Even if Iran keeps to the terms of the P5+1 agreement negotiated in Vienna there will still be a crisis over Iran’s nuclear program only the timing of the crisis will be delayed until the strictest provisions expire in 10-15 years depending on the provision.
The main reason is that the deal allows the rogue nation to continue to run centrifuges most of which will be enriching uranium. But if the Iranians are really running a peaceful program there is no need for them to have centrifuges or enrich uranium. Even John Kerry said at the beginning of negotiations that there was no reason for Iran to enrich and more importantly there was no right for them to enrich.
We are told that the goal of the agreement is to ensure that Iran will be prevented from building nuclear weapons for the life of the deal. According to an oped written by John Kerry and Earnest Moniz published last week the life of the deal is “forever” however that’s not true:
The plan approved in Vienna does not expire — it is indefinite. Some provisions will be in place for 10 years, others for 15, and still others for 20 or 25 years. But the transparency requirements and Iran’s most fundamental obligation — to preserve the peaceful nature of its nuclear program — are permanent.
Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?
Under the agreement Iran is allowed to keep 5,060 centrifuges, which according to former deputy director of the CIA is a large enough program to produce bombs but not enough for a power program. On Feb. 18th of this year, Mike Morell told Charlie Rose (video embedded below)
The potential Iran nuclear agreement would limit Iran to the number of centrifuges needed for a weapon but too few for a nuclear power program.
If you are going to have a nuclear weapons program, 5,000 is pretty much the number you need,” Morell, now a CBS analyst, said on Charlie Rose. “If you have a power program, you need a lot more. By limiting them to a small number of centrifuges, we are limiting them to the number you need for a weapon.”
Now the remaining 14,000 centrifuges do not get destroyed. Most of them will get stored at their Natanz plant for ten years. Afterwards they are available for use.
One third of the 1044 centrifuges in the underground site of Fordo will be used for isotope production instead of uranium enrichment. However the process to produce isotopes is very similar to enriching uranium (just a different raw material). The remaining two thirds will remain idle for 15 years; afterward they too are available for use.
Iran is allowed to build and test gas centrifuges, which are used for plutonium but are allowed to play with only a few of each type for the first ten years. In other words while restrictions are in place Iran can’t use them to enrich but will be able to perfect advanced plutonium producing gas centrifuges.
On one hand the preface of the P5+1 agreement assures that Iran’s nuclear program is for “exclusively peaceful purposes, consistent with international non-proliferation norms.” But if the deal is forever as Kerry wrote, and if according to the agreement Iran “pinky swears, crosses their heart hope to die stick a needle in their eyes” their nuclear program is for exclusively peaceful purposes, consistent with international non-proliferation norms,” then why as the limits on the program wane, some after year 10, and the rest after year 15, why is it easy for Iran to once again to pull the old centrifuges out of storage, and use their updated technology to make new ones and once again become a nuclear threat. Why do they need to enrich at all?
By the end of year 15, Iran could have in place a nuclear infrastructure that could produce the significant quantities of weapon-grade needed to create a few nuclear weapons within months.
And there is absolutely nothing in the deal to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons after 15 years—nothing!
If Iran’s nuclear program is truly for peaceful purposes the preface of the deal reads, there is no reason for Iran to enrich uranium on its own, they could get it from other countries.
In November 2013 John Kerry said the U.S. does not recognize a right to enrich:
“There is no inherent right to enrich,” Kerry said on ABC’s “This Week.” “And everywhere in this particular agreement it states that they could only do that by mutual agreement, and nothing is agreed on until everything is agreed on.”
Kerry added: “We do not recognize a right to enrich.”
Somewhere in the intervening twenty months Kerry changed his mind and signed a deal that if Iran keeps to the agreement (a huge if) the rogue nation will be a nuclear power within months of the agreement expiring.