++This week's panel discussion had three critics of the Iranian deal with far more knowledge of the subject of nuclear negotiations than the usual critics.
++Still there were a few disingenuous statements such as the "breakout time" would be about six months after the agreement ends. First "breakout time", which Ernest Moniz says from a very, very conservative estimate is about one year. This means not that Iran would have a bomb--but only enough enriched uranium to build a bomb. To build a bomb you need detonators. So essentially if the deal runs 12-15 years as people speculate. Then Year 13--when I am 78--they would have enough uranium to build a bomb. So let's say they get some detonators and could have one bomb by the time I am 80. Now are you going to fire the bomb at someone or test it first? So then I am about 82 by the time they have another bomb to actually use.
++It's a crude analogy but then you want to bomb Iran. All the military experts have said that this would only delay their program 4-5 years. So you gain 15 years by negotiating instead of risking an even larger regional war and retaliation through terrorist act for something that will cost you billions and only give you 4 years.
++Here are the real main concerns: secret military sites;Iran's deals with North Korea for ballistic missiles; the exchange with North Korea over detonators; and the use of sanctions relief to fund Iran's activities in Yemen,Jordan,Syria and the region.
++The Israelis,the Republicans and other critics wanted to throw everything and the kitchen sink into the negotiations. Iran wanted to throw arms deals and the ballistic missile issue into the mix.
++The Obama Administration wanted the talks to be exclusively nuclear. The idea was that Iran had to prove their program was only for energy and not weaponry. For those assuming it was a military program,negotiations on ballistic missiles is vital. And when Iran raised the issue of sanctions over ballistic missiles the red flags went up. In point of fact is Iran had agreed to negotiations over ballistic missiles it was admitting to the nuclear program being military.
++The other issue, of course, is the arms embargo. Here the Russians have millions at stake ,having made arms deals with Tehran once the nuclear deal is agreed upon. It will be interesting to see where that ends up.
++As for verification--spot checks versus managed. The managed inspections did result in findings of Iran cheating and the IAEA disclosed those findings. Whether it makes a difference with Ernest Moniz' model I can't tell. He basically got all the politics out of the problem and created a model of negotiation where the Iranians are in a trap, not able to enrich to nuclear quality uranium for the duration of the deal, even if they cheat. The problem with this is like many Obama policy creations, it is too sophisticated for the political site to understand.
++Old cold warriors used to Soviet-American arms negotiations refuse to believe that Ernest figured out a new way to negotiate. They are still stuck in throw weights and number of missiles, hen we are not dealing with that type of situation.
++The other problem is Obama's idea of snap-back sanctions in case of violations of the agreement. No one believes that Russia and China will allow such a thing and European countries are already sending trade missions to Iran for the minute a deal is struck. The sanctions regime the Obama Administration created caused real economic suffering to the other P4 +! nations. I doubt they would go back to those days.
++You will see the amazing changing goalposts. Before the interim agreement, critics talked about Arak being used to generate weapons grade plutonium and Furdow being the primary military research site. Now Arak isn't mentioned and Furdow is being dismissed as not the site that would be used.
++You will hear alot of President Obama's motivations. I heard this deal is a product of Obama's hubris and that it is essential to his legacy. Critics in Washington agree with the Iranians who say President Obama needs the deal more than they do. No one mentions that President Obama's legacy as our only African-American President with a weird name is pretty secure. No one mentions his commitment to non-proliferation which predates the presidency.
++The other complaint I heard is that this was President Obama's sneaky way of ensuring that Iran doesn't build a bomb on his watch. Instead the next President will have to deal with this issue.
++A deal puts Israel,the Saudis and the Republicans in a box. A deal makes it almost impossible for Bibi to rationalize a military strike. And the Republicans will have to come clean on what they intend to do with Iran.
++Republican congress types want to avoid this issue because there is an inconvenient truth that the United States and Iran are weird allies in Iraq but at odds in Syria. So what is your policy?
++The regional issues pertaining to ISIS do affect these negotiations. ISIS is now active in the Caucasus and Putin is horrified. Iran and the United States have focused on ISIS. So an Iran nuclear deal is thought to put the matter to rest so everyone can go after ISIS.
++Sam Nunn and Dick Lugar are no longer around in the Senate to escort this deal to approval. We haven't had a nuclear deal since Obama and Medevev.
++The IAEA says they can have a report on the pre-military dimensions of this program by the end of the year. The problem has been partly Iran's refusal to discuss it but partyly it is how to deal with the CIA's stung operation when they gave plans for nuclear detonators to Iranian agents in Vienna during the Clinton years. This lead to the eventual breakup of the A.Q. Khan nuclear network, which also included Iran.
++Did Iran cease their military program at that time or did they continue it clandestinely?
++We will be entertained in September by Bibi showing up at the UN again with his Boris Badanov Bomb. This year he will point to the neglect of the P4+1 to demand the complete dismantling of the Iranian nuclear program as demanded by the UN Security Council Resolutions.
++Now it doesn't help that the ads around this visit will intercut the negotiators in Vienna and the million demonstrators in tehran demanding" Death to the Jews and Death to Israel". As much as I dislike Bibi, it's not like Israelis can feel warm and fuzzy about the Iranians.
++I just hope he doesn't wheel out Eli Wiesel--"Eli, I can't promise you it won't happen again."
++President Obama will face pushback from his own party like Reagan did with his nuclear reduction agreement from the conservatives. Hillary Clinton has already promised she would be a better friend of Israel than President Obama. It will be interesting to see where she comes down on these talks.
++The Donald already has come out against these talks because Persians know how to negotiate better than we do. That will be the refrain from Republicans. This deal really is about nuclear proliferation , not non-proliferation.
++Having been humiliated by years of Obama's success, the republicans will see this as their last shot at wounding Obama. Every Republican candidate will come out against the deal and vow that this deal made America less safe. It is their wedge to make 2016 about national security and not the economy or the cultural wars they lost.
++How much of this will truly affect the deal,I don't know. We don't have one yet. But here's hoping.
++the deal will have untended consequences. Alleviation of the sanctions will bring millions to the Republican Guard but will it to the Iranian people. They are currently involved in prolonged conflicts throughout the region. Why does anyone think they are actually consolidating control in these areas. I concede they control Iraq and are now infiltrating the Kurds but at home if the sanctions relief doesn't produce for the people,there will be unrest as we saw in 2009 and 2011.
++This is Obama's Gamble with History. If he pulls this off he ends another chapter of the United States trying to isolate a country in perpetuity. Can it lead to more agreements? Maybe.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment