Is This Even Legal?

The National Review posted a story today about the nuclear deal with Iran. In the story, Fred Fleitz, the author, reports on two aspects of the deal with Iran that were not going to be made public (or available to Congress or other nations).

The article reports:

Senator Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) and Congressmen Mike Pompeo (R., Kan.) issued a press release yesterday on a startling discovery they made during a July 17 meeting with International Atomic Energy Agency officials in Vienna: There are two secret side deals to the nuclear agreement with Iran that will not be shared with other nations, with Congress, or with the U.S. public. One of these side deals concerns inspection of the Parchin military base, where Iran reportedly has conducted explosive testing related to nuclear-warhead development. The Iranian government has refused to allow the IAEA to visit this site. Over the last several years, Iran has taken steps to clean up evidence of weapons-related activity at Parchin. 

The other side deal relates to the possible military dimensions (PMDs) of Iran’s nuclear program. Evidently the PMD issue is not resolved. In 2013, Iran agreed to answer International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) questions about work in weapons-related areas, but has not actually answered the questions.

This is a copy of part of the press release issued by Senator Cotton and Congressman Pompeo:

According to the IAEA, the Iran agreement negotiators, including the Obama administration, agreed that the IAEA and Iran would forge separate arrangements to govern the inspection of the Parchin military complex — one of the most secretive military facilities in Iran — and how Iran would satisfy the IAEA’s outstanding questions regarding past weaponization work. Both arrangements will not be vetted by any organization other than Iran and the IAEA, and will not be released even to the nations that negotiated the JCPOA [Iran nuclear agreement]. This means that the secret arrangements have not been released for public scrutiny and have not been submitted to Congress as part of its legislatively mandated review of the Iran deal. 

Do we need any more reasons to reject this treaty?



I Guess They Were Too Busy Celebrating To Negotiate

Just to be clear–I am pretty much opposed to any nuclear deal with Iran. I can’t imagine the current administration making a deal that is worth anything, and even if they did, I can’t imagine Iran not cheating on whatever deal is made. I guess I have an attitude problem. However, the nuclear negotiations did not stop Iran from celebrating Al-Quds Day.

Yesterday the Washington Examiner posted a story about Iran’s celebration of Al-Quds Day. The day is celebrated by burning American and Israeli flags and shouting “Death to Israel” and “Down with America.” These are the people we are negotiating with.

According to the Times of Israel, millions of Iranians participated in the demonstrations. There is one possible saving grace here. In Iran it is often the case that demonstrations are sponsored by the government. People are not necessarily paid to demonstrate, but they are told to do so. That fact makes it very difficult to gauge what is actually happening in the country. There is also another thing to consider when looking at events in Iran. Because of the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980’s, Iran has a very unique population. In 2014, the median age of Iran’s population was 28, as opposed to a median age of about 39 in America. The younger people in Iran tend to be pro-western, but do not have the freedom to express themselves–the mullahs control the government and enforce Sharia Law.

The only successful way to deal with Iran’s nuclear program is to change the government of Iran, and unfortunately, in 2009 the Obama Administration showed the young people in Iran who wanted a revolution that it would not support them.

Meanwhile, the negotiations are continuing with a country that I seriously doubt is negotiating in good faith.

The Need For Sanity In The Negotiations With Iran

Scott Johnson posted an article at Power Line today about the ongoing negotiations with Iran. There is a June 30 deadline for some sort of agreement to be reached. It is a good idea to keep in mind that a nuclear treaty with Iran would be seen by President Obama as the crowning accomplishment of his second term of office. To put this in perspective, it might be a good idea to remember that President Obama considered Obamacare to be the crowning accomplishment of his first term of office. We have seen how that worked out.

President Obama is desperate for a deal with Iran. Unfortunately, Iran is well aware of that fact. The concessions made to Iran have passed ridiculous and are moving forward to dangerous.

The article at Power Line reports:

The Associated Press got ahold of one of the five secret annexes being worked on ahead of a final deal between the P5+1 global powers and Iran. This one – titled “Civil Nuclear Cooperation” – details a range of nuclear technology that various members of the P5+1 will be obligated to provide Iran, including “high-tech reactors and other state-of-the-art equipment.” The draft that the AP saw wasn’t finalized, and so some of the concessions are subject to change.

As the annex is written right now, however, this is no longer a deal to stop the Iranian nuclear program. It’s a deal to let the Iranians perfect their nuclear program with international assistance and under international protection.

Are we nuts? Someone needs to stop this runaway train before it puts the entire world at risk.

The article concludes:

Imagine that 15 years from now the Iranians have built a dozen LWRs (light-water reactors) with help from a P5+1 nation. One concern is indeed that they’ll kick out inspectors, keep the spent fuel, and start reprocessing on the way to creating a plutonium bomb. But a more subtle concern is that they will use the existence of the LWRs as a pretext for industrial-scale uranium enrichment – because they’ll say they need the uranium fuel for their plutonium plants – which can serve as a cover for breaking out with a uranium bomb. The P5+1 would be actively providing the Iranians with diplomatic leverage to use against the P5+1 in the future. The answer to this latter concern is that the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) sunset clause already allows the Iranians to have an industrial-scale uranium enrichment program that can serve as a cover for breaking out with a uranium bomb. I’m not sure the administration wants to overemphasize that point.

Please follow the above link to read the entire article. It is chilling to think of where these negotiations are headed.

Ignoring The Obvious Threat

Mona Charen posted an article at National Review Online today about President Obama’s understanding of the national security threats to America. While speaking at a Nuclear Security Summit, President Obama stated, “I continue to be much more concerned, when it comes to our security, with the prospect of a nuclear weapon going off in Manhattan.”

The article reports:

The president was speaking at a meeting of the Nuclear Security Summit, a conclave of nations who agree to certain worthy actions such as converting their reactors from the use of highly enriched uranium to newer versions using low-enriched uranium, beefing up security at nuclear facilities, improving radiation detection at air and sea ports, and so forth. Fifty-seven nations and entities (the EU and U.N. included) participate in this process. But the Islamic Republic of Iran is not on the list.

The article reminds us that the most likely way for terrorists to obtain a nuclear weapon would be from Iran.

The article states:

While we are clinking glasses with Iran in negotiations in Vienna, the U.S. State Department continues to list Iran as a state sponsor of terror. In 2012, Iran participated in planned terror attacks in India, Thailand, Georgia, and Kenya. It provided aid and training to the Taliban, Shiite groups in Iraq, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and continues to cooperate in various ways with al-Qaeda. The president should curl up some evening with the State Department’s country reports. They’re not beclouded by wishful thinking.

President Obama has made numerous attempts to make friends with Iran. Iran has used these attempts to have sanctions lifted and continue its nuclear program. The sanctions that were in place were seriously hurting the Iranian economy. Unless the economy improved, it was going to be difficult for the current mullahs to stay in power–they needed the sanctions lifted. Had the sanctions stayed in place, there might have been a chance for a regime change in Iran. Now that the sanctions have been lifted, that opportunity has passed.

The article concludes:

If Obama does lose sleep worrying about nuclear terrorism, he should drop his naïve parlay with Iran. He may fondly envision a new cordiality between old foes. That’s not what they see.

Naivete is not an attractive trait in an American President.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Mistaken Priorities posted an article on Friday about some of the money spent on American Embassies overseas.

The lead paragraph of the article points out:

While our consulate in Benghazi was guarded by unarmed Libyan contractors making $4 an hour, our embassy in Vienna received an expensive charging station for its new electric cars to help fight climate change.

The article also states that there were 230 security incidents in Libya between June 2011 and July 2012. Forty-eight of those incidents took place in Benghazi. Was anyone paying attention?

The article states:

In a May 3, 2012, email on which Ambassador Stevens was copied, the State Department denied a request by a group of Special Forces assigned to protect the U.S. Embassy in Libya to continue their use of a DC-3 airplane for security operations throughout the country.

Four days after the use of an ancient DC-3, along with other security requests, was being denied, on May 7, 2012, the State Department authorized the U.S. Embassy in Vienna to purchase a $108,000 electric-vehicle charging station for the embassy motor pool’s new Chevrolet Volts.

The article concludes:

Instead of an “Energy Efficiency Sweep Of Europe,” money should have been provided for a terrorist sweep of the Middle East that included protection for our diplomats in places like Benghazi. The $535 million wasted by Obama-Biden on Solyndra would have helped.

It seems that someone’s priorities were misplaced.

Enhanced by Zemanta