Iran’s Path to the Bomb

_76114095_3c03127b-b8dc-47c0-af9c-66715d0adff4As nuclear negotiations resume between Iran and world powers, it is becoming increasingly clear that any deal signed will be considered negatively by Israel as “ill-conceived.”

According to most estimations, the focus of the talks has shifted from dismantling Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, as demanded by Jerusalem, to creating a verification network that would, ideally, grant inspectors unfettered access to Iranian sites to ensure the peaceful nature of its nuclear operations.

In “Inspections: The Weak Link in a Nuclear Agreement with Iran,” Dore Gold, a former Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations and currently an advisor to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, questions “the advisability of erecting a comprehensive agreement with Iran that is so highly dependent upon the efficacy of its inspection system and the willingness of Iran to agree to what some analysts call unprecedented levels of transparency.”

The drawbacks should be evident, especially when considering Iran’s ongoing refusal to grant the IAEA access to its Parchin facility, where the UN nuclear watchdog believes Tehran has conducted military research into the development of atomic weapons. That the underground Fordow nuclear plant remained unknown to the West for years casts further doubt on both the Islamic Republic’s trustworthiness and the ability of monitors to keep tabs on the whole of its nuclear activities.

The fact that U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry recently revealed that Iran’s breakout capacity stands at a mere two months should alone obviate any such deal, as this window is surely too close for comfort.

Nonetheless, it appears as though the prospects of reversing the Islamic Republic’s nuclear progress by significantly reducing the number of its centrifuges is off the table.

In the prescient words of Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif, the “talks are not about nuclear capability…they are about Iranian integrity and dignity.”

But the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism is undeserving of respect.

Iran continues to fuel the debauchery in Syria, and now has boots on the ground in Iraq; with the aim there, in conjunction with local Shiite fighters, almost certainly to carve out an Iranian protectorate.

Moreover, the widely held belief that Iran opposes the Sunni terror group ISIS, which is active in both Iraq and Syria, is tenuous at best, with recent reports suggesting the organization may well have been spawn by Tehran.

As the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs’ Pinhas Inbari recently pointed out, “the more time passes, the more this notion of a link between ISIS, Syrian and Iranian intelligence has become fixed in the minds of leading Arab analysts.”

To support this claim, Inbari highlights a February 2012 U.S. Treasury Department document which states that ISIS’ precursor, “al-Qaeda in Iraq,” was provided with money and weapons by Iran. He also raises the intriguing possibility that Iran facilitated ISIS’ advances in Iraq in order to force the U.S. to deepen its coordination with Tehran.

As journalist Melanie Phillips recently noted in the Jerusalem Post, “the Iranian leadership [has] suggested the price of its ‘help’ in ‘stabilizing’ Iraq would be a deal over its nuclear program.”

And this is the key point: The road to an Iranian bomb is paved with instability.

Iran’s carefully crafted plan is two-tiered; first, to foment widespread regional unrest, thereby removing the focus on is illicit nuclear work while, concurrently, convincing the West, which shuns chaos in favor of stability, that the only solution is to engage, rather than defeat, Iran.

And it has worked.

The West has misunderstood, or otherwise turned a blind eye to, Iran’s strategy, devised to buy time while Tehran becomes a nuclear power, which, in turn, will allow it to pursue its ultimate ambition of spreading its Islamic “revolution” throughout the world.

The ramifications of an expansionist, nuclear-armed Iran would be devastating.

Even without the bomb, in the near future Iran will effectively control territory spanning from eastern Iraq to southern Lebanon. The so-called Shi’ite crescent warned of years ago by Jordan’s King Abdullah is, for all intents and purposes, a fait accompli.

An Iran with atomic bombs can be expected to set its sights on Sunni Gulf states, including Kuwait and Bahrain, where its meddling during the Arab Spring prompted Saudi Arabia to deploy troops to the country.

In fact, Tehran appears to be on a collision course with Riyadh (which, parenthetically, is alleged to have pre-paid atomic weapons waiting for it in Pakistan).

Were tensions to explode between the Mullahs and the House of Saud, the entire region could be drawn into a bloody conflict; not unlike the Sunni-Shiite proxy war currently being waged in Syria, although the effects of a direct clash between the leading purveyors of these competing forms of Islam would, almost inconceivably, be much worse.

Like it or not, such a prospect would force the hand of the United States, which could not sit idly by as its allies, as well as the global oil economy, became endangered.

It is possible that an emboldened Russia would likewise become involved, at the very least as an arms supplier, and perhaps even ascendant China if to protect its growing interests in the region.

Israel, undoubtedly, would be targeted by its enemies and thus dragged into the fighting.

This is but a snapshot of the bleak picture facing the Middle East if Iran goes nuclear, and the Obama administration in particular is seemingly oblivious.

While the U.S. president reiterated last month—this time to his outgoing Israeli counterpart—that he remains committed to preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, Obama’s words are no longer trusted by many in Jerusalem given his willingness (eagerness) to treat a rogue regime, ideologically committed to the West’s destruction, as a friend.

Hence the recent dispatch to Washington of Israeli National Security Adviser Yossi Cohen and Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz, in order to spell out the Jewish state’s positions perhaps for the last time.

Speaking to prior to his departure, Steinitz made clear that a good deal “will not allow the Iranians to remain a nuclear threshold state…. Our position is that an agreement needs to be based not only on supervision and verification, but on dismantling infrastructure,” he affirmed.

Netanyahu likewise weighed in last week, granting interviews to major television networks in each of the P5+1 countries.

“Inspectors can be deceived,” he warned, before advocating for an agreement along the lines of the Syrian one, which “remove[s] what’s not destroyed.”

But given Obama’s ongoing rapprochement with Iran, Israel’s expectations are surely being tempered. In fact, it would be surprising if the government was not already intensifying covert preparations for “plan-B.”

What this entails could be revealed as early as July 21st, the day after the deadline for a nuclear agreement is set to expire.

Only then will it become known whether Netanyahu is serious about preventing an Iranian bomb—and the lengths to which he is willing to go in order to do so.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • Jason P

    If Bybelezer’s article is any indication, i24News is a news source worthing of attention. He gives us a lucid and chilling summary of what is happening in the region and what is at stake.

    I have often wondered about Saudi Arabia’s access to Pakistan’s nukes. They are close allies having created the Taliban to take over Afghanistan. ISIS is in play and will surely side with both sides as needed. It opposes both Shiites and the Saudi ruling family.

    Will drawing Iran further into the Iraq/Syria war drain its resources? Can we deal with Russia and China to withdraw support from Iran? Will economic ruin finally help internal opposition overthrow the current regime in Iran? I’d like what Bybelezer thinks. In any case Bibi may have to act soon and alone.

    • Hard Little Machine

      There is no acting left possible at all. The only decision Israel needs to make is whether to publicize their own use-doctrine. They’ve said over and over ‘we won’t be the first to introduce nuclear weapons’ and on paper that makes sense because eventually Nuclear Iran will have to declare they are Nuclear Iran because it serves no political purpose otherwise. One Iran freely admits they are in fact a nuclear state with a functional delivery capability then and only then can Israel, in somewhat ambiguous germs, elucidate what their own use doctrine is. And why not. We live in a world now where there’s no real downside to admitting you have these things. Not when all sorts of other states are openly discussing getting their own.

  • Hard Little Machine

    My sense of it is Iran has had ‘the bomb’ since 2012 and quietly reached a detente with Obama not to advertise that fact because it would upset his election. In exchange he’s willing to let them continue onward as long as they limit their Lebensraum to their own backyard. And if the Jews all get vaporized, oh well, they vote Democrat anyway.

    • Jason P

      This is an obscene post. I hope it is deleted soon.

    • JayWye

      Iran’s first use of a nuclear bomb may not be over Israel,but the US,an EMP attack. An EMP attack on the US would set us back to 19th century living conditions we are NOT prepared for,and many millions would die from starvation and disease in the first year. It could mean the end of the US. Iran has been testing SCUD launches from containerships,with HIGH altitude detonations characteristic of an EMP attack,and not usable for attacks with conventional warheads . This type of attack is not needed for Israel,Iran’s IRBMs already can reach Israel. But with the US crippled or destroyed,Iran is free to do as they please,without any other Western nation able or willing to interfere with them. Don’t forget,to Iran,the US is the “Great Satan”,and Israel is only the “lesser Satan”.

      Then there’s the other major nuke option;the “Test Baker” scenario.
      But that would only affect NYC or the DC area,not the entire nation as would an EMP attack.

  • bigjulie

    President Barack Hussein Pantywaist is not renown for either his decisiveness or his honesty. He seems to have a strong dislike for Jews and a preference for Muslim aims, while practicing his own brand of Taquya. His apparent purge of military officers not perceived to be in agreement with him over the last 3-4 years indicates to me that he has the intention of causing a huge number of people to do things “his way” by force, rather than persuasion. Those people are most likely all here in this country.
    There is also a planet-wide perception that he will dither over anything decisive to the point that other entities on the planet will have little to worry about if he happens to disapprove of something they do. In other words, they have about 2.5 years left to accomplish their aims without appreciable American interference. If the Saudis are buying Pakistani nukes, it is quite likely that others are as well, IMHO.
    The way things seem to be going, especially in the ME, does not sound like they will have a happy, or good, ending for Israel unless decisive action is taken soon.

    • AishaBPena

      until I saw the paycheck which said $8694 , I didn’t
      believe that my sister was like trully erning money part time on there
      computar. . there friends cousin had bean doing this for only thirteen months
      and resantly repayed the dept on their home and bought themselves a Infiniti .
      check out the post right here C­a­s­h­f­i­g­.­C­O­M­

      • JayWye

        moderator? hello? THREE DAYS up and still not deleted?

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Per the dictates of Islam, Muslims can only make a Hudna with infidels. A Hudna is a kind of temporary truce that will inevitably be broken at some point in the future whenever they deem the timing is right. Indeed, this is why the peace process between the Jewish infidels in Israel and the so-called Palestinian Muslims is a joke. Only gullible useful idiots advocate negotiating with Muslims. Indeed, negotiating with Muslims is a fool’s game.

    Thus, there is only one viable solution. Knock out Iran’s ability to pursue nukes, and if that is impossible, then destroy Iran.

    Not to mention that if Iran does acquire nukes, I hope everyone is ready and prepared to deal with an Islamic totalitarian world – that has as its sole fundamental purpose making Islam supreme – armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons, because Pakistan will emerge as the nuclear weapons go to for the Islamic totalitarian world.

    Indeed, they have been manufacturing nukes at a hectic pace the past few years in anticipation of Iran joining the nuclear club, and never mind the fact that Pakistan’s BS excuse for having nuclear weapons in the first place is to counter India. However, India is like Israel and, indeed, the rest of infidel world, i.e., a victim of never ending jihad.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    But the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism is undeserving of respect.

    There is no need to mention this ludicrous sentence in this article. Not to mention that Muslims aren’t terrorists, i.e., radicals and extremists, targeting and murdering innocent civilian infidels in cold blood anyway. Instead, they are jihadists, i.e., Mujahideen (holy warriors), waging jihad per the dictates of Sharia, which is a holy war waged by all Muslims against all infidels in the cause of Allah to ultimately make Islam supreme throughout the world, and the reason Muslims primarily target and murder innocent civilian infidels doesn’t have anything whatsoever to do with terrorism. Instead, it is because it is proscribed for them per the dictates of Sharia because targeting and murdering innocent civilian infidels in cold blood is the weak exposed underbelly of the infidel world.

    Indeed, this writer could afford to sharpen up his knowledge base on Islam somewhat since it guides and dictates the Muslims every move. Especially if you are going to write about the Islamic totalitarian world quite extensively.

    Like it or not, such a prospect would force the hand of the United States, which could not sit idly by as its allies, as well as the global oil economy, became endangered.

    What allies? We only have enemies in the Islamic totalitarian world. We don’t have any allies. Moreover, revenue during times of jihad is a very precious commodity needed to feed and house hungry and cold jihadis, thus they have no other choice but to sell oil, as oil is their sole source of revenue. It’s either sell oil or stop fighting jihad.

    This is but a snapshot of the bleak picture facing the Middle East if Iran goes nuclear, and the Obama administration in particular is seemingly oblivious.

    Damn…I thought I had painted a pretty bleak picture of the Islamic totalitarian world if Iran was able to go nuclear, but your hyperbole far outreaches mind.

  • kate5778b

    Another case of ‘the enemy of our enemy is our friend’, proving we never learn from history; also we never learn from our culture; the flag being the symbol of that culture: they all understand theirs, proudly waving the black flag or the Hizballah flag, they truly understand what they are doing and why they are doing it.

  • Alleged Comment

    One thing is overlooked. We know liberals and Demoncraps are pushing this to leave Iran alone so they can get the bomb.

    But what most people don’t know is why?

    Ii is because liberals and Demoncraps LOVE HUMAN MISERY AND SUFFERING and what a bitter way than to make sure Iran gets the bomb???

    It is their modus operandi if you look and study their agenda and history.

    And get this! It comes in many flavors to delite the morons as long as it ends in “ism”. Atheism, socialism, communism, racism, socialism, fascism, humanism or liberalism.

  • JayWye

    the idea that the UN’s IAEA can restrain Iran via inspection of their nuclear sites is ludicrous. Iran constructed several nuclear sites that the IAEA was not aware of until Iranian dissidents exposed them,and they were either finished and operating,or nearly finished. Secondly,Iran tested nuclear BOMB components (neutron initiators and explosive implosions of dummy pits) without the IAEA’s knowledge. Iran was CAUGHT with nuclear bomb plans from Pakistan,who has already tested and weaponized their nukes,and mounted them on missiles. Iran was caught doing computer simulations of nuclear bomb yield enhancements. ALL work on nuclear weapons and their components is prohibited by the NPT that Iran signed and continues to profess that they comply with. But it’s clear that Iran HAS violated the Treaty several times,yet suffers no consequences. Instead the fools of the present Administration think they can sign MORE agreements and that Iran will comply with them faithfully. Ludicrous.