Follow by Email

Friday, April 3, 2015

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier: The Israeli Government Should "Look More Closely at the Agreement"

Concerning this week's so-called "understanding" between the P5+1 and Iran, German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier stated on Friday, "We ask the Israeli government to look more closely at the agreement."

You would think that the 59-year-old Steinmeier, whose country not so many years ago murdered 70 percent of European Jewry, would know better than to advise Israel how to assess a purported nuclear "understanding" - not an agreement - with a nation whose Supreme Leader is calling for the Jewish nation's annihilation.

Believe me, Steinmeier, we in Israel know an existential threat when we see one, and it is you who should reconsider the implications of providing a barbaric regime, pledged to Israel's destruction, with a nuclear weapons arsenal in 15 years at most.

More specifically, Steinmeier should begin by reading yesterday's Washington Post editorial entitled "Obama’s Iran deal falls far short of his own goals," which states:

"THE 'KEY parameters' for an agreement on Iran’s nuclear program released Thursday fall well short of the goals originally set by the Obama administration. None of Iran’s nuclear facilities — including the Fordow center buried under a mountain — will be closed. Not one of the country’s 19,000 centrifuges will be dismantled. Tehran’s existing stockpile of enriched uranium will be 'reduced' but not necessarily shipped out of the country. In effect, Iran’s nuclear infrastructure will remain intact, though some of it will be mothballed for 10 years. When the accord lapses, the Islamic republic will instantly become a threshold nuclear state.

That’s a long way from the standard set by President Obama in 2012 when he declared that 'the deal we’ll accept' with Iran 'is that they end their nuclear program' and 'abide by the U.N. resolutions that have been in place.' Those resolutions call for Iran to suspend the enrichment of uranium. Instead, under the agreement announced Thursday, enrichment will continue with 5,000 centrifuges for a decade, and all restraints on it will end in 15 years."

Steinmeier should also consider the conclusions of R. Scott Kemp, Assistant Professor of Nuclear Science and Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, regarding the "understanding" (my emphasis in red):

"A breakout time of three months is technically possible under the current text of the deal. This arises because of a lack of specificity about the non-uranium enrichment capabilities allowed at Fordow. The text of the JCPOA says that no uranium enrichment will occur at Fordow, and that approximately two-thirds of the current 2976 centrifuges installed there will be removed. This leaves the possibility of about 1000 centrifuges at Fordow, enriching elements other than uranium. If 1000 IR-8 centrifuges were installed there, a possibility allowed under the text of JCPOA, then the enrichment capability at Fordow would be equivalent to about 20,000 IR-1 centrifuges or three times that allowed at Natanz."

I would only observe that Professor Kemp is mistaken when he alludes to the "U.S. drafted Parameters for a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action" as the text of the deal. Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif is already denying the accuracy of this "fact sheet":

"The solutions are good for all, as they stand. There is no need to spin using 'fact sheets' so early on."

And then there is also the "conventional" threat against Israel posed by Iran's proxies in Gaza, Lebanon and Syria, which will receive increased support from Tehran as the sanctions regime is removed. As stated by Charles Krauthammer:

"If Iran is pursuing destabilization and supporting its proxies in Syria, in Iraq, in Lebanon, and now in Yemen under conditions of tremendous economic strain and diplomatic isolation, the idea that when we lift the sanctions, we allow billions of dollars to flow into the treasury so it’ll be unconstrained, it will double and triple the amount of support it is giving to the Assad regime in Syria, to Hezbollah in Lebanon, to Hamas in Gaza, and Yemen, and it will also be able to invest all the money — in the maintenance and the advance of the nuclear infrastructure which everybody agrees remains intact. And the idea that it will without isolation decrease its activities when it is on the threshold of being the hegemonic power in the region is completely contrary to all the evidence on the ground."

Hezbollah possesses some 70,000 missiles in Lebanon, all pointed at Israel, and Iran is now upgrading their warheads with guidance systems.

Shame on Steinmeier! Shame on Merkel! Shame on Germany!

1 comment:

  1. When Krauthammer said that, I was also watching "13 Days" about the 1962 Cuban missile crisis (channelflippinghobby).

    I started wondering about Iran staging ballistic missiles somewhere in South America.

    It is more useful to read the Iran and Yemen news at al-Arabiya where one only needs to filter their news through the Sunni lens, currently well outside the WH World of Spin.