Two Reactions To The Iran Deal-Results Matter, Not Intentions

Rick Francona at Middle-East Perspectives:

The choices were never good:

‘Let me first say that I hope that this deal works. A nuclear weapon in the hands of the mullahs in Tehran would be a disaster, not just for the Middle East, but the entire world. That said, I am concerned that the deal as structured may not prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability. I am not confident that this Administration has negotiated the type of agreement that will be successful’

Adam Garfinkle takes a slightly longer view (and links to a leaked copy of the text)

‘We should therefore begin now quietly developing the means to unilaterally sterilize, or suppress to the extent possible, the prospects for nuclear weapons exchanges within the Middle East, and do some serious thinking about how to integrate such a capability into U.S. military doctrine. Once we’re ready, it may be that announcing the capability will function as a disincentive to proliferation, but that’s a call that cannot be made this far out.’

If you’ve got links heavy on analysis, and lighter on politics, rhetoric, and posturing, send them my way.

Thanks.

———————-

Addition: Pejman Yousefzadeh has read the deal and gone through a list of concerns.  Among them: Iran gets to stockpile ballistic missiles, a key component for deliverable nukes, and what’s to say Iran will allow inspections?  The international community typically has no teeth, and weapons inspectors little leverage with really bad actors.  The goal is not to allow the Iranian regime to simply buy time and keep doing what it’s been doing.

‘Also, there’s this:  Vladimir Putin appears to have an awful lot of power with which to influence the course of this agreement. Anyone really believe that he will exercise that power in a fashion that will please the United States, or will advance American national security interests?’

In hearing Ben Rhodes’ talk, and Obama’s speech after the deal, I keep being reminded that results matter, not intentions.  When you’re dealing with an Islamist regime, with a deep anti-American hatred, that represses many of its own people counter to our interests, that runs guns, terrorism, and its brutal influence around the region, how you deal is key.

On this site, a lot of skepticism: Henry Kissinger & George Schulz Via The WSJ: ‘The Iran Deal And Its Consequences’]…Israel, Iran, & Peace: Andrew Sullivan Responds To Charges Of Potential Anti-SemitismSome Saturday Links On Iran-Skepticism, To Say The Least George Shultz & Henry Kissinger At The Hoover Institution: ‘What A Final Iran Deal Must Do’ So what are our interests and how do we secure them as the fires in the Middle-East rage?  Michael Totten makes a case here in Why We Can’t Leave The Middle-East.’  He gets push-back in the comments

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s