Saturday, January 9, 2021

Let the Iran Nuclear Deal bloom again

 Imagine overhearing a conversation that goes something like this: “I won't say I'm sorry I broke your Humpty Dumpty, but let me tell you how you can put your Humpty together again.” Hearing this, you would think someone is off his rocker, won't you? After all, the hammer that shatters the glass window does not fix it.

 

And yet, this is what's attempted in America's Washington Beltway every day. It is that the incompetent operators who fail at everything they do, are the ones considered experienced enough to fix what they broke in the first-pace. What's worse, an operator with the reverse Midas Touch, does not even have to reside in the Washington Beltway to advise America how to double down on its losses.

 

A case that screams this asinine reality came under the title: “Wither the Iran nuclear deal?” and the subtitle: “In light of recent developments, it is difficult to see how US President-elect Joe Biden can turn his intention to return to the JCPOA into a reality when he assumes office.” The article was written by Raphael Ofek who is an intelligence officer working for the Israeli intelligence community. His article was published on January 6, 2021 in the online publication, Jewish News Syndicate.

 

Raphael Ofek first made the point that things have changed so much since the outgoing President Donald Trump pulled America out of the Iran Nuclear Deal, he cannot see how the incoming President Joe Biden will be able to return to the deal. To buttress his argument, Ofek quoted the words of Rafael Grossi who is Director-General of the IAEA.

 

This done, Raphael Ofek contrasted Grossi's words with those of Joe Biden, and then added his own. Here they are: “In light of recent developments such as the killing of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, the architect of Iran's military nuclear program...” And that's supposed to convince the readers that Joe Biden will fail in the quest to return America to the Nuclear Deal even if modifications are introduced and accepted by all sides.

 

But unconvinced that he made a strong case from which he could draw conclusions one way or the other, Raphael Ofek changed his approach, arguing the case. While still neglecting to show how much damage Donald Trump has done to the cause of keeping Iran from developing nuclear weapons, Ofek chose to describe the thinking of each signatory to the Iran Nuclear Deal … and that included the various factions he believes make up the Iranian regime. Here is how Ofek put it:

 

“The European Union and the other signatories appear willing to return to the agreement as is. France takes the threat of Iranian violations more seriously than Germany and Britain. Europe's approach is thus the same as it was in 2015. Then and now, the EU was enthusiastic about reaching a deal. It was reported that if the nuclear deal does not return to its original state, Iran might consider itself released from all its commitments to the IAEA. Iran is thus in the middle of a triangle: One leg is the IAEA; another is the non-US signatories to the agreement; the third is the United States. The IAEA is constantly on guard against Iran's nuclear mischief. The EU's member states, as well as Russia and China, are less troubled by fear of an Iran in possession of nuclear weapons. Iran itself is divided between ultra-conservatives and pragmatists”.

 

Had Raphael Ofek not neglected to analyze the effect of Trump's decision to pull out of the Nuclear Deal, he would have reached the proper conclusions, which would have put him in line with the non-American signatories to the deal, some of whom are America's allies. Here, in brief is what Ofek would have observed; would have put in context with what else was happening in the world, parsed the situation intelligently, and drawn well-studied and enlightened conclusions:

 

“In the latest IAEA report, emphasis was placed on Iran's announcement that its nuclear program would no longer be subject to restrictions in the operational sphere. The declaration followed Iran's 2019 enrichment of uranium beyond 300 kilograms of UF6. Iran also increased the enrichment rate to 4.5 percent, beyond the agreed limit of 3.67 percent. According to the IAEA, the amount of uranium Iran has enriched since then exceeds 2.4 tons. The report contained references to Iran's violations of the nuclear agreement on the development and production of advanced centrifuges, as well as the start of its operations on an industrial scale, which could allow it to shorten the enrichment period and enrich uranium for nuclear weapons”.

 

What this says, is that withdrawing from the nuclear deal did the opposite of what the Jewish leaders who pushed for it, were predicting. It is that instead of capitulating, Iran got stronger because it was forced to rely on itself more than it would have under normal circumstances.

 

And having been treated very badly, Iran has now been given every excuse it may need to do what it never wanted to do based on religious grounds in the first place –– and that is to build a nuclear arsenal with which to make sure it will never again be treated as badly by anyone.