Iran Nuclear Deal

Gorospe John Paul A.

IS1241

Introduction
War war never changes the situation in our world today demands that measures be put
in to place that discourage or dissuade countries from becoming a nuclear power. The desire to
do so is great, as countries want to be competitive with each other with these weapons of mass
destruction. It stems from either wanting other countries to do what they want or deterring with
other countries from doing something to them. This is where partnership in a global community
would come in, such as those made by other countries.
The Pros for the deal how I see it and what I think about it
The arms embargo has placed a timeframe on ballistic missiles and conventional
weapons, of eight and five years respectively. But the time frame could be shortened if the
International Atomic Energy Agency certifies that Irans nuclear program is for peaceful
purposes only (Crichton). I agree that the embargo should be in place and also agree that if
Irans nuclear aspirations are for peaceful purposes then they should be rewarded as such and
have embargo lifted.
The breakout time for a nuclear device will go form a few months to more than 12
months. This is the key in the early stages of this deal as it places the fear of Iran accumulating
enough enriched uranium to make one nuclear device further away. This has been done by
allowing Iran [to] export all but 300kg of its entire stockpile of eight tons (sic) of low enriched
uranium (Blair), and also by reducing the said amount of centrifuges will be kept idle for 10
years. After this time period, Irans breakout time will be reduced to where it is today, maybe
around three months.
The inspection by the I.A.E.A has been opened to include military sites. With a
procedural process for Iran to contest a request for a particular site if they believe that their
national security is at risk. Iranian objections to some visits will be handled through a dispute
settlement process, according to the agreement (Dorell). And, as Einhon states in his article,
[supporters of the agreement] maintain that sophisticated environmental sampling technologies
would have a good chance of detecting microscopic traces of covert activity if uranium or other

Iran Nuclear Deal

Gorospe John Paul A.
IS1241
nuclear materials were involved, even long after 24 days. And they argue that, as soon as the
IAEA requests an inspection, U.S. intelligence assets would focus on the suspect site and be able
to identify signs that incriminating cleanup efforts were underway. Inspections of any kind
would raise suspicions on both sides of the deal and it would most certainly be a tense period of
time, for all involved.
Sanctions relief will not be removed immediately, but over the course of time as long as
Iran compiles with the accrd. John Kerry said the IAEA signed an agreement with Iran to
resolve its outstanding questions within three months. Sanctions relief will not occur until that
investigation is complete, Kerry said. Its not clear how exhaustive the IAEA report will be
(Dorell) While the sum of $100 billion is substantial, and will aid Iran, I believe that Iran will not
use the funds to an aggressive nuclear path, as it has other commitments in the area. Along the
debts owed, as with most countries, it really needs to stimulate its economy and the funds will
most likely be used for this and other necessary economic needs for the country.
The Cons for the deal how I see it and what I think about it
While the nuclear inspections of the accord allow the I.A.E.A. to visit suspected
enrichment sites, they have to request such an inspection and Iran has 24 days to comply to the
request. this seems to be too long of a process as so much can be hidden, discarded, or converted
within that 24 day period. The anytime anywhere rule is null and void if it gives any advance
notice of inspection. Christie compared it to a situation in which police shoed up to a location
with a search warrand and said, Ill be back in 24 days to search (Wong). This view is help by
many as it to hold back the snap inspection fear against Iran. While some sites will have
continuous monitoring, the fact that other sites will have no monitoring and will only have to
comply after more than three weeks notice is a little alarming.
Most Americans think Iran will ultimately violate the terms of the agreement, with 37%
calling that extremely likely and 23% saying very likely. Just 10% think its not at all likely that
Iran would break the agreement. Republicans (83% likely) and independents (58% likely) are
more apt to believe iran would violate the agreement than are Democrats (44% likely) (Agiesta)
Under what conditions would Iran want to pursue the costly advances associated with the

Iran Nuclear Deal

Gorospe John Paul A.
IS1241
enrichment process, and then not go ahead with a nuclear weapons program? While I agree that
many people think this way, it is just surmising the general feeling, not an educated summary of
the actual likelihood of Iran violating the terms.
I believe that this deal is the more realistic, as it places more oversight on the process and
places Iran on the global stage. While I disagree with the long request period of 24 days, I
believe that overall the deal is a start to relationship building in the region. Although according to
a Sept. 9 speech, Iranian Supreme Leadear Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned about US
intentions toward Iran and said that there will be no negotiations with the United States outside
of the nuclear deal reached in July (Karami). This view of United States as the enemy will take
a long time to overcome and although this deal was a necessary step to global peace and nonnuclear proliferation, there is a price that the United States has paid.
Conclusion
Critics assert that allowing Iran to ramp up its enrichment capacity in the out years
means that the deal merely postpones but does not prevent a nuclear-armed Iran (Einhorn). I
agree with this statement, at this point in time but no one knows how the next ten years will
change that outcome, I assert that the fact that this deal can postpone a nuclear-armed iran for a
decade is a good thing. The world will just have to wait and see that comes about in the next
decade and what kind of agreement may have to be made at the end of this time period. Einhorn
makes a strong argument that Irans leaders

having paid the huge price of devastating

sanctions and international isolation for pursuing nuclear weapons

would judge that nuclear

arms are a national imperative. After having the sanctions lifted for ten, years I dont believe
that Iran would want to return to sanctions that hurt their economy and way of life.
Recommendation
I think the deal could be improved with the Iranian leaders about the time of inspection
request be brought down to a few days only with an understanding and cooperation with the
leaders of Iran. They are, rightly so, cautious about letting inspectors in to their areas they deem
important to national security. This is a valid point that needs to be addressed, but that I believe

Iran Nuclear Deal

Gorospe John Paul A.
IS1241
could be overcome with a joint vetting and inspection team consisting of agreed upon inspectors
on both sides of the deal.

Reference
Agiesta, J. (2015). Poll: Americans skeptical Iran adhere to nuclear deal CNNPolitics.com,
Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/13/politics/iran-nuclear-deal-poll/
Blair,

D.

(2015).

summary

of

the

Iran

nuclear

deal.

Retrieved

from

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/11739214/A-summary-of-the-Irannuclear-deal.html
Crichton, K., & Sanger, D. (2015). Who Got What They Wanted in the Iran Nuclear Deal.
Retrived from http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/07/14/world/middleeast/Iran-nucleardeal-who-got-what-they-wanted.html?_r=1
Dorell, O. (2015). Iran nuclear deal: What each side won and lost. Retrieved from
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/07/14/Iran-deal-what-each-won-andlost/30062147/
Einhorn, R. (2015). Debating the Iran nuclear deal: A former American negotiator outlines the
battleground issues. Retrieved from http:// www.brookings.edu/research/reports2/2015/08/irannuclear-deal-battleground-issues-einhorn
Karami, A. (2015). Khamenei: Israel will no longer exist in 25 years Al monitor: The pulse of
the Middle East. Retrieved from Http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/orginals/2015/09/khameneinegotiation-us.html#
Wong, K. (2015). Christie blasts iran nuclear deal. Retrieved from http://thehill.com/blogs/ballotbox/presidential-races/250028-christie-balsts-iran-nuclear-deal