Submitted by: Veronica Coffin
By: Denise Simon
Consider the stated position of the Supreme leader of Iran:
Reuters and AFP – Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has stated his country’s red lines for a nuclear deal with six world powers.
“Freezing Iran’s research and development for a long time like 10 or 12 years is not acceptable,” Khamenei said in a speech broadcast live on June 23.
Khamenei, who has the final say for Iran on any deal, added that all financial and economic sanctions “should be lifted immediately” if an agreement is signed.
Britain, France, Germany, China, Russia, and the United States want Tehran to commit to a verifiable halt of at least 10 years on sensitive nuclear development work as part of a deal they aim to reach by a June 30 deadline. In exchange, they are offering relief from economic sanctions.
Khamenei reiterated that Iran would not give international inspectors access to its military sites and accused the United States of wanting to destroy Iran’s nuclear industry.
The six powers want limits on Tehran’s programs that could have a military use.
Tehran denies it is pursuing nuclear weapons.
When the NYT finally prints an explosive fantasy piece on what the White House and John Kerry at the State Department are doing with Iran, one needs to take notice. The New York Times calls this Iran agreement a ‘fatal flaw’.
The Iran Deal’s Fatal Flaw
PRESIDENT OBAMA’S main pitch for the pending nuclear deal with Iran is that it would extend the “breakout time” necessary for Iran to produce enough enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon. In a recent interview with NPR, he said that the current breakout time is “about two to three months by our intelligence estimates.” By contrast, he claimed, the pending deal would shrink Iran’s nuclear program, so that if Iran later “decided to break the deal, kick out all the inspectors, break the seals and go for a bomb, we’d have over a year to respond.”
Unfortunately, that claim is false, as can be demonstrated with basic science and math. Most important, in the event of an overt attempt by Iran to build a bomb, Mr. Obama’s argument assumes that Iran would employ only the 5,060 centrifuges that the deal would allow for uranium enrichment, not the roughly 14,000 additional centrifuges that Iran would be permitted to keep mainly for spare parts. Such an assumption is laughable. In a real-world breakout, Iran would race, not crawl, to the bomb. Iran stands to gain enormously. The deal would lift nuclear-related sanctions, thereby infusing Iran’s economy with billions of dollars annually. In addition, the deal could release frozen Iranian assets, reportedly giving Tehran a $30 billion to $50 billion “signing bonus.”
Showering Iran with rewards for making illusory concessions poses grave risks. It would entrench the ruling mullahs, who could claim credit for Iran’s economic resurgence. The extra resources would also enable Iran to amplify the havoc it is fostering in neighboring countries like Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen.
Worst of all, lifting sanctions would facilitate a huge expansion of Iran’s nuclear program. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, says that he wants 190,000 centrifuges eventually, or 10 times the current amount, as would appear to be permissible under the deal after just 10 years. Such enormous enrichment capacity would shrink the breakout time to mere days, so that Iran could produce enough weapons-grade uranium for a bomb before we even knew it was trying — thus eliminating any hope of our taking preventive action.
Nothing in the pending deal is worth such risks. Read the full article in context here.
*** But is getting worse as new documents demonstrate.
Reported by Fox News via Associated Press:
The United States and its allies are willing to offer Iran state-of-the-art nuclear equipment if Tehran agrees to pare down its atomic weapons program as part of a final nuclear agreement, a draft document has revealed.
The confidential paper, obtained by the Associated Press, has dozens of bracketed text where disagreements remain. Technical cooperation is the least controversial issue at the talks, and the number of brackets suggest the sides have a ways to go, not only on that topic but also more contentious disputes, with less than a week until the June 30 deadline for a deal.
However, the scope of the help now being offered in the draft may displease U.S. congressional critics who already argue that Washington has offered too many concessions at the negotiations.
The draft, titled “Civil Nuclear Cooperation,” promises to supply Iran with light-water nuclear reactors instead of its nearly completed heavy-water facility at Arak, which would produce enough plutonium for several bombs a year if completed as planned. The full details are here.
Civil Nuclear Cooperation platform is not new.
Chilling are the following facts:
Russia and Saudi Arabia have signed a nuclear cooperation agreement. The U.S. has done the samewith Korea. Then comes Pakistan learning from U.S. and India where pacts could lead to even more proliferation globally.
For a more detailed summary of the Nuclear Cooperation agreements, take a look at a surface review on equipment, supply and banks in the matter of Korea.