The good, the bad, the secret: The nuclear deal with Iran

Reuters

Germany's Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle, China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi, Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, and France's Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius greet and shake hands with each other at the Palais des Nations in Geneva November 24, 2013. Iran and six world powers reached a breakthrough agreement early there to curb Tehran's nuclear program in exchange for limited sanctions relief.

Article Highlights

  • When word came that Kerry was returning to Geneva, there was little doubt a deal had been reached with Iran.

    Tweet This

  • Naturally, both Iran’s and Obama’s friends in Washington were equally quick to praise the “historic agreement”.

    Tweet This

  • I hear they’re talking about selling out Assad in favor of a new Syrian government.

    Tweet This

When word came that Secretary of State John Kerry was winging his way back to Geneva, there was little doubt a deal had been reached with Iran for some nuclear concessions in exchange for a modicum of sanctions relief. Reaction was predictable from most quarters, with those concerned about Iran’s bona fides slamming the de minimis requirements of the agreement — particularly a failure to secure Iran’s agreement to cease all enrichment, a key demand of all relevant U.N. Security Council resolutions. Naturally, both Iran’s and Obama’s friends in Washington were equally quick to praise the “historic agreement”.

The good in the dribs and drabs reported about this agreement are straightforward:
  • a halt of work at Arak, the heavy water reactor that provides Iran a second route to a bomb
  • A suspension of installation of new centrifuges
  • Intrusive new inspections
  • A cap on the stockpile of enriched uranium

 

The bad is in what is left out:
  • all enrichment
  • cooperation in revealing details of Iran’s military work at Parchin
  • Construction (though not installation) of new centrifuges
  • Reversal of nuclear progress
Chatting last week with a prominent nuclear expert in Washington (a Democrat), we talked about the problems with the then prospective deal. Ironically, we were in complete agreement:
  • Phased deals such as this buy more time for the would-be nuclear state to advance its program while giving key concessions on the sanctions front.
  • Sequenced agreements of this kind don’t work (viz: North Korea).
  • The administration was too desperate for a deal.
  • There will be no phase two.

 

In reality, Iran has given nothing of substance other than a “pause” in its program.  The administration has left the hard work to the IAEA, including Parchin and verification.  Any hint of suspicion that Iran will continue work at an as yet undisclosed secret site was missing.  In return, while the concessions to Iran on sanctions are in and of themselves not dramatic, the reversal in momentum for sanctions and the loss of the psychology of impenetrable sanctions is of immeasurable value to Tehran.  Dealmakers will be back, letters of credit will once again be available, and it will be the beginning of the end of international cooperation on sanctions.  Worse yet, the administration will be loath to call Iran for failing to measure up to the letter of the agreement for fear of collapse, with all the concomitant loss of reputation to the President.  The administration, having once been an advocate for an end to Iran’s nuclear program, will become an advocate for Iran.  Don’t believe it?  Look at last week’s outrageous comments by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei about Israel.  Where was Kerry?  Look at the administration’s opposition to new sanctions on the Hill.

In short, it is wrong to say Iran has given nothing; Iran has given something, but nothing that halts its progress towards a nuclear weapons capability.  It has simply pushed back a break-out date which was immaterial to Iran, which has little intention of immediate break-out in any case. In return, it has earned something far more valuable than the concessions it granted: an advocate for the current regime in the White House.

One last thing: AP is reporting secret talks have been going on between the White House and Iran for months now. We’ve heard this repeatedly.  What are they talking about?  In addition to the nuclear issue, I hear they’re talking about selling out Assad in favor of a new Syrian government that looks exactly like the current government, minus Assad.  Hezbollah?  Nothing.  Terrorism?  Nothing.  Watch out.

Also Visit
AEIdeas Blog The American Magazine
About the Author

 

Danielle
Pletka

  • As a long-time Senate Committee on Foreign Relation senior professional staff member for the Near East and South Asia, Danielle Pletka was the point person on Middle East, Pakistan, India and Afghanistan issues. As the vice president for foreign and defense policy studies at AEI, Pletka writes on national security matters with a focus on Iran and weapons proliferation, the Middle East, Syria, Israel and the Arab Spring. She also studies and writes about South Asia: Pakistan, India and Afghanistan.


    Pletka is the co-editor of “Dissent and Reform in the Arab World: Empowering Democrats” (AEI Press, 2008) and the co-author of “Containing and Deterring a Nuclear Iran” (AEI Press, 2011) and “Iranian influence in the Levant, Egypt, Iraq, and Afghanistan” (AEI Press, 2012). Her most recent study, “America vs. Iran: The competition for the future of the Middle East,” was published in January 2014.


     


    Follow Danielle Pletka on Twitter.


  • Phone: 202-862-5943
    Email: dpletka@aei.org
  • Assistant Info

    Name: Alexandra Della Rocchetta
    Phone: 202-862-7152
    Email: alex.dellarocchetta@aei.org

What's new on AEI

image Recovering from tax time blues
image 10 welfare reform lessons
image Let HHS nominee Sylvia Burwell explain Obamacare lie
image Why bold ideas backfire in politics
AEI on Facebook
Events Calendar
  • 14
    MON
  • 15
    TUE
  • 16
    WED
  • 17
    THU
  • 18
    FRI
Wednesday, April 16, 2014 | 10:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m.
Calling treason by its name: A conversation with Liam Fox

Join us at AEI as the Right Honorable Liam Fox sits down with Marc Thiessen to discuss and debate whether America’s intelligence agencies have infringed on the personal privacy of US citizens.

Thursday, April 17, 2014 | 4:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.
The curmudgeon's guide to getting ahead

How can young people succeed in workplaces dominated by curmudgeons who are judging their every move? At this AEI book event, bestselling author and social scientist Charles Murray will offer indispensable advice for navigating the workplace, getting ahead, and living a fulfilling life.

No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.