Obama Officials Use Nonproliferation Conference To Praise Nuke Deal

Today marks the start of the 6^th Annual Generation Prague Conference, held by the Department of State. The conference is “devoted to educating younger generations on international security and nuclear disarmament”, reflecting back to President Obama’s 2009 speech in Prague, Czech Republic, calling on the youth of America to take on “the difficult task of disarmament”.

This afternoon, Under Secretary for Political Affairs, Wendy Sherman, briefly gave listeners insight into what the last few hours of the Iranian Nuclear negotiations in Vienna looked like, acknowledging that the issue of the raising the conventional arms embargo on Iran, which was introduced by Iranian negotiators to the agreement at the last second, was indeed “a punishment…[and] quite a political hot potato”. However, the reality that within a few years time, Iran could have the freedom to import and export a variety of arms including intercontinental ballistic missiles is a much graver situation than that described as just “a hot potato.”

As repeatedly highlighted by various representatives and panel members in yesterday’s congressional hearing on the implications of a nuclear deal with Iran, there is one sole reason behind a country’s possession of ICBMs, and that is for the delivery of nuclear weapons. Iran’s insistence on the eventual freedom to possess ICBMs is clearly contradictory to its “peace-pursuing” rhetoric.

When Sherman urged the audience to work towards “educating people about a very complex agreement,” she apparently meant by promoting Obama Administration talking points, as she decribed the deal as“something the whole world wants…and will support.” Apparently Sherman hasn’t noticed the reaction from U.S. allies in the region, including Israel and the Arab States. This deal was introduced just over 24 hours ago and Congress still has 60 days to review the agreement in its entirety. Just based on the hearing yesterday featuring Former Senator Joe Lieberman and Gen. Michael Hayden, Ms. Sherman may want to dim her starry-eyed view of this agreement for now.

National Security Advisor to Vice President Biden, Colin Kahl, followed Sherman. Mr. Kahl discussed details of the agreement, emphasized the importance of this agreement, and attempted to paint a picture where a world without the Iran agreement was dark indeed.

In his opening, Mr. Kahl claimed  the agreement will constrain Iran’s enrichment program, cut their centrifuges by two-thirds, and extend the period of time required to reach “breakout capability” from 2-3 months to 12-14. Kahl didn’t mention that any nuclear enrichment by Iran is a violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and completely unacceptable. Kahl mentioned that, “the president of the United States, whoever he or she is…will have more options available to him or her in 13 or 14 years than the president has today,” which was the same talking point offered by President Obama in a press conference later in the day. But of course in reality, the deal constrains future options, as it eviscerates global agreement on sanctions, and opens Iran to the world market, making the future imposition or re-imposition of sanctions highly difficult if not impossible.

Kahl also failed to address the likelihood that Iran will continue its practice of violating agreements. An extended breakout capability period provides no benefit if Iran plans to advance its nuclear program despite agreement conditions. If this were the case, the only one left with more options would be Iran.

Before questioning commenced, Mr. Kahl warned what will happen in the event that this deal is rejected:

“At this stage…if a good deal is thrown off, pushed off the table, one that the international community, as Wendy noted, supports, we’re in for a lot of trouble because that’s the moment the sanctions regime falls apart. That’s the moment Iran gets out of jail but doesn’t actually have to dismantle much of their nuclear program, and that’s when the rest of the world starts wondering if the United States can lead.”  That’s ironic considering that a major Obama Administration talking point has been that if Iran did not comply, things could go back to the way they were before, with sanctions in place and pressure still on the Iranian regime. Now, says Kahl, if Congress rejects the proposed nuclear deal, the damage the Administration has already done to sanctions will make constraining Iran impossible.

Perhaps the greatest irony is that the Obama Administration should take the opportunity to use a summit about the eventual reduction and elimination of nuclear weapons, as President Obama talked about in his Prague speech, in order to praise the signing of a nuclear deal which eviscerates nonproliferation standards, will permit Iran to engage in nuclear work with concessions that no other nation has ever received, and, if successful, almost certainly guarantees a Middle East nuclear arms race.

We must look to Congress to comprehensively review and assess this deal, and prove to the American people just how potentially dangerous it really is.