President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry are trying to fool the world into thinking that the Iran deal they are bound to soon complete will prevent the Iranians from developing nuclear weapons.
But Iran’s neighbors, who are most threatened by the arrangement, know better. And according to the Wall Street Journal, they now see the emerging agreement as the starting gun for their own nuclear weapons programs, entering a race that ends in ten years, once the restrictions on Iran are lifted.
From the piece.
The nuclear deal that the U.S. and other world powers hope to reach with Iran would put a 10-year curb on the Islamic republic’s nuclear program. For some of Iran’s regional rivals, that is also becoming a deadline for developing nuclear arms of their own.
In Saudi Arabia, there are widespread public calls to match Iran’s nuclear quest. The two other Middle East heavyweights, Turkey and Egypt, could also feel compelled to follow suit, senior Western and Arab officials warn.
Such an arms race would further destabilize what is already the world’s most volatile region, where the risks of a nuclear war would be compounded by the threat of radioactive material falling into the hands of terrorist groups.
While Saudi Arabia has long advocated a nuclear-free Middle East, its leaders are doubtful that the completed accord on limiting Tehran’s nuclear program will stop Iran from becoming a threshold nuclear-weapons power when proposed restrictions on is number of centrifuges and uranium stockpiles expire in 10 years. They also aren’t willing to bet that the regime in Tehran will somehow become more moderate and responsible by then, a hope entertained by many in the West.
Think of the world we are facing with this Iran arms deal. Nuclear weapons in India, Pakistan, Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Israel and Egypt. And then others will surely not want to be left out of the fun. We are confronting the end of the nonproliferation era.
Does anyone really doubt that these weapons will be used? Either in hostility, through the accidental or purposeful provision of atom bombs to terrorists, or simply through an accidental launch?
Is this scenario less risky than trying to eradicate Iran’s nuclear program militarily which, if done by the United States instead of Israel, is an achievable objective?
Thinks of who will now have these weapons. Extremists, unstable regimes.
The Saudis seem kind of Westernized because they are fabulously wealthy and do business with us. But they’re not. They’re religious zealots seeking to spread their ruthlessly uncompromising brand of Islam far and wide. Are they really going to be good custodians of nuclear weapons?
The Iranian regime isn’t likely to change. It hasn’t changed much in 36 years. And now the mullahs will be newly emboldened and empowered by their successful completion of their decades-long nuclear weapons project.
Meantime, John Kerry and his Iranian counterparts will pick up the Nobel Prize for Peace.
From Hitler, to Mao tse-Tung, to the Soviets, to Iran – why do Westerners never believe that fanatics are serious about the beliefs they ardently espouse? And to the extent we do, we’re like like altruistic but naive women staying with morally defective men in the hopes that they can “reform” them.
This is going to be a very bad old world soon. It has been made that way not by fate, but by choices made by this president. And consequences to be faced by a future one.