Reminder: check back here in seven months to see if Iran and the U.S. and its allies have reached an agreement on Tehran’s nuclear program. We suspect not, which could be a good thing.
There was little surprise accompanying the news this week that after many months of intense negotiations, which already included an extension, the two sides were still far apart. That came as a relief to the Israeli government, which feared that a “bad deal” was at hand, one that would allow Iran to continue to enrich uranium yet ease or end sanctions against it. But it seems clear that the deeper the U.S. delves into these talks, with so much time, energy and prestige invested, the more difficult it will be to walk away from them without an agreement in hand.
There is still the possibility that Iran may give in to the economic and diplomatic pressure and dismantle its program, but that is highly unlikely. Already the Western powers have conceded the right of Iran to enrich uranium; it’s just a matter of how much. And it’s also just a matter of whether Iran can achieve a nuclear bomb in a few months or perhaps a year.
What is galling, because it is assumed but not mentioned, is that the West knows Iran is lying in its persistent claim that it only seeks to achieve nuclear power for peaceful means. If that were true, why suffer serious economic sanctions and resist efforts to inspect its facilities?
The most recent report of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirms that Iran has violated its agreement and refused to provide vital information about its program.
Of course Iran’s objective is a nuclear bomb. But rather than recognize Tehran as a world leader in exporting terror that must be confronted, the U.S. maintains the façade of diplomacy and prefers a strategy of continuing talks that may well go nowhere. That could mean no Iranian bomb during Obama’s watch and let the next resident of the White House worry about it.
Is that the president’s goal?