Daily Alert Archives

Defining a Bad Agreement with Iran

(Jerusalem Post) Ephraim Asculai - Besides giving in to Iran by avoiding all major points that were imperative in the UN Security Council resolutions concerning Iran, the Joint Plan of Action (JPA) agreed upon in November studiously avoided adding any demands that would clarify the outstanding issues and bring about a halt, albeit temporarily, to Iran's unrelenting progress toward the reduction of the potential timetable of producing a first nuclear explosive device. How much time is needed, in a realistic situation, before a breach of Iran's obligations is discovered, reported and responded to? This period should be as long as possible so as not to enable Iran to "break out" and produce a first nuclear device and test it without being found out beforehand. Assigning a year to this period is probably much too low. Two years is a much more rational and acceptable time. The issues are too serious for vagueness. Every case of non-compliance has to be dealt with promptly. The Iranians have the experience and the temerity to exploit each and every weakness and use it to deceive, distort and circumvent in order to arrive at the desired result. Any agreement that does not take these possibilities into account, and ignores the fact that Iran has been (and probably still is) seeking a military nuclear capability, will be a bad one, and should be avoided at all costs. The writer is Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv.
2014-04-11 00:00:00
Full Article