Iran’s Breakout Time Down From 1 Year To Half (Rev 16)

 

Former IAEA Deputy Director: Current Deal’s Breakout Time Would Be Seven or Eight Months

by TheTower.org Staff | 03.30.15 6:04 pm
 

Top analysts, including a former top official at the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog, are calling into question basic assumptions about the wisdom of the deal currently being hammered out in Lausanne, Switzerland between the P5+1 global powers and Iran. At stake is whether the administration’s publicly-expressed goal for the talks—that they produce a deal that keeps Iran a year from nuclear breakout for roughly the next decade—is a tenable way to prevent the Iranians from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

In an analysis published Saturday, Olli Heinonen, former deputy director-general for safeguards at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and now at Harvard University, argued that a one-year breakout window is not enough to prevent the Iranians from dashing across the nuclear finish line—even assuming that the rumored terms could achieve such a one-year period, which Heinonen calculated is not at all certain. Instead, it appears that the deal shaping up would put Iran perhaps only seven to eight months from breakout. Assuming that Iran will be able to operate 6,500 centrifuges, Heinonen estimated that using first-generation centrifuges, the breakout time would be nine months; however, given the stockpile of low-enriched uranium the Iranians have on hand, he writes that “a breakout time of between seven and eight months would…be possible.”

Real world constraints on detection mean that even with a one year breakout time, the U.S. might not have sufficient time to prevent the Iranians from constructing a nuclear bomb should the Islamic Republic go down that path. If Iran attempted to conceal its nuclear activities from the IAEA, it would take the organization at least two months to sift through samples and conduct the proper analysis. Further samples would likely be needed, expanding the detection time to three months. Then the IAEA would need time to report to the United Nations Security Council, which would need more time to respond.

Heinonen, along with Michael Hayden, the former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, and Ray Takeyh, a former State Department advisor on Iranian affairs in the Obama administration, wrote last week in The Washington Post about additional real-world constraints that make one year an inadequate time to catch Iran cheating and act:

The United States would have to convince the other member states invested in the agreement — including veto-wielding Russia and China — that the accord was being violated and that forceful action was needed. Time would be spent quarrelling over divergent views, with several outcomes possible, including a Security Council presidential statement or a resolution whose content would need to be agreed upon. And only then could new economic sanctions be imposed on Iran.

Either prior to or after the IAEA inspections, the U.S. Director of National Intelligence would need a significant amount of time to build a case of Iranian noncompliance and bring it to the attention of the President. The result would mean that the international community would not have enough time to implement effective economic sanctions in response.

The breakout time could actually be reduced further. If Iran is able to conduct research and development on advanced centrifuges, and make them operational, the enrichment process would speed up significantly. The Associated Press reported on Sunday that Iranian demands to build more advanced centrifuges have emerged as a key hurdle in the talks. In April 2014, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei declared, “Consent was given to the nuclear talks in order to break up the hostile atmosphere created by the hegemonistic [sic] front against Iran, but all people should be aware that despite the fact that the talks will continue, the Islamic Republic of Iran will not halt its activities with regard to nuclear research and development.”

ISIS Can Take The Pakistani Horn (Daniel 8:8)

ISIS could take Pakistan in months

Published by Greg Yoder on November 21, 2014

Pakistan (MNN) — While the world watches ISIS continue its stronghold in Syria and Iraq, it’s now reaching out into other parts of the region.

Fighters loyal to the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria are now in complete control of the city of Derna: population of about 100,000, not far from the Egyptian border and just about 200 miles from the southern shores of the European Union.

Now, we’re hearing from Christian workers in Pakistan that the country may be the next to fall. Bruce Allen with Forgotten Missionaries International says, “The Taliban have already sworn allegiance to ISIS. So, it’s bound to happen in the next one month to six months.”

That’s not the worst of the problems. “Pakistan is a nuclear power. And if the government or military falls, things will get very bad if the nuclear weapons fall into rouge hands.”

U.S. Congressman Frank Wolf is an advocate for religious freedom around the world. He agrees with Allen. He’s puzzled by why nobody is talking about this. “It’s just kind of getting out of control, and it’s almost like nobody’s really doing anything about it.” Especially the United States.

In the past, the U.S. was a neutralizer. Wolf says those opposed to ISIS are afraid, especially now. “America’s credibility, reputation, and strength seem to be–it’s painful to say this–at an all-time low around the world. They don’t hear the United States speaking out. They don’t hear the President speaking out.”

Ultimately, Congressman Wolf says, “I think the responsibility really rests with the church in the West. We are fundamentally failing, and for the longest period of time the church in the West has been relatively silent.”

Allen says that’s only part of the problem. “We in the West tend to value our comfort, and convenience, and things like that; however, the media plays a part in that. If the church was more aware of what was actually happening, I think they’d get more galvanized.”

Allen says if ISIS takes over, Christians will face more persecution, and ministries in Pakistan will be forced to close or go underground. That’s why your financial support and prayers are needed now. “We want to make sure that before it gets worse, our staff are really prepared to continue serving in the midst of chaos.”

Also, will you begin talking about these issues on your Facebook page? Start a conversation by posting a link to this story and asking people to respond. Also, begin calling media outlets and letting them know about ISIS in Pakistan.