logo IISS small cropped





For your perusal, my latest INTO THE FRAY column:

 Iran & the chilling significance of the “No Alternative” argument
(Kindly consider “liking”, sharing, tweeting – please use hash-tag ‪#‎IntoFray) 

Aaron David Miller: “Why would the mullahs cheat on a deal this good…”

Aaron David Miller: “Why would the mullahs cheat on a deal this good…”

The attempt to justify the 2015 deal with Iran, as being the only viable alternative to allowing it to develop nuclear weapons, is both infuriating and disingenuous


It appears this week on the following sites (in alphabetical order):

ISRAELI FRONTLINE http://www.israelifrontline.com/2018/05/into-the-fray-iran-the-chilling-significance-of-the-no-alternative-argument.html 
ISRAEL NATIONAL NEWS: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/22109
ISRAPUNDIT: https://www.israpundit.org/into-the-fray-iran-the-chilling-significance-of-the-no-alternative-argument/
ISRAEL RISING: https://www.israelrising.com/iran-chilling-significance-no-alternative-argument/

JERUSALEM HERALD : (To be posted) 
JEWISH PRESS:   http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/columns/into-the-fray-martin-sherman/into-the-fray-iran-the-chilling-significance-of-the-no-alternative-argument/2018/05/07/
JNS:   https://www.jns.org/opinion/iran-and-the-chilling-significance-of-the-no-alternative-argument/
JEWS DOWN UNDER: https://jewsdownunder.com/2018/05/04/into-the-fray-iran-the-chilling-significance-of-the-no-alternative-argument/

MEDIUM: https://medium.com/@martinsherman/into-the-fray-iran-the-chilling-significance-of-the-no-alternative-argument-8b3ed798d2a2
UNITED WITH ISRAEL: https://unitedwithisrael.org/iran-and-the-chilling-significance-of-the-no-alternative-argument/

Several short excerpts:   

The prime minister of Israel is deeply opposed to it, I think he’s made that very clear. I have repeatedly asked, what is the alternative that you present that you think makes it less likely for Iran to get a nuclear weapon? And I have yet to obtain a good answer on that. Barack Obama, on the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, Office of the White House Press Secretary, April 11, 2015.


President Obama has been crystal clear. Don’t rush. We’re not in a rush. We need to get the right deal…No deal is better than a bad deal. And we are certainly adhering to that concept.  Obama’s Secretary of State, John Kerry, “No deal is better than a bad deal”, Politico, Nov. 10, 2013.


Why would the mullahs cheat on a deal as good for them as this one?…Simply put, this is one terrific agreement for Tehran. And Iran is likely to have no interest in violating it…It’s the cruelest of ironies that Iran is reaping huge rewards for giving up something it wasn’t supposed to be doing in the first place. Aaron David Miller, “Iran’s Win-Win…Win Win Win Nuke Deal”, Daily Beast, July 20, 2015.  


The Iran nuclear deal, concluded in July 2015, was catapulted back into the headlines on Monday, when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu revealed that the Israel intelligence services had managed to spirit away a huge trove of documents from the heart of Tehran to Israel.


A dodgy deal, born of deception


Benjamin Netanyahu presents documents on Iran nuclear program

Benjamin Netanyahu presents documents on Iran nuclear program

The documents prove that, in contradiction to public declarations of it leaders, Iran had, indeed, planned to produce nuclear weapons, to develop the ability to deliver them by means of ballistic missiles, and had secretly stored the information in an undisclosed location—presumably for use at some future date, chosen by the Iranians. After all, if this was not the Iranian intent, why bother to store them at all—never mind surreptitiously conceal such storage?







“…the cruelest of ironies…”

 “What if Iran deal was a mistake…?”

“What if Iran deal was a mistake…?”

For the real point brought home by Netanyahu’s revelation is not that the deal has been violated, but that it should never have been made in the first place. As former senior State Department official, and today Vice President at the Woodrow Wilson International Center, Aaron David Miller, points out, the absurdity of the deal is that it awards “Iran … huge rewards for giving up something it wasn’t supposed to be doing in the first place”…



Premature and prejudicial


After all, since Netanyahu divulged only a small fraction of the seized material, it is somewhat premature and prejudicial to determine whether there are any new, previously unknown elements of any consequence in it…Moreover, as it stands at the moment, it is impossible to know whether Iran is adhering to the deal, or violating it. For it is precisely in those locations, where such violations are likely to take place—its military sites—that Iran has refused to allow inspections!… 


“Obama chose to ignore the peril…” 


Signatories of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal

Signatories of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal

This grim assessment is underscored by an opinion piece just published by nuclear expert, Ephraim Asculai, formerly of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and today a senior Research Fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies. He observes: “…the “deal” with Iran dealt only partially and temporarily with the issue of preventing Iran from accomplishing its original program…According to Asculai, “Former US President Barack Obama chose to ignore the potential… But the looming crisis did not disappear. When the term of the [deal] is up in a few years, Iran will legally resume its enrichment activities.”


Aiding and abetting Iran’s nuclear ambitions 


Nuclear expert Asculai: Deniers accessories to Iran’s nuclear ambitions

Nuclear expert Asculai: Deniers accessories to Iran’s nuclear ambitions

…Asculai berates detractors of Netanyahu’s presentation and their attempt to dismiss its importance, accusing them of aiding and abetting Iran in its quest for weaponized nuclear capability: “By stating that Iran did not do wrong, these deniers are becoming accessories to its nuclear ambitions”, asking in exasperation: “Is this what they really want?”…


Infuriating and disingenuous


The attempt to justify the deal with Iran as being the only viable alternative to allowing the Islamic Republic to develop nuclear weapons is both infuriating and disingenuous…It is infuriating because the very acceptance of the 2015 deal flies in the face of repeated prior commitments by the Obama administration to eschew bad deals…After all, in Obama’s own terms, the alternative was “no deal”!…


Making abrogation inevitable


Indeed, the very assumption that if the deal is abandoned, Iran will acquire nuclear weapons, virtually ensures that it will…Accordingly, if the US and its allies were not willing to confront Tehran with a credible specter of punitive, coercive action, which will compel it to abandon its nuclear program, then clearly, there is no inducement for it to adhere to the deal – making its future abrogation inevitable…at any time Iran deems expedient…That is the true—and chilling—significance of the unfounded contention that there is “no other viable alternative”.

As usual your talkbacks/comments/critiques welcome,

Best wishes,




Print Friendly, PDF & Email