by Ruby Henley
We know after observing tests all the way back to 2013, North Korea does have advanced nuclear technology. Why did we deny what some experts tried to tell us?
Bruce Bechtol, a political scientist and former senior defense intelligence analyst is a specialist in North Korea. He told us that Iranian officials were present at every major North Korean test; of course, this is not difficult to believe unless you are naïve.
North Korea collaborated with Syria on the construction of a nuclear reactor with the purpose of producing plutonium for nuclear weapons. North Korea has also dealt with Hezbollah, and that should not surprise anyone.
Currently North Korea and President Trump are working together to bring peace between the two countries. President Trump has done wonderfully in his negotiations with the very advanced country. While they were underestimated, they were busy advancing their nuclear capabilities.
In North Korea’s dealings with Iran, the two countries have worked together since1980. North Korea supplied submarines and guns to Iran during the 1980 – 1988 Iran-Iraq War. It is a fact that Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps were present for the first successful test of a Nodong-1 medium range missile.
Further, in 2003, a high-ranking North Korean defector, a missile scientist, told Congress about a mission he had to Iran in 1989. He was to fire a North Korean missile for the Iranians and come home to make more. This scientist was extremely courageous in telling his story.
(This information comes from Claudia Rosett, who covers foreign affairs, tyrants, terrorist, and democratic dissidents. Her experience comes from reporting in Asia, former Soviet Union, Latin America, and Middle East. She has written for the Wall Street Journal and Forbes. She won the Eric Breindel Award for ground-breaking reporting. www.forbes.com/sites/claudiarosett/#5b3431851452)
“Questions about possible Iran-North Korea teamwork on nuclear weapons are well-founded, as Ted Cruz explained in his seven-page letter, referencing numerous open-source reports (including two of my own). North Korea and Iran have been strategic allies since just after Iran’s 1979 Islamic revolution. They have a long history of weapons deals, in which the usual arrangement has been that North Korea works on the weapons, oil-rich Iran pays the bills, and technicians shuttle between both countries.
Over many years, North Korea and Iran have both carried out numerous ballistic missile tests, including multiple tests by both countries since the Iran nuclear deal took effect this January. That raises the question of why Iran, having promised not to make nuclear weapons, continues to pour resources into testing ballistic missiles. If not for nuclear weapons, then for what? One obvious question is whether North Korea’s nuclear program might be secretly doubling as a nuclear backshop for Iran.”
President Obama’s $1.7 billion Iranian Deal was very likely used to pay North Korea for assistance in nuclear advancement. Strangely enough this was shipped to Tehran in three planeloads of foreign banknotes.
This is an in-depth analysis of the many failings in the Iran Nuclear Deal. What can be done to change the failings at this point? At least they can be understood to some extent.
The sunset provisions in the JCPOA mean restrictions on Iran’s uranium-enrichment and plutonium reprocessing lift after 10 to 15 years. Iran is free to expand its nuclear program at that time to an industrial scale and introduce advanced centrifuges that can potentially reduce its “breakout” time – the time needed to produce enough weapons-grade uranium for a nuclear weapon – to a matter of weeks, if not days—”almost down to zero,” according to President Obama.
The JCPOA therefore merely “rents” Iranian arms control for a limited and defined period, after which Iran will be permitted to have an industrial-scale nuclear program with no limitations on number and type of centrifuges, or on its stockpiles of fissile material, buttressed by the economic benefits obtained through sanctions easing.
The JCPOA does not require Iran to submit to “anytime, anywhere” International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspections of facilities and military sites where nuclear activities are suspected to have occurred. Iran, a serial cheater on its nuclear and other international obligations, can delay inspections of such facilities for up to 24 days, giving it significant time to hide evidence of covert nuclear activities..
The JCPOA prematurely and irresponsibly closed the IAEA probe into Iran’s documented nuclear-weaponization efforts or the so-called Possible Military Dimensions (PMDs) of its nuclear program.
However, the IAEA concluded that Iran was actively designing a nuclear weapon through at least 2009. Iran’s lack of cooperation with the IAEA probe makes it impossible to verify if Tehran has halted all such efforts.
Consequently, the international community has an incomplete picture of Iran’s nuclear program making it impossible to establish a baseline to guide future inspections and verification.
It goes without saying that Iran was the winner in this agreement.
U.N. sanctions and some E.U. sanctions were lifted, enabling Iran to access $100 billion or more in previously frozen assets. Remaining EU sanctions will be lifted in less than 8 years.
Plus, the U.S. ceased applying nuclear-related sanctions against foreign companies for doing business in Iran. It would be absolutely outrageous if Iran had not complied with this win-win, as it was such a benefit to the Country!
Sanctions relief revitalized the Iranian economy and reduced leverage to hold Iran accountable. Since the deal, Iran has signed over $100 billion in contracts with foreign companies. Iranian economic growth and foreign trade have increased dramatically, while inflation has decreased sharply.
Iran continues to be the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, backing terrorist organization, Hezbollah, which has been responsible for the deaths of American citizens.
Iran has escalated its support to Syria’s Assad dictatorship, enabling Assad to reverse key setbacks and turn the tide of war in his favor..
Iran has test-launched at least 16 ballistic missiles since the JCPOA was reached. U.N. Security Council Resolution 2231, which implemented the deal, aided Iran’s ballistic-missile program by replacing previous resolution language that said Iran “shall not” engage in ballistic-missile activities with weaker language that merely “calls upon” Iran not to test any ballistic missiles “designed to be nuclear capable.”
President Trump is currently contemplating what steps should be taken in dealing with the Iran agreement. He is working under a great deal of pressure from the global community. The United States is, of course, being threatened by iran – no big surprise.
Here is the full document: www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/nov/24/iran-nuclear-deal-joint-plan-action
I want to conclude with the following excerpt from www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/07/does_iran_already_have_nuclear_weapons.html
“There is nothing new about Iran operating outside its borders. On September 5, 2007, Israeli aircraft and commandos attacked and destroyed Deir al-Zor in Syria and the nearby complex of Kibar. The complex was confirmed by the IAEA as a nuclear weapons development site, operated by Iran with the participation of North Korea.
It was not the only nuclear site in Syria. Marj as-Sultan, a facility near Damascus, is believed to be a uranium enrichment facility. With fighting taking place around this town, the German magazine Der Spiegel reports that the uranium and other material and equipment have been moved “to a well-hidden underground location just west of the city of Qusayr, not even two kilometers from the border with Lebanon.” And Der Spiegel believes that yet another nuclear facility was built this year at a secret location. According to Der Spiegel, Assad’s goal is nuclear capability, but how would this help him deal with the civil war raging in Syria? A more likely explanation is that this is an Iranian operation supported by North Korea.
Countries developing nuclear weapons often follow multiple tracks and build significant redundancy into their program so that a single point of failure won’t block progress in development. The U.S. pursued both uranium and plutonium weapons and created multiple facilities and different processes to get to its goal. Ditto for Russia, Britain, France, Iraq, India, and Pakistan. Iran is pursuing multiple paths to weaponization, but it is doing it with a twist. Because it needs a deal for sanctions relief, Iran is pursuing both domestic and extraterritorial nuclear weapons development. There is no doubt about its close ties to North Korea, and Syria provides concrete evidence of the convergence of the main players.
The nuclear deal with Iran does not consider these external relationships, or even officially recognize that they exist. Nor does it take into account that the explosions in North Korea could have been Iranian bombs. Although American intelligence is not completely confident on the matter, it is clear that the administration has heard voices of concern from within its own establishment.
This is another example of the ardor with which the Obama administration has pursued the Iran nuclear deal without regard for Iranian behavior before and during the negotiation.”
Plus there is a final option in dealing with the raw deal with Iran, and this come from www.newsmax.com/elilake/iran-regime-nuclear-deal/2018/04/24/id/856464/
“Those who want to kill the Iran nuclear deal, and those who want to fix it, may both overlook that there’s a strong third option: keep its fate in limbo.
May 12 is the deadline for President Donald Trump to decide whether to re-impose crippling sanctions, which were lifted by the deal that was intended to provide transparency into and temporary limits on Iran’s nuclear development.
This week French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel will press Trump to hold off. Iran’s foreign minister, Javad Zarif, went on CBS to threaten that Iran had “unpleasant” options should Trump impose the sanctions. Even HBO late-night host John Oliver has gotten in on the act. His program will take out ads this week on Fox News asking the president to remain in the nuclear bargain that was forged by Barack Obama. Trump’s own nominee for secretary of state said recently that his preference is to strengthen, and not end, the nuclear deal.
(In the following excerpt the author speaks of the problems in Iran.)
Finally, there is a foreign policy crisis. One of the catalysts for the first round of mass demonstrations in December and January was a leak of the official budget. It showed that billions of dollars were funneled to Iran’s military and Revolutionary Guard Corps, currently waging hot wars in Syria and Yemen, while Iran’s youth unemployment rate continued to rise. This is one reason many of the demonstrators today chant slogans that proclaim Iran should focus on its problems at home and not on sowing mischief abroad.
All of these factors have stoked the embers of the protests that began nearly five months ago. They also explain why the regime has not been able to quiet the demonstrations the way it did in 2009 following rigged presidential elections, by arresting and “disappearing” the urban elites who took to the streets.
This time around the protests have spread to different strata of Iranian society. Alireza Nader, a former Iran specialist for the RAND Corporation, notes that even former insiders like the onetime president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are predicting an end to the current regime.
All of this presents an opportunity for Trump, Macron and Merkel. Europe and the U.S. cannot take over the insurrection in Iran, nor should they. But the great Western powers can at least open a channel for future support.
“The majority of Iranians want change,” Nader told me. “They no longer believe in the game of moderates versus hardliners. Right now is the perfect time for the U.S. government to establish an official connection with the Democratic opposition.”
For years Iran pursued a diplomatic strategy to entangle the West in negotiations while it built up its nuclear capability. Now Trump, Macron and Merkel have an opportunity to return the favor by dragging out diplomacy while the regime wobbles. Let’s use negotiations over the nuclear deal to maintain the uncertainty that discourages foreign investment in Iran. Every week of inaction, every week of back-and-forth among Western allies, buys more time for the next Iranian revolution.
(Eli Lake is a Bloomberg View columnist. He was the senior national security correspondent for the Daily Beast and covered national security and intelligence for the Washington Times, the New York Sun, and UPI. )
“The United States is not a trustworthy, reliable negotiating partner,” said FM Zarif, adding, “the track record is not just limited to the nuclear deal.”
In conclusion, Iran has never said a good word about the United States.