The United States and five other world powers announced an agreement Sunday morning that would temporarily freeze Iran’s nuclear program and supposedly lay the foundation for a more sweeping agreement later on. Not surprisingly, an intense debate followed the announcement with one side arguing it was a victory for the US and its allies, and the other claiming it was a major sell-out and a big win for Iran. So which is it?
As you would expect, the mainstream media portrayed the agreement as a huge win for the US and its allies. Yet some in a better position to judge the deal concluded that it was a big win for Iran. We’ll hear from both sides today, and you can decide for yourself.
As I pointed out in last week’s E-Letter, a major agreement between Iran and the P5+1 nations (US, Great Britain, France, Russia, China + Germany) to halt (or delay, as it turns out) Iran’s nuclear weapons program was very close, so it was no surprise that a deal was agreed upon in Geneva last weekend. However, the more I read the details of the agreement, the more I am disappointed in the outcome.
It now appears that the P5+1 were more interested in a headline-making deal than they were in permanently halting Iran’s nuclear weapons program. As we’ll see below, Iran does not have to dismantle any of its 10,000+ working centrifuges, and the new agreement only slows down Iran’s ability to produce a nuclear bomb by a few months, at best.
Iran’s new president and even the Supreme Leader hailed the agreement as a huge win for Iran. President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry came out somewhat on the defensive, claiming that the deal was a big victory for the US and its allies. Today, we’ll look at the agreement and try to analyze the pluses and minuses for both sides.