News reports over the past few days have featured a string of once unimaginable concessions from the P5+1 in the Iran nuclear talks. (One can imagine the French are feeding the media a steady diet of leaks. It is the French who have expressed the most concern about the bonanza of concessions, so leaks and ensuing public outrage is an understandable strategy if one is trying to stop a bad deal.)
At times President Obama sounds almost incoherent on Iran. On one hand he says, like the Israeli prime minister, that he does not see a peace deal in the near future. ("What we can't do is pretend that there's a possibility for something that's not there. And we can't continue to premise our public diplomacy based on something that everybody knows is not going to happen at least in the next several years.") So they are on the same page? Nope.
Despite the obvious rush to a deal Democrats have not reconsidered whether it might be best to vote on Corker-Graham before a deal is struck, not after, or whether the administration might benefit from some guidelines as to what might be an acceptable deal.
In advance of the deadline for a framework agreement on Iran’s nuclear program, JINSA’s Gemunder Center Iran Task Force issues a new brief detailing concerns about Iran's nuclear program that must still be resolved to ensure an acceptable final deal. The brief also provides recommendations for the Administration and Congress to work together to develop credible verification and enforcement mechanisms for a comprehensive agreement.
The US military must be prepared to confront hybrid threats, best defined as non-state entities equipped with advanced weapons normally associated with conventional militaries. These non-state entities routinely co-locate command centers and other military targets in urban environments and deliberately endanger civilians to generate sympathy and support within the international community.
Israel’s military went far beyond its legal obligation last summer during its Gaza operation to prevent civilian casualties, according to report by a panel of former senior U.S. military officials and legal experts.
While a United Nations panel stages a guilt-before-the-evidence probe of Israel’s conduct in last summer’s Gaza war, a task force of retired U.S. generals is warning American commanders never to do what Israel did — pull their punches.
The Iran debate is in full swing, as it should be. The potential for a nuclear breakout by a radical Islamist state and for a deal that might cement its status as such is worth robust debate. But one reason the debate seems disjointed is that the defenders of the Obama administration and the administration itself seem unaware or unwilling to recognize certain facts.
03/13/2015 - 11:14am
The Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs
1307 New York Ave., NW, Suite 200
Washington, D.C. 20005