The current state of the middle east is not a pretty picture. The Islamic State is on the move. Iran is supporting Syria's Bashar Assad, Hezbollah and the Houthis in Yemen. Syria and Yemen are in shambles. The Saudis are fighting in Yemen. Egypt is fighting in the Sinai Peninsula. Hamas and Hezbollah are rearing to confront Israel. Libya is fighting itself. Turkey is fighting ISIS and the Kurds. ISIS is killing every Christian they see in a horrific genocide. 1
Amidst all this, we learn that President Obama has struck a deal which will essentially lift sanctions and provide economic relief to Iran, who in return will promise to slow down their nuclear program. 2 Sanctions were first put into place in 1979 during the Iranian hostage crisis during which the U.S. froze $12 billion in assets, including bank deposits, gold, and other properties.
The affairs, events, and politics of the Middle East are incredibly complex. It's hard to know the full ramifications and effects of our foreign policy in that region. More and more it seems that we are simply stuck between two bad choices.
For
President Obama argues there are only two ways to stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon: a diplomatic agreement or another war in the Middle East. “None of them have presented to me, or the American people, a better alternative”. 10
The agreement doesn’t solve the underlying problem, but it may buy us 15 years.8 "Think of all the changes that have taken place—in the United States, Iran, the Middle East, the entire world—since 2000." 11
Russia and China are eager to do business with Iran and they told us that if this deal does not go through, they would not obey sanctions any longer. 10
Analysts said the military benefits of having a clearer view of Iran’s program is an undeniable feature of the agreement.“The more you know about Iran’s nuclear program and the industrial infrastructure behind that program, the better you will be able to target it.” Iran must also describe the entirety of its nuclear program...in much greater detail than it has to date. 7
Critics point to the fact that it is unlikely for Iran to keep their word, and there's nothing stopping Iran from using secret facilities. Obama officials have expressed confidence Iran won’t be able to skirt international inspectors, saying they have multiple ways to detect nuclear activity. According to National Security Adviser Susan Rice "they can't hide the evidence of that in any meaningful way in that kind of period of time. And you can't hide a facility of that size very easily for long,". 10
Intrusive inspections also allow intelligence officials to worry less about keeping watch over Iran’s known nuclear sites, allowing them to focus on the hunt for any nuclear activity Iran might be conducting in secret. 7
Opponents of the deal point to the 24 day grace period that Iran is allowed if they are ever found breaking their agreement, but proponents argue that this is misleading. A a provision known as the Additional Protocol requests access within 24 hours. "If the Iranians do take up the entire 24 days, and if they are trying to hide something, there is a very strong chance that they’ll be seen, heard, or otherwise detected.". 11
Iran was one of 190 nations to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which acknowledges "the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production, and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination" 11
We have negotiated before with countries intent on building nuclear weapons and these negotiated agreements "contributed significantly to the fact that we survived and, indeed, won the Cold War without nuclear Armageddon."9
Nicholas Kristof of the NY Times points out that Clinton reached an agreement with North Korea in 1994 in which North Korea didn't follow said agreement, however, North Korea "made zero nuclear weapons" according to American intelligence estimates. After the deal collapsed in 2002, the Bush administration turned to a more confrontational approach and North Korea then "made perhaps nine nuclear weapons".
From a grand strategy perspective, the United States seems to have an awful lot on its plate right now. Heightened tension with Iran seems like a luxury that the U.S. can’t afford. 11
Against
A main argument of opponents is that with this deal we are giving far more than we are receiving. Iran will still retain the ability to continue its research and development on ballistic missiles and other aspects of a nuclear program.4
Lifting sanctions will give Iran a huge influx of money which will in fact aid the country in accelerating research and fund terrorism
including Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthi, as well as Syria’s dictator Bashar al-Assad. As a result of the ballistic missile ban being lifted, this deal will make it easier to continue development of a missile which can carry a nuclear warhead across the Atlantic "Under this agreement, a state-sponsor of terror that currently is sponsoring terrorist groups and destabilizing the Middle East, will gain free access to the international arms market." 2
A provision in the negotiations allows for U.S. to reimpose sanctions if Iran is caught violating their agreement. However, this may not be as easy as it sounds."The U.S. could reimpose sanctions on Iran, but it would be reimposing these sanctions on what will be a much-richer country, one that could withstand such sanctions for quite a while."4
After Iran has received sanctions relief, if Iran then rushed to produce a nuclear weapon, using the military option becomes more likely. Russia and China stand to benefit from business deals with Iran and it's hard to imagine that they will agree to reimpose sanctions (although they are barely respecting them as it is).
Certain facilities will be off limits to inspectors. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will only have 24/7 access to
declared nuclear facilities. The IAEA can “press” for access to suspect nuclear sites. However, provisions for access military and suspect military sites are extremely weak and in some instances Iran will
inspect itself and report the results. 13
The question arises, "Will the administration risk its precious nuclear deal if Iran threatens to break it every time the two countries are at loggerheads over regional crises in Yemen or Syria?" 9
The argument is made that the deal that Clinton made with North Korea in the 90's to relax sanctions actually aided them in developing nuclear weapons by allowing billions of dollars to flow into their country.
The agreement requires Iran to dilute or send out of the country its reactor-grade enriched uranium stockpile. "If Iran sells this enriched uranium, it will receive natural uranium in return. This will solve a problem Iran has concerning access to natural uranium. (Iran has little natural uranium and its mines are running out.) Since the agreement allows Iran to continue to develop advanced centrifuges, Tehran will have the capacity to quickly replaced its enriched uranium stockpile."1
Even if we managed to keep them from developing a nuke, after this agreement expires, Iran would have the option to produce enough enriched fuel for a nuclear weapon in a short time.
There are still too many unknowns to be able to be able to confidently make a decision. "We know Iran was developing a nuclear weapon, and we must understand how far it went down the weaponization path before we can move forward with the deal."
The agreement talks about normalization of economic relations with Iran and states that the parties shall “implement this...in good faith . . . based on mutual respect.” But Iran actively instigates regional instability, advocates for Israel’s destruction, kills the innocent and shouts “Death to America.” 5 Just a few weeks ago, even as the negotiations were taking place,
Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei tweeted that "God willing" there would be no Israel in 25 years.
My Thoughts
President Obama is using the old "keep your enemies close" philosophy. He is making a gamble with this deal a only time will tell if this will pay off or not.
We are in a difficult position where it seems like there's no good answer. I believe one of the reasons we are in this predicament in the first place is because of Obama's deal with Iran in 2013 which sparked a modest Iranian economic recovery and allowed the country greater resilience to sanctions pressure. His foreign policy is centered around appeasement and avoiding conflict, and as a result we have seen increased instability in the world.
Buck Sexton, former intelligence officer of the CIA says it best: “We had the Iranians boxed in. Let’s just make that very clear. Their currency was in free-fall; their economy was being strangled; there was opposition to this sclerotic, evil regime on the streets of Tehran from the beginning of the Obama administration. … He didn’t touch that. He didn’t want to get involved...the Israelis are now the ones who are constrained."
According to the LA Times "The response of the United States to these threats is driven more by the crisis of the moment than by any overarching geopolitical or military strategy. The principal driving motivation appears to be to avoid being trapped by another war in the region."
The Iranians will likely get a nuclear weapon one way or another and that is a frightening prospect to say the least. We can only hope - assuming the deal goes through - that the gamble pays and we can manage to delay Iran for a little longer.
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/assessing-iran-deal-5-big-lessons-history-13272 9
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/i-will-vote-against-the-iran-deal/2015/09/04/003842ca-5281-11e5-9812-92d5948a40f8_story.html 5
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/07/14/422809249/the-latest-on-iran-deal-obama-to-deliver-speech-from-white-house
6 http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-panetta-iran-middle-east-strategy-20150904-story.html
7 http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/iran-nuclear-deal-argument-bomb-121613
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/07/14/iran-nuclear-deal-much-worse-than-experts-predicted.html 12
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/07/14/422920192/6-things-you-should-know-about-the-iran-nuclear-deal
1 http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/07/14/buck-sexton-highlights-exactly-how-obama-has-boxed-the-israelis-in-with-iranian-nuclear-agreement/
2 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/11739214/A-summary-of-the-Iran-nuclear-deal.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/13/opinion/nicholas-kristof-mr-obama-try-these-arguments-for-your-iran-deal.html 8
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/07/iran-nuclear-weapons-deal-obama/398465/4
9 http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-best-arguments-for-an-iran-deal-1436829351
11 http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/248387-obamas-five-big-arguments-on-iran-deal
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/10/16/the-political-science-and-politics-of-the-iran-nuclear-negotiations/
http://www.businessinsider.com/iran-nuclear-negotiations-extended-deadline-obama-boxed-in-2014-712
13 http://www.nationalreview.com/article/421550/iran-nuclear-bombshell-Iran-police-itself?target=author&tid=906156
