What Can Iran Hide in 24 Days? Answering the Questions Posed by the Nuclear Deal

WASHINGTON (JTA) – Congress has until mid- to late September to consider whether to reject the nuclear restrictions for the sanctions rollback deal reached by Iran and six major powers on July 14. Some of the debate is over the meaning of certain provisions in the accord. Here’s a breakdown of differences in how the sides interpret parts of the deal.

…

Obama and his Cabinet have said that detectable signs of nuclear enrichment activity outlast 24 days — by centuries, even.

But critics say there are other activities related to nuclear weaponization that can go undetected, such as computer modeling for nuclear devices, explosives testing and the building of nuclear warheads, said Mark Dubowitz, director of the Foundation of Defense of Democracies.

“That kind of activity may not involve actual enrichment where there would be traces of uranium to detect,” he told JTA.

…

Among the agreement’s provisions aimed at ensuring nuclear safety is “cooperation through training and workshops to strengthen Iran’s ability to protect against, and respond to nuclear security threats, including sabotage, as well as to enable effective and sustainable nuclear security and physical protection systems.”

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., who is running for president, argues that this provision sets the United States and its traditional allies in the Middle East on a collision course by requiring the United States to help Iran defend itself against Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and other U.S. allies in the region.

But Daryl Kimball, president of the Arms Control Association, says that is not the intention of the provision. Rather it’s meant to maintain security at civilian nuclear sites so terrorists can’t access them or steal equipment for other countries. The provision does not oblige the United States to avoid sabotage operations like Stuxnet, the computer virus believed to have been designed by Israel and the United States that wrecked Iran’s centrifuges in 2010.

But Dubowitz says the wording may give Iran legal cover to solicit assistance from other countries, such as China, in stopping cyber attacks.

“It’s not clear from the agreement,” he said.

…

Read the full article here