Iran Deal

Hmmm:

World powers have reached a deal with Iran on limiting Iranian nuclear activity in return for the lifting of international economic sanctions.

US President Barack Obama said that with the deal, “every pathway to a nuclear weapon is cut off” for Iran.

And President Hassan Rouhani said the “historic” deal opened a “new chapter” in Iran’s relations with the world.

Mr Obama, who is trying to persuade a sceptical US Congress of the benefits, said it would oblige Iran to:

remove two-thirds of installed centrifuges and store them under international supervision

get rid of 98% of its enriched uranium

accept that sanctions would be rapidly restored if the deal was violated

permanently give the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) access “where necessary when necessary”

Sanctions relief would be gradual, Mr Obama said, with an arms embargo remaining in place for five years and an embargo on missiles for eight years.

The major drawback is the end of the sanctions. Jonah Goldberg explains:

The lifting of crippling sanctions, which will come about as part of the nuclear deal struck in Vienna, means that at least $150 billion, a sum Barack Obama first invoked in May, will soon enough flow to Tehran. With this very large pot of money, the regime will be able to fund both domestic works and foreign adventures in Syria, Yemen, Lebanon, Iraq, and elsewhere.

It is hard to imagine a scenario—at least in the short term—in which Hezbollah and other terror organizations on the Iranian payroll don’t see a windfall from the agreement. This is a bad development in particular for the people of Syria. Iran, as the Assad regime’s funder, protector, and supplier of weapons, foot soldiers, and strategists, is playing a crucial role in the destruction of Syria. Now Syrians will see their oppressor become wealthier and gain international legitimacy (legitimacy not just for Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, which this deal will leave in place.)

Goldberg, however, points out that, despite these problems, the deal achieves our main objective of delaying Iran’s acquisition of a nuclear weapon, possibly for decades. I would also add that it prevents us from not reaching a deal and seeing the sanctions regime collapse, particularly from the Russian side, where Moscow is trying to form a stronger alliance with Iran.

A key point for me is that the sanctions are set to snap back automatically if Iran is found to have violated the deal, which is a key point. It would take a new UN resolution to remove them again.

Liberals are praising the deal; conservatives are denouncing it. I expect to see Chamberlain cited about a million times in the next sixty days (it is, after all, the only history the neocons are familiar with). But I don’t see that there was much of a choice here. Bombing Iran sounds good, but it would spark a massive international crisis and might not even work. Maintaining the sanctions would be fine, but that coalition is already crumbling and would collapse completely if we walked away from a deal.

In short, I think this is probably the least bad option given the cards we have.

Comments are closed.

  1. AlexInCT

    They pushed this thing so they could use it for the coming elections. However, when we finally end up with a nuclear arms race in the ME after Iran sneaks out a bomb, or worse uses one, will make be the crowning achievement to prove the destructive and stupid nature of this administration and the progressive movement.

    This deal is not worth the paper it will be printed on, and everyone – but especially the Iranian thugocracy – knows it. What a shame.

    Thumb up 1

  2. AlexInCT

    Today the news is replete with articles trying to make the case that “Obama is smarter than us rubes” – I am SMAATH! – (said in the Fredo voice from the Godfather movies) and to roll back the obvious the disaster just wrought on the world by these amateurs. This capitulation that assures that the world’s most prolific and prominent sponsor of terror, the Iranian state, somehow will stop cheating and trying to circumvent the system, is bubkis. Iran’s nuke program has not been stopped or delayed. In fact, I bet Iran busts out a nuclear weapon in under 3 months if it is not attacked first by a Saudi-Israeli led coalition. And then the show will really begin. Of course, Obama will then pretend it was not his fault.

    Remember that these “geniuses” are the ones that championed the Russian reset. How well is that working for us? Then we have Libya, Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and a slew of other foreign policy disasters that all seem to have been ignored by a complicit and idiotic media. I can see why the Obama administration empathizes with the junta running in Iran, though: both are corrupt, morally bankrupt, constantly tell lies, and care not a bit how destructive and damaging what they are doing to the country they lord it over is, because their prime objective is self-serving. Miss him yet

    Thumb up 0

  3. Xetrov

    All of the stupid ass Republicans in the Senate that are now whining about this deal brought this on themselves.

    http://www.nationaljournal.com/2016-elections/the-limits-of-the-rubio-cruz-iran-rebellion-20150507

    They could have stopped any attempt at ratification through the Constitutional process of requiring Senate approval for any treaty, but they gave up that power to the Executive in May and now must have 2/3rds to stop him rather than 2/3rds to approve it like it should be.  All of this moaning is just political bullshit.

    Thumb up 1

  4. West Virginia Rebel

    Verification and inspections, Mr. Nobel Prize Winner? The release of our people being held in Iran? No? I guess you’re just stuck with scolding Major Garrett, then.

    Also, thoughts and prayers for George H.W. Bush and his recovery.

    Thumb up 0

  5. AlexInCT

    Alex – what would you have been looking for in a deal?

    Good faith on the other side’s part, and when it comes to Iran I expect none of that. We wasted time talking to them when what we needed to do was undermine the program and the leadership while ratcheting up the sanctions. Only an idiot tries to avoid being eaten by a hungry pack of hyenas by trying to show them how nice he can be, and that idiot is in my country’s WH.

    The real world doesn’t operate like the social discussion clubs from these credentialed elitists high school and college years, and they are too dumb to understand you don’t try to play nice to the guy that means it when he says he wants to slit your throat and drink your blood.

     

    Thumb up 0

  6. Nobody

    Alex – what would you have been looking for in a deal?

    Who says a “deal” was ever even a requirement?

    When you’re “dealing” with the devil, you’re dealing with the devil.

    Thumb up 0

  7. CM

    Bush strengthens Iran through his ill-conceived and utterly disastrous war, and yet by locking them out of nukes for the foreseeable future Obama is the enabler. Brilliant. Who even cares what people think when they believe that EVERYTHING Obama touches is wrong? How are these people relevant to anything anymore?

    Thumb up 0

  8. Nobody

    So just let them get on with it then?

    Hmm, isn’t this an example of that whole “binary” thingie that CM so often whines about?

     by locking them out of nukes for the foreseeable future

    Yeah, sure.  The devil always honors his commitments, doesn’t he?

    Thumb up 0

  9. Nobody

     they believe that EVERYTHING Obama touches is wrong

    Maybe you should read up on the concept of “first principles”.  If two people have completely different first principles, then it’s entirely possible that they would agree on virtually nothing.

    Thumb up 1

  10. Nobody

    locking them out of nukes for the foreseeable future

    Assuming this is even true (which only a fool would believe to be the case), what’s stopping Iran from building up a massive stockpile of conventional weapons in the mean time?  Or sponsoring terrorism projects around the world?

    Or continuing to hold and torture American hostages?  So much for Obama’s “We Leave No One Behind” bullshit.

    Thumb up 1

  11. CM

    Ever heard of lurking,  numbnuts?

    So what happened? Couldn’t contain the rampant dickishness any longer?

    Maybe you should read up on the concept of “first principles”.  If two people have completely different first principles, then it’s entirely possible that they would agree on virtually nothing.

    It could also be blind ideological and partisan hatred. That whole numbnuts binary thing you read about while you were lurking like a weirdo.

    Thumb up 0

  12. Nobody

    So what happened?

    Your rampant dickishness became unbearable.

    It could also be blind ideological and partisan hatred.

    Yeah, you liberal fucksticks really need to work on that — it’s destroying our way of life.

    Thumb up 0

  13. CM

    Your rampant dickishness became unbearable.

    So you thought you’d put yours on display to show me how much I have to learn? I’m not worthy….

    Yeah, you liberal fucksticks really need to work on that — it’s destroying our way of life.

    I didn’t need any assistance but thanks for supporting and emphasising everything I’ve been saying. Brilliant. You hairy-nippled circus monkey.

    Thumb up 0

  14. ilovecress

    Hmm, isn’t this an example of that whole “binary” thingie that CM so often whines about?

    Hence the question mark. So you say ‘no’ to a deal. And I guess you’re saying ‘no’ to letting them get on with it. So…. what then?

    Thumb up 0

  15. Nobody

    So you thought you’d put yours on display to show me how much I have to learn?

    Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, apparently.

    I didn’t need any assistance…

    Of course not.  They never do…

     

     

    Thumb up 0

  16. Nobody

    Hence the question mark.

    The question itself implied that there was no option but to “let them get on with it”, which is binary.  That’s the whole point.

     

    Thumb up 1