intoned, “decimated”; ISIS is not a “junior varsity” terrorist network; and Iran is not a partner with whom the west can successfully negotiate.

It looks like the U.S. is the captain of the junior varsity team. And Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu will not sugarcoat his assessment.

This “agreement” which is not a deal, is not even the framework of a deal, is, ultimately, an attempt by the Obama administration to rack up at least one foreign policy “achievement” during its tenure.

But that “achievement” confuses an end date to a series of discussions with the attainment of even the modest goals this administration claimed it would reach.

What follows are key details which have been released about the “agreement” reached between the U.S.-dominated allies known as the P5+1 (the junior varsity) and Iran, regarding the latter nation’s nuclear program.

A quick perusal makes clear the U.S. administration’s insistence that diplomacy would safely ensure Iran would not become a threshold nuclear power was exactly what its critics claimed: a hollow gesture which rewarded Iran with its goal of more time to continue in pursuit of achieving that status. What’s more, the deal which the parties are currently hurtling towards will not only permit but will actually legitimize Iran in its achievement of that status.

CENTRIFUGES

Iran currently has 9,000 operational centrifuges (that is the generally accepted number). The U.S. claims that, under the terms of the new deal, about 3,000 fewer Iranian centrifuges will be operational during the next 10 years, while 5,060 centrifuges will continue enriching uranium during that period.

The U.S. also claims that Iran will not use “advanced” centrifuge models for 10 years, and any development will be in accordance with P5+1 oversight. The Iranians say nuts to that, and will continue doing research and development on advanced centrifuges during the duration of the 10 year period.

Fordow, the uranium enrichment plant built in an underground bunker, will be used for “peaceful purposes.” The U.S. claims that Iran will move two-thirds of its centrifuges out of this facility and will not enrich uranium there for at least 15 years.

In other words, even according to the U.S. version of the facts, and even were one to believe that Iran will strictly adhere to its obligations under this “pre-deal,” Iran gets to continue enriching uranium, thousands of centrifuges will continue spinning, and the underground bunker will have operational centrifuges during the term of the deal.

CURRENTLY ENRICHED URANIUM

The U.S. claims that Iran’s acurrently enriched uranium will be reduced. That is already a three-step default by the allies. Initially, all enriched uranium was to be destroyed. As the result of negotiations the Iranians had allegedly agreed to instead move its already enriched uranium to Russia, where it was to be converted for non-military use.

Instead, the U.S. is reduced to bragging about a mere “reduction” in Iran’s already enriched uranium. And we don’t know what is meant by “reduction” or “neutralization” – another term used in the U.S. fact sheet.

According to a former CIA analyst, “If Iran’s enriched-uranium stockpile remains in the country,” and if it is only converted to powder form, which the Obama administration had previously – erroneously – claimed meant it would be neutralized, “Iran will retain the capability to make about eight or more nuclear weapons in about three months.” Maybe little league rather than junior varsity players more accurately describes Secretary of State John Kerry and his negotiating team.

INSPECTIONS

The inspections terms and verification measures allegedly stipulate that Iran will be required to allow inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency access to Iran’s facilities and possible covert enrichment sites. However, there appears to be no requirement that Iran will permit “snap” inspections and unfettered access to all of Iran’s nuclear facilities. This is not only a concern because of the standard enrichment facilities, but it does not appear to include guaranteed access to Iran’s military bases. Iran is suspected to have worked on military dimensions to its nuclear program at some military bases.

SANCTIONS

There is a stark disparity between Iran and the P5+1’s characterization of when international sanctions would be lifted against Iran.

The Iranian leadership had recently been pressing its team to ensure that there would be an immediate lifting of economic sanctions against the Islamic Republic once a deal was reached. Indeed, that is the way the Iranian team has characterized the agreed-upon timing for sanctions relief regarding Iran’s nuclear program (other human rights-based and other sanctions currently in place on Iran are unaffected by this deal).

The U.S. claims that sanctions will be lifted after the IAEA verifies that Iran has complied with “all of its key nuclear-related steps.” These sanctions will “snap back” if Iran fails to comply with its commitments.

The snap-back image is a good one, but no one really believes there will be any snap in the response, let alone a determination of whether Iran is in compliance, especially given the pass it has already been given on so many violations of previous commitments.

ISRAELI RESPONSE

During the recent election season in Israel, the main parties disagreed about almost everything with one exception: Iran. From the far left members of the Labour/Hatnua party, right through to Likud, Bayit Yehudi and Yisrael Beitenu, the candidates agreed there was no daylight between them and Israeli Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s critical position regarding Iran’s nuclear weapons capability.

Speaking after a cabinet meeting about the proposed agreement with Iran on Friday, April 3, Netanyahu said that the cabinet “is united in strongly opposing the proposed deal” which would “pose a grave danger to the region and to the world and would threaten the very survival of the State of Israel.”

After ticking off the many problematic aspects of the deal – that no centrifuges would be destroyed, no nuclear facilities would be destroyed, that it will bolster Iran’s economy just as Iran is increasing its footprint of global terrorism and that it leaves Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure and the capacity to build a nuclear bomb within a matter of months in just a few years, Netanyahu offered this grave condemnation:

Such a deal does not block Iran’s path to the bomb.

Such a deal paves Iran’s path to the bomb.

And it might very well spark a nuclear arms race throughout the Middle East and it would greatly increase the risks of terrible war.

The Israeli prime minister once again asserted the alternative approach he suggested when addressing the joint houses of Congress on March 3. His suggestion was to increase the pressure on Iran until a good deal is achieved. This approach flips on its head the allies’ approach of giving the carrot to the poorly behaved donkey hoping it will cause the donkey to repent and mend its ways especially after such a reward.

The Israeli prime minister quoted an Iranian commander who said just two days ago, while the Lausanne negotiations were taking place, “The destruction of Israel is non-negotiatble.”

Netanyahu’s response: “I want to make clear to all. The survival of Israel is non-negotiable.”

And then the Israeli prime minister said something which can only mean that Israel will take matters into its own hands if the parameters of the Iran deal are concluded based on the currently understood terms.

Netanyahu said: “Israel will not accept an agreement which allows a country that vows to annihilate us to develop nuclear weapons, period.”