Makovsky in The Washington Post on Iran
Deal or no deal with Iran?
By Jennifer Rubin – The Washington Post
July 9, 2014
Deal or no deal with Iran?
By Jennifer Rubin – The Washington Post
July 9, 2014
We are fewer than a dozen days from the July 20 deadline for a final deal with Iran on its illicit nuclear weapons program. The Supreme Leader, who actually runs things, had this to say on Tuesday: “Their aim is that we accept a capacity of 10,000 [separate] work units (SWUs), which is equivalent to 10,000 centrifuges of the older type that we already have. Our officials say we need 190,000 SWU. Perhaps this is not a need this year or in two years or five years, but this is the country’s absolute need.”
That kind of puts a crimp in the whole negotiation thing, doesn’t it? Really, it’s been apparent to just about everyone but President Obama and his team that there is no appetite in Iran for dismantling tens of thousands of centrifuges, giving up its heavy water plant, allowing unfettered inspections and coming clean on its past weapons program.
Michael Makovsky, chief executive of the pro-Israel group JINSA, tells me, “Khamenei’s statement reinforces the growing perception that an acceptable comprehensive deal with Iran is unlikely by July 20, despite the Obama’s Administration’s eagerness for one.” He adds, “If that’s the case, then there should not be an extension of the interim deal, which has permitted Iran to advance its nuclear program and almost double its oil exports. Instead, the U.S. should focus on increasing our diplomatic leverage by passing sanctions that effectively create an economic embargo of Iran, and we should augment Israel’s capacity to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities, including by transferring to it spare B-52s and MOPs [massive ordnance penetrators].” While that is no guarantee of success, Makovsky argues, “That approach offers a better chance of achieving an acceptable deal.”