Enhancing U.S. security - A good deal will not only guard against an Iranian nuclear weapon but also advance nonproliferation efforts in the Middle East, writes Michael Krepon in the Los Angeles Times. “The extent of these plans [to build nuclear power plants in Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt] will depend on the extent to which Iran's nuclear capacity is limited… Those who oppose this or any agreement with Iran invite more nuclear proliferation in the Middle East.”
--“Instead of providing answers, opponents take refuge in legislation for tougher sanctions,” the author concludes. “Those who oppose an agreement that limits Iran's enrichment capability in verifiable ways or indeed any agreement... are obligated to explain how rejecting such a deal or ending negotiations now would advance U.S. national, regional and international security interests.” http://lat.ms/1CiH9p7 [1]
Veto - A bill recently introduced by Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) would require the administration to submit the text of any final agreement with Iran to Congress within five days of the deal’s conclusion. The bill would also prohibit the president from suspending or waiving sanctions on Iran passed by Congress for 60 days after a deal.
--The White House has issued a veto threat on the bill, arguing that the U.S. "should give our negotiators the best chance of success, rather than complicating their efforts," said NSC spokesperson Bernadette Meehan. Full story by Reuters. http://reut.rs/18EM0Ve [2]
Nuclear consequences - “If the U.S. is seen as the cause of the negotiations failure, say, because Congress passes a bill requiring a contentious up-or-down vote on the agreement… the carefully constructed international sanctions regime would almost certainly weaken and possibly collapse. ” writes Retired Col. Richard Klass in Roll Call. “Without the support of our international partners, Iran would be free... to build a bomb if it so chooses, without the heavy burden of sanctions on its shoulders.” http://bit.ly/1BPDNu5 [3]
Military consequences - “Long after Netanyahu’s speech ends, and the partisan applause fades, the U.S. will live with the consequences of Congress’ choices about Iran,” writes Jon Rainwater in The Hill. “If Congress chooses to play the spoiler, both isolation and war may follow.”
--“A Congressional veto of a deal would be the type of unilateralism that led to the Iraq war - only this time without the president and with Bibi as the only partner in this loneliest coalition of the willing. Congress should stand down and give diplomacy – and most of the world community – a chance to succeed.” http://bit.ly/1M3ESQk [4]
Preemptive rebuttal - White House officials are getting out in front of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to Congress tomorrow, “arguing that he has failed to present a feasible alternative to American proposals for constraining Iran’s nuclear program.” Full story by David Sanger and Michael Gordon for The New York Times here. http://nyti.ms/187QMtj [5]
--Key quote from Secretary of State John Kerry on ABC’s This Week: “Israel is safer today and that is the standard that we will apply to any agreement going forward… Given our success on the interim agreement, I believe we deserve the benefit of the doubt… It is better to do this by diplomacy [than resort to military action.]” Full transcript here. http://abcn.ws/1FOaaqC [6]
Tweet - @GaelTarleton [7]: U.S.-Iran deal to reduce nuke threat important. Israel can't just say no. Stakes so high. @Cirincione @plough_shares http://t.co/kqM9l8e0ES [8]
Driving force -“Mr. Kerry has become a driving force behind the complicated, seven-nation talks [over Iran’s nuclear program]... To critics, Mr. Kerry’s eagerness is an open invitation for the Iranians to press for concessions as the talks enter the final stage.” The New York Times’ Michael Gordon reviews Secretary Kerry’s pursuit of a diplomatic deal. http://nyti.ms/1E9tlfE [9]
North Korea report - Based on its current trajectory, North Korea seems likely to moderately increase its nuclear stockpile, potentially reaching 50 weapons by 2020, and advance its miniaturization and missile technology, according to a new report by Joel S. Wit and Sun Young Ahn at 38 North. Full report here. http://bit.ly/1vEdtjS [10]
Tweet - @Cirincione [11]: “When you look at the choices, not fantasy alternatives but real alternatives, it’s not a very attractive picture." http://t.co/dFdRTDhPIQ [12]
Slow progress - Iran is moving slowly to cooperate with the UN investigation into its past nuclear activities, IAEA chief Yukiya Amano said in recent remarks. Iran and the IAEA agreed earlier this year to accelerate the investigation, though the exact timeline remains unclear. Reuters reports. http://reut.rs/1M1BAex [13]
Nonproliferation consequences - Failure to secure an Iran nuclear deal would strike a blow to the global nonproliferation regime, potential sparking a “cascade of regional fuel making,” argues Kingston Reif in The National Interest. Without a deal, Iran’s nuclear program will be unconstrained, posing a threat to Saudi Arabia and other regional actors and potentially provoking a race to develop their own enrichment programs. http://bit.ly/1EacvgL [14]
Quick Hits:
-- “Seoul: North Korea test fires 2 short-range missiles,” by Hyung-Jin Kim for the Associated Press. http://yhoo.it/1M3Fqps [15]
-- “US Can Respond to Russia on INF With Missiles - Ex-Pentagon Official.” In Sputnik. http://bit.ly/1CjhZqp [16]
Events:
--“Reinvent Nuclear Security: Developing Next-Generation Innovators.” March 3 at 2:00 p.m. EST. Featuring Erika Gregory of N Square, and other participants. Online webinar sponsored by N Square. RSVP online. http://bit.ly/1M3GuK6 [17]
--“Senate Armed Services Committee, hearing on the Defense Department budget.” With Defense Secretary Ashton Carter and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey. March 3 at 2:30 p.m. located at 216 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington DC. Webcast on the committee website. http://1.usa.gov/RmEbep [18]
--“The Iran Nuclear Issue: Current State of Play.” Featuring Thomas Pickering, former Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs; Jessica Mathews, Carnegie Endowment; Suzanne Maloney, Brookings Institution. March 3 at 3:30-5:00 PM. Located at the University of Maryland, Colony Ballroom, Stamp Student Union, College Park, MD. RSVP online. http://bit.ly/17KDDGP [19]
--“House Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water, hearing on the Weapons Activities budget of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA).” With Frank Klotz, Administrator, NNSA, Don Cook, Deputy Administrator for Defense Programs, NNSA; and Brig. Gen. Stephen Davis, Principal Assistant Deputy Administrator for Military Applications, NNSA. March 4 at 1:00 PM. Located at 2362-B Rayburn House Office Building, Washington DC. Webcast on the committee website. http://1.usa.gov/17KE83y [20]
--“Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, hearing on "U.S. Nuclear Weapons Policy, Programs and Strategy." With Frank Kendall, Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics; Brian McKeon, Principal Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Policy; Michael Elliott, Deputy Director for Strategic Stability, Strategic Plans and Policy Directorate, Joint Chiefs of Staff; Adm. Cecil Haney, Commander, U.S. Strategic Command; and Frank Klotz, Administrator, National Nuclear Security Administration. March 4 at 3:30 PM. Located at 222 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington. Webcast on the committee website. http://1.usa.gov/17KENCd [21]
Dessert:
Nuclear notebook - The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has a new interactive graphic covering world nuclear arsenals since World War II. Check it out: http://bit.ly/1FOhe6w [22]
Topic
- Early Warning [23]
- Corker Bill [24]
- John Kerry [25]
- Driving Force [26]
- North Korea [27]
- IAEA Inspections [28]
- PMD [29]
- Nuclear Notebook [30]