Go Back   DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums > Global Defense & Military > Geo-strategic Issues

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence


iran nuclear deal

This is a discussion on iran nuclear deal within the Geo-strategic Issues forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; today the US and Iran signed a deal on Iran's nuclear industry. Iran will reduce its stockpile of partially enriched ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old April 2nd, 2015   #1
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
No Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 154
Threads:
iran nuclear deal

today the US and Iran signed a deal on Iran's nuclear industry. Iran will reduce its stockpile of partially enriched uranium significantly, open itself up to inspections and convert some of its enrichment laboratories over to physics research. In return the US will slowly remove sanctions on Iran.

Seems a good deal all round. Iran has a lot to benefit from normalised relations with the west. In years to come we might see the US starting to sell a lot of commercial items to Iran such as jetliners etc.

Israel and Saudi Arabia aren't happy.

Little aside, Japan has 3000kg of plutonium and a very skilled technical and engineering clique. They could build an a-bomb in as little as six months if they wanted to. Am not saying that they want to... but if they chose to, they could. Also it is reported that in the event of war Pakistan would supply Saudi Arabia with some of its nuclear weapons. Saudi Arabia paid a large part of their development. Also there are 6000 Pakistani troops on Saudi soil for 'security reasons'

Say the opposite happened and Iran did not sign the deal and went on and developed the a-bomb, Saudi Arabia would be annoyed and no doubt ask Pakistan if it could have some of their joint nuclear stockpile back now

I imagine some in the US congress aint going to be happy with the deal, and Netanyahu is totally pissed.
peterAustralia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 3rd, 2015   #2
Defense Aficionado
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,346
Threads:
It works both ways: Iran will benefit from improved ties with the west and vice versa. Undoubtedly there will be attempts by certain players to undermine Iran's improved relations with the West. Saudi for decades - with a willing West - has successfully painted Iran as the regional "bad boy" and has isolated Iran. Saudi involvement in Yemen is part of the long standing Sunni/Shia cold war and is aimed at checking Iran's rise in influence. The U.S. needs Iranian help with Afghanistan and with IS but has no alternative but to support the involvement of Saudi and other allies in Yemen; which off course like with Syria is aimed at Iran.

Pakistan had almost a brigade's worth of troop in Saudi during the 1980's. These troops were equipped and paid by Saudi but Pakistan later declared that the troops would defend Saudi but would not be used against Iran. I'm quite sceptical as to the willingness of Pakistan to provide Saudi with nukes. Pakistan needs Saudi cash but is also beholden to China as China acts as a counterweight against India and from what I've read elsewhere; imposes tight control on Pakistan's nukes.
STURM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 3rd, 2015   #3
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,178
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by STURM View Post
Pakistan needs Saudi cash but is also beholden to China as China acts as a counterweight against India and from what I've read elsewhere; imposes tight control on Pakistan's nukes.
Not sure how tight China's control of Pakistan's nuclear technology is. North Korea got some Pakistani assistance although it may not have been state sanctioned.
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 3rd, 2015   #4
Defense Aficionado
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,346
Threads:
Pakistan needs Saudi cash to prop up its economy but from a strategical viewpoint; China is far more important to Pakistan; the main Pakistani security focus remains India and China plays a huge part. Also, if I'm not mistaken Pakistan's Ghauri missiles and others are essentially Chinese missiles and for the Pakistan nuclear programme, China has provided far more assistance than North Korea. I didn't save the link but I remember reading on an Indian blog that China exercises strict control on the deployment of Pakistani nukes and this was one condition the Chinese insisted on before allowing Pakistan access to Chinese missiles.

A couple of very interesting articles on why Saudi and Israel opposes the deal and what the effects of Iran signing the deal [positive to some and dangerous to others] might bring to the geo-political situation in the region.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/...-10154920.html

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/0...061906177.html

Last edited by STURM; April 4th, 2015 at 10:17 AM.
STURM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2015   #5
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,178
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by STURM View Post
Pakistan needs Saudi cash to prop up its economy but from a strategical viewpoint; China is far more important to Pakistan; the main Pakistani security focus remains India and China plays a huge part. Also, if I'm not mistaken Pakistan's Ghauri missiles and others are essentially Chinese missiles and for the Pakistan nuclear programme, China has provided far more assistance than North Korea. I didn't save the link but I remember reading on an Indian blog that China exercises strict control on the deployment of Pakistani nukes and this was one condition the Chinese insisted on before allowing Pakistan access to Chinese missiles.

A couple of very interesting articles on why Saudi and Israel opposes the deal and what the effects of Iran signing the deal [positive to some and dangerous to others] might bring to the geo-political situation in the region.

Iran nuclear deal: A powerful Tehran turned into America’s policeman in the Gulf? It could happen - Robert Fisk - Commentators - The Independent

Why Saudi Arabia and Israel oppose Iran nuclear deal - Al Jazeera English
Interesting reads at both sites but Iran and Saudi Arabia are and will remain ugly choices for the ME power broker role. As for the nuke agreement, who knows? The NK deal sucked and opponents of this deal will be quick to point that out. It's a replay of "is any kind of deal better than no deal". I admit that I don't know!
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2015   #6
Defense Aficionado
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,346
Threads:
The deal's not perfect, no doubt there but it's a compromise and better than the alternative: war.
If no deal had been reached and Netanyahu sensed that he had the support of the U.S: we would probably be looking at a strike on Iran. The Iranians off course would be justified in retaliating, leading to the Americans getting involved and soon there would be another war in the region.

What is very telling is that the main reason Israel and Saudi are so opposed to the deal is not because both are worried that Iranian nukes might someday land on Haifa or Riyadh but because a nuclear armed Iran would have more much influence in the region and in Israel's case; it would lose its nuclear monopoly. It also goes without saying that a U.S/Iran rapprochement worries Iran and Saudi.

IMO improved Iran/U S. ties and the rise of Iran as a regional power (as it once was) will be good for the region. It will however be interesting to see what Israel and Saudi do next to counter Iran and what Saudi and it's ever willing Arab partners do if the Houthis gain more ground. There are already reports of Saudi special forces in Yemen. Some would say that Saudi would be doing more good if it led an Arab contingent to Iraq to assist in the defeat of IS.
STURM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 Weeks Ago   #7
Defense Enthusiast
Chief Warrant Officer
No Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: terra
Posts: 435
Threads:
POTUS seems determined to scuttle the Iran nuke deal, motivated no doubt by his obsession with fulfilling campaign promises and undoing the Obama legacy. I doubt he has given much thought to the aftermath of any treaty abrogation only that he notch up a 'win' for his base. Apparently North Korea isn't a big enough crisis to occupy him and he thinks messing with the Iranians somehow makes sense.

The good news is he's getting pushback from the IC which he has derided in the past.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...h-intelligence

US intelligence officials are under pressure from the White House to produce a justification to declare Iran in violation of a 2015 nuclear agreement, in an echo of the politicisation of intelligence that led up to the Iraq invasion, according to former officials and analysts.

The collapse of the 2015 deal between Tehran, the US and five other countries – by which Iran has significantly curbed its nuclear programme in return for sanctions relief – would trigger a new crisis over nuclear proliferation at a time when the US is in a tense standoff with North Korea.

Intelligence analysts, chastened by the experience of the 2003 Iraq war, launched by the Bush administration on the basis of phoney evidence of weapons of mass destruction, are said to be resisting the pressure to come up with evidence of Iranian violations.

The Guardian view on sanctions: an essential tool
Editorial: Neither pure diplomacy nor outright war, sanctions are often better than both
Read more
“Anecdotally, I have heard this from members of the intelligence community – that they feel like they have come under pressure,” said Ned Price, a former CIA analyst who also served as a national security council spokesman and special assistant to Barack Obama. “They told me there was a sense of revulsion. There was a sense of déjà vu. There was a sense of ‘we’ve seen this movie before’.”

However, Donald Trump has said he expects to declare Iran non-compliant by mid-October, the next time he is required by Congress to sign a three-monthly certification of the nuclear deal (known as the Joint Comprehensive Programme of Action, or JCPOA). And the administration is pursuing another avenue that could trigger the collapse of the deal.
colay1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:25 AM.