One Year Later: Iran Nuclear Deal a Coordinated ‘Deception’

President Barack Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran could be an important issue this election year. Supporters of the deal say it will prevent Iran from getting a nuclear bomb but critics still warn that it’s a bad deal.

Obama hailed the deal as a diplomatic breakthrough when it was signed just a little more than a year ago by the United States and five other world powers.

“After two years of negotiations, the United States together with our international partners has achieved something that decades of animosity has not,” he explained. “A comprehensive, long-term deal with Iran that will prevent it from obtaining a nuclear weapon.”

Despite the praise by Obama and others, some experts still warn the flaws within the agreement could mean that instead of preventing the Persian nation from building a nuclear weapon, it will lead to a nuclear Iran with potentially catastrophic results for the Middle East, Israel,  and even the United States.

“Their major goal in this negotiation was to get maximum sanctions relief in exchange for minimal nuclear concessions and that’s basically what they got with this deal,” Emily Landau, Israeli nuclear expert, explained.

She believes Iran won the negotiations as the agreement failed to address the nation’s ballistic missile program.

“Their biggest victory is not having their breakout capability destroyed, undermined, you know, dismantled. Not only that, they gained legitimacy for their uranium enrichment,” Landau added.

Throughout the negotiations, the Obama administration presented a narrative that said if you don’t support the deal, you’re for war. They also presented Iranian President Hassan Rouhani as a moderate.

Former CIA official Clare Lopez believes the administration wasn’t honest with the American public.

“We’re looking at a real coordinated effort to deceive the American people about this deal, … while not even touching on the covert program, which is of course where the weapons development is really going on literally underground in bunkers and tunnels under mountains,” Lopez said.

Lopez cites the now infamous New York Times magazine article where Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes said they used the media as an “echo chamber” to help push its argument to the public in the United States.

“So trying to sell all of that package of goods through duplicity and — deceit, but using a very agreeable, a very complicit media in — in the United States is what that echo chamber was all about,” Lopez added.

While the deal puts restraints on Iran for 10 or 15 years, Landau says they don’t mind.

“Looking at the long term, which is what Iran does, they’ve kept their breakout capability even if they have to wait out 10 to 15 years until the sunset clause comes into effect and all these restrictions that we’re talking about come into effect,” she explained. “Whether they uphold them, everything will be lifted and then they will be in a much better position to move towards nuclear weapons capability.”

While ISIS seized the headlines in the West, Landau and Lopez believe Iran remains the far greater danger.

“A country that can develop intercontinental ballistic missile capability; that could maybe in 10 years reach the United States obviously we’re talking about a different magnitude of capability,” Landau said.

“No comparison at all,” Lopez added. “The threat from the Iranian regime is existential, particularly as regards their nuclear weapons capability and the EMP component of that.”

 

This article originally appeared on CBN News, August 3, 2016, and reposted with permission.