Why Exactly the Iran Deal is Good for Iran and the Second Signpost

So the Iran Nuclear Deal was done on July 14. Iran and the P5+1 nations finished negotiations and now the tentative agreement is to be debated and voted on in the participating countries.

You have heard it said from conservative circles and even from me that this deal is a bad deal. But Obama said that this nuclear deal with Iran stops that country in every way from getting the bomb, but that is simply not the case. So now that the dust has settled and the ink has dried I examined the text of the JCPOA (Joint Comprehension Plan of Action) first hand to see exactly why this is a bad deal. A pdf of the text is at this website. There is a link to the right on the site that directs you to get the original pdf.

I found four weaknesses in the deal that would allow Iran to continue forward to the bomb. It would be laughable if the situation wasn’t so serious as to how, well, “stupid” is the word that comes to mind, the P5+1 were in giving Iran such slack. The leadership of the United States for maybe the last hundred years has gullibly thought that other nations’ leadership thinks the same way we do. In the preamble this statement on page 16 caught my attention –

“28. The E3/EU+3 and Iran commit to implement this JCPOA in good faith and in a constructive atmosphere, based on mutual respect, and to refrain from any action inconsistent with the letter, spirit and intent of this JCPOA that would undermine its successful implementation.”

Mutual respect? Iran has no respect for any nation unless it is led by good militant Shia Muslims. Iran’s leadership has plenty of respect for Syria, and Iraq and maybe Lebanon and Yemen but that is pretty much it. I would hate to play poker with the Iranian delegates there in Vienna as they must be the world experts in keeping a straight face.

Anyway, here is my list of four problems:

Problem #1

The first problem brings back to mind the days of Saddam Hussein and his hiding the WMD that he seemed to have in his facilities, keeping U.N. inspectors waiting. Here is the text of the agreement from page 43 –

“78. If the absence of undeclared nuclear materials and activities or activities inconsistent with the JCPOA cannot be verified after the implementation of the alternative arrangements agreed by Iran and IAEA…at the specified locations within 14 days of the IAEA’s original request for access, Iran, in consultation with the members of the Joint Commission, would resolve the IAEA’s concerns through necessary means agreed between Iran and IAEA. In the absence of an agreement, the members of the Joint Commission, by consensus or by a vote of 5 or more of its 8 members, would advise on the necessary means to resolve the IAEA’s concerns. The process of consultation with, and any action by, the members of the Joint Commission would not exceed 7 days, and Iran would implement the necessary means within 3 additional days.”

Wow! Do you see that? Iran gets a total of 24 days to hide and cover-up and deceive the world that no, absolutely not, there is no violation of the agreement in that next building, or that next room, or that next hidden secret area. First up then is the old problem of delaying and putting off. We will come back to this Item #78 later as it also contains another problem.

Problem #2

This one is another doozy. It’s sort of like allowing an enemy’s friends to make sure the enemy is doing the right thing. We have on page 40 –

“67. Iran will increase the number of designated IAEA inspectors to the range of 130-150 within 9 months from the date of the implementation of the JCPOA, and will generally allow the designation of inspectors from nations that have diplomatic relations with Iran, consistent with its laws and regulations.”

It will have inspectors from countries only with which it has diplomatic relations. So let’s review the list of nations involved. The P5 include the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council – United States, Russia, China, United Kingdom, and France. The two nations’ inspectors I would trust most – the US and UK – have no diplomatic relations with Iran. Sorry boys, you don’t get to have any inspectors. But Russia and China who are not only friends of Iran but trade partners and strategic partners do have diplomatic relations. France does too. The “+1” of the “P5+1” is Germany/EU. Germany also has diplomatic relations with Iran. So if France and Germany who are our allies have a say, it comes down to Russia and China vs. France and Germany, with no US or UK. So it seems like the inspectors are “stacked.” I can see the scenario where the Russian inspectors actually help the Iranians by telling them where the inspectors are going to inspect next so the Iranians have way more than 24 days.

I found it interesting that the next day this news story came out. It seems the supreme leader declared that he vowed “to defy American policies in the region despite a deal with world powers over Tehran’s nuclear programme.” So indeed the supreme leader is making it clear it wants to keep its lack of diplomatic relations with the United States. Kerry called this development disturbing. Talk about slow.

Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif with the Head of Iranian Atomic Energy Organization Ali Akbar Salehi to his left, on March 30, seems to look pleased at how the JCPOA (the nuclear agreement) is being formed.

Head of the Iranian delegation in Vienna, Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif (L), with the Head of Iranian Atomic Energy Organization Ali Akbar Salehi (R), on March 30, seems to look pleased at how the JCPOA (the nuclear agreement) is being formed.

Problem #3

Back to page 43, Item 78, there is,

“In the absence of an agreement, the members of the Joint Commission, by consensus or by a vote of 5 or more of its 8 members, would advise on the necessary means to resolve the IAEA’s concerns.”

So in the middle of those 24 days the Joint Commission is going to decide and vote whether there is even a problem where Iran is holding back evidence. And the vote must be 5 of 8 or better. The Joint Commission (Item ix, page 4) will include a member from each of the six countries involved and two third party country representatives. So it’s already 2 versus 2 – the US and UK versus Russia and China. So it’s a matter of seeing how the vote goes with the remaining members. And remember even if the US gets the vote it wants, Iran has been moving things around for 24 days.

Problem #4

This problem comes from what is missing. It dawned on me as I saw requirement after requirement looking at uranium stockpiles, uranium enrichment, and uranium processing. I saw nothing about inspecting suspected bomb laboratories, bomb factories or bomb assembly areas. Another “wow!”


Well, there you have it. It doesn’t matter that Iran has to reduce its enrichment of uranium or even its uranium stockpiles. With friends in places where it counts, and plenty of warning, and no checking of the places where they actually load the uranium and make the bombs, it seems to me that Iran can still get the bomb. And with the bomb will come the Second Signpost and the Persian ram of Daniel 8 where “no animal could stand against him, and none could rescue from his power. He did as he pleased and became great.” Nukes allow that sort of thing.

Categories: In The News, Signpost #2: Iran

Tags: , , , , , , ,

9 replies

  1. Very well analyzed, Mark.

    In addition, even if Iran WOULD act according to the letter of the agreement, and all of the the inspectors do their job really well, the agreement is still very profitable for them. Even then the Middle East becomes a more dangerous place, and moreover ensuring Iran having plenty of nukes in 15 years:
    And having them play their “great new game” PLUS them cheating on the treaty as is to be expected… makes them a dangerous ram indeed.
    It will still need some time before it can profit from the agreement, and get stronger from it, though. But the ram does not seem to lack in patience.

    By the way, check out the fifty “daily cartoons” on Al Arabiya:
    A few are offensive, some are only understandable for Arabians, but several are about the Nuclear deal and various aspects of the situation of the Middle-East and the dealings of the USA with it.

  2. An aspect of this that was discussed on my site that I thought your readers would like to see was why would the Administration sign on to a deal like this? If we assume correctly or incorrectly that the Administration loyalties are with the Sunni’s, why arm Iran?

    1. It allows Sunni nations to also “arm up” and gain their own nukes.
    2. It give Iran a false sense of security to invade west, south and north.
    3. It makes Iran even more dangerous, so after their invasion, the USA is likely to aid Turkey (Yavan) in its counterattack.

    The end result is the conquering of the Shia enemy by the Sunni’s that wouldn’t be possible without this deal. This is the end result the Administration sees and wants: a Middle East dominated by a single, nuclear Sunni Caliphate, that is their end game.

    Of course, Daniel 8 tells us that the Caliphate is immediately broken into 4 and the prominent horn is broken off. The Administration does not see that aspect IMO.


  3. There is at least one more major problem: http://www.businessinsider.com/john-kerry-iran-deal-israel-cyber-attack-2015-7

    I find the part that says the U.S. might have to protect the Iranian nuclear program extremely discomforting. I mean, are we going to go to war or impose sanctions against our ally Israel in favor of our enemy Iran? This makes no sense and the world is truely upside down. Maranatha! Lord come soon!

  4. Good catch, Corban.
    The language isn’t as direct for it says “envisaged” above it at the header for that small section, but still it certainly leaves the door open; a door that shouldn’t be open.

  5. I think Obama got what he wanted from the IRAN deal. The last think an outgoing Pesident wants is a start of a war that could escalate to regional wars and this deal will give both sides some time to delay further tensions until 2017.
    The problem now will be in the hands of the next US president (Republican or Democrat). Now Obama can schedule his quarter million dollars speaches all over the world with no worries.

    Yes this will give Iran to regain back it’s regional strength in the Middle East, and many Arab countries such as Kuwait and Saudi Arabia will be forced to gear up on weapons and jet fighters
    from the US ($$$$), out of the fear of IRAN gaining more power. Open checks for US weapons industry.

    Of course Israel will try to create further tension, so that the conflicts of the Middle East will stay directed back to ISIS/Syria and IRAQ, now that IRAN got their agreement settled with US.

    Sorry, but war has been delayed for now.

  6. so right after this Iran deal Turkey goes on the offensive against Isis in Syria presumably and also hits hard at the Kurds, the PKK… what is up with that?

  7. Momonapurpose,
    Interesting development. I’m looking at it.

  8. http://www.businessinsider.com/irans-ahmadinejad-is-trying-to-make-a-comeback-2015-8

    2017 could be the game changer for IRAN.
    Heeeeee’sssss back, just like Putin.

  9. It’s interesting, Mark. Last night on Social Media someone posted about the ominous feeling of doom they felt regarding the deal with Iran. I posted back that it will be because of direct fulfillment of Daniel 8. I’m sure that had to sink in for awhile since this person to my knowledge has no interest in biblical prophecy. The understanding of, “something is wrong, but I don’t know what” is likely widespread among the churches.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: