We were struck by the observation last week of Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Wendy Sherman, who has overall responsibility for the nuclear negotiations with Iran. We are now eight months into those negotiations and getting close to the November 24 deadline for a comprehensive settlement. Yet this is part of what Secretary Sherman had to say:
Thus far, we can say on the positive side that our talks have been serious and that we have identified potential answers to some questions. However, to get to a comprehensive agreement, we remain far apart on other core issues, including the size and scope of Iran’s uranium enrichment capacity. I fully expect in the days ahead that Iran will try to convince the world that on this pivotal matter, the status quo – or its equivalent – should be acceptable. It is not. If it were, we wouldn’t be involved in this difficult and very painstaking negotiation.
So even at this late date Iran is apparently still insisting that it can, and fully intends to, maintain the current level of its uranium enrichment capacity, which is, of course, the measure of its ability to produce nuclear weapons. Indeed, we thought this was the very issue President Obama was willing to go to war over should diplomacy fail to achieve an agreement reducing that capacity.
We have long felt Iran’s principal goal in agreeing to enter negotiations was to delay, by any means available, substantial action by the U.S., the West, and Israel (other than economic sanctions already imposed by the West) until it had amassed a functional nuclear weapons capacity.
If anything, the slow pace of negotiations reflected a sense on the part of Iranian officials that there was a general lack of resolve in the West for military action to deal with the problem. In this Iran seems to be succeeding. And the emergence of the threat posed by ISIS seems to have introduced another significant dimension, and a possible windfall for Iran, even though it’s on record as opposing the group.
Whatever one has to say about Iran, it does have clout in the Middle East and the Gulf region and could play a key role in addressing the ISIS threat. Reuters reported this week that Iran is ready to work with the United States and its allies in this regard but wants a quid pro quo in the nuclear negotiations.
Secretary of State Kerry insists that the two issues must remain separate. In fact, several weeks ago Mr. Kerry said Iran would not play a role in the planned response to ISIS. Yet on Sunday he met for more than an hour with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif. The meeting reportedly focused on the need to make progress in the nuclear talks and on the ISIS threat.
Whatever the U.S. stance on Iranian involvement in the fight against ISIS, the fact remains that a nuclear capacity will catapult Iran into the ranks of the world’s major powers, precipitate an arms race in that part of the world, and pose an existential threat to Israel. The administration should be very wary of making pacts with the devil.