Iran Negotiations Cannot be Based on “Breakout” Alone By Laicie Heeley & Lt. Gen. Robert G. Gard Negotiators from the P5+1 and Iran have agreed on four more months, beyond the original July 20 deadline, to ensure that they are able to negotiate the best deal on Iran’s nuclear program. But some of the toughest […]
Iran Negotiations Cannot Be Based on “Breakout” Alone
Gen. Gard and I are over on War on the Rocks today talking about Iran’s breakout capacity and its relationship to ongoing negotiations.
Some snips below:
Why have we chosen breakout as the one defining metric of a good deal? The purpose of each constraint, taken as a whole, is to limit Iran’s nuclear program to the point that the international community could detect any attempt to build a nuclear weapon, and even more importantly, react. A good nuclear deal will include a combination of elements that address Iran’s past, present, and future nuclear activities, including monitoring and transparency, possible military dimensions of Iran’s nuclear program, and former U.N. Security Council resolutions.
[snip]
With thorough and unimpeded monitoring by IAEA, to include the ability under the “Additional Protocol” to inspect any suspicious location for nuclear activity, we would know almost instantaneously if and when Iran makes a decision to produce weapons-grade fissile material, convert it to metallic form, and construct an explosive device, a process that would require considerable time. But we would not have to wait until then to consider a response.
[snip]
Iran’s nuclear capacity must be restrained — that’s the point of the negotiations — but agreement on a final deal shouldn’t be hampered by maximalist demands on either side. While Iran should not expect to leave the table without compromising on the size of its nuclear program, the P5+1 should also not focus so myopically on one element of Iran’s nuclear program to the extent that it might cloud the possibility of obtaining a solid deal.
Head over to War on the Rocks to read the rest of the piece.
Publishes Op-Ed on Iran Negotiations
“The nuclear talks represent a critical opportunity to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran, protect U.S. security, and prevent another war. We must give these talks adequate time to succeed…” write Brig. Gen. John H. Johns and Angela Canterbury for CNN.
CNN Publishes Op-Ed on Iran Negotiations by Brig. Gen. John H. Johns and Angela Canterbury
Why it’s right to keep talking to Iran World powers announced late Friday the need for an extension of negotiations as diplomats work to achieve a comprehensive deal on Iran’s nuclear program. This is an opportunity we can’t forgo. Diplomacy must be given the chance to succeed, lest we live with the probable consequences of […]
Our New Buzzfeed Post on Iran
We’ve found that when we mention the news on Iran to our friends, this is often the reaction we get:
So, we decided to break it down. This is the story of how the United States entered into negotiations with Iran, and what’s going on with those negotiations right now.
1. It began in 2013 with a historic phone call between President Obama and Iranian
President Rouhani. The talks went well:
2. And were complemented by talks between Iran and the P5+1 (a group that includes
Russia, China, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and the United States). These
negotiations addressed the issue of Iran’s nuclear program, a program the U.S.
feared might be used to develop nuclear weapons.
Read the rest on Buzzfeed!