OP ED

Iran nuclear deal is fatally flawed. Reject it

Jake Bennett and Steven Schwarz
AZ We See It
Iran and six world powers reached a landmark nuclear deal on July 14, 2015, meant to place long-term verifiable limits on nuclear programs that Tehran could modify to make atomic arms.
  • Congress should continue asking the tough questions that will lead to a better outcome, such as:
  • Does the agreement sufficiently limit Iran’s nuclear-weapons capability?
  • How can America’s deterrence be strengthened in the face of relatively front-loaded sanctions relief?

Over the past few weeks, the world has been wrestling with the implications of an Iran nuclear deal that many criticize as flawed.

We believe that Congress is in a position to craft a robust U.S. policy response to help address some of the weaknesses, particularly in the areas of:

-- Deterring Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon when limitations under the deal run their course.

-- More rigorously sanctioning Iran’s support for terrorism and hostile behavior in the region.

-- Providing support to allies to counter the threat of Iran’s aggression.

-- Establishing a credible policy of persuasive consequences for cheating on the deal.

We appreciate our congressional representatives’ principled dedication on this topic to date, and urge them to stay the course, to continue asking the tough questions that will lead to a better outcome, such as:

Does the agreement sufficiently limit Iran’s nuclear-weapons capability?

While the deal would limit Iran’s known uranium-enrichment facilities for 15 years, once the limitations phase out, Iran could emerge as a nuclear-threshold state. This means it would have immediate breakout capability to build and deliver a nuclear weapon, possibly in as short a time as a few weeks, representing an even more urgent threat than it does today.

Can the verification and enforcement mechanisms ensure Iranian compliance?

The designers of the deal argue that the supervision of Iran’s nuclear supply chain, and the framework of inspections and verification, are sufficient to detect cheating. Not all nuclear experts are so convinced.

David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security and a former weapons inspector in Iraq, said the 24 days’ notice Iran gets under the current framework could provide ample time for the Iranians to dispose of any evidence of prohibited nuclear work, including experiments with high explosives that could be used to trigger a nuclear weapon, or the construction of a small plant to make centrifuges.

How can America’s deterrence be strengthened in the face of relatively front-loaded sanctions relief?

Jake Bennett is regional director of the Anti-Defamation League Arizona.

The agreement preserves and legitimizes aspects of Iran’s nuclear program, releases $150 billion as soon as six months, and heightens the security challenges facing Israel and America’s other Middle Eastern allies.

The agreement provides for a reimposition of sanctions only in the case of a major breach. At that point, Iran has already recovered its war chest, and the sanctions only apply to new contracts and new business. While it would stifle new growth, it would not impact their economy in as dramatic a way as the current sanctions do.

Without the deterrence of surprise inspections, or of automatic and punitive sanctions, what will compel Iran not to cheat?

Many strategists who have reviewed the agreement believe that the U.S. must state a direct deterrent policy clearly, such as Congress authorizing the use of military force to destroy Iran’s nuclear program if Iran takes steps to enrich uranium above levels for normal civilian uses. The administration should enunciate clearly this policy.

Steven Schwarz is board chair of the Jewish Federation of Greater Phoenix.

Congress should also consider more rigorously addressing sanctions and other measures to curtail Iran’s support for terrorism, elements of Iran’s hostile behavior in the region, its egregious human-rights violations and repression of the Iranian people.

Without these steps, Congress should reject this agreement.

Jake Bennett is regional director of the Anti-Defamation League Arizona. Steven Schwarz is board chair of the Jewish Federation of Greater Phoenix. Also signing onto this essay were Amy Altshuler, board chair of Anti-Defamation League Arizona, and Stuart Wachs, president and CEO of the Jewish Federation of Greater Phoenix.