Today, CNAS released a paper by my colleague Dr. Colin H. Kahl that provides some important context for the talks between Iran and the P5+1 countries that took place earlier this month and will continue on Nov. 20. The paper argues (pg. 2) that a final deal should seek three main goals: 1) Lengthen breakout times; 2) Shorten detection timelines; 3) Provide assurances against a covert nuclear infrastructure.
It warns (pg. 4-5) against the dangers of pursuing a maximalist deal for four broad reasons:
1) “[I]t is unclear if any escalation of sanctions could bring the regime to its knees in time to prevent Iran from achieving a breakout capability.”
2) “[S]omewhat paradoxically, escalating sanctions at this moment could actually end up weakening international pressure on Iran.”
3) “[I]ssuing more explicit military threats (through a possible authorization of use of military force, for example) is also unlikely to achieve a maximalist diplomatic outcome.”
4) “[A]ttempting to generate an existential crisis for the Islamic Republic could backfire by increasing the regime’s incentives to acquire nuclear weapons.”
The paper then goes on to explain (pg. 5-6) the major components of a “sufficient” deal. They include, broadly:
1) Significant constraints on uranium enrichment
2) Significant constraints on the plutonium track
3) An intrusive inspections regime
4) Transparency into past military dimensions of the Iranian nuclear program
Kahl concludes that “if we are to avoid the worst possible outcomes – unconstrained Iranian nuclearization or another major war in the Middle East – then a good-if-imperfect deal is clearly preferable to no deal at all.” Of course, the devil is very much in the details—and Kahl gets into all of them, so read on if you’re interested. You can find the full paper here.
More from CNAS
CommentaryHow Iran Became the New Battle Line Between Conservatives and Twitter
In the latest salvo in the conservative war against Twitter, Senator Ted Cruz is calling for a criminal investigation into the social media platform for violating U....
By Peter Harrell & Elizabeth Goitein
PodcastThe Trump Administration’s Latest Moves to Dismantle the Iran Nuclear Agreement with Peter Harrell and Richard Nephew
On May 27, the Trump administration announced that it was withdrawing sanctions waivers that had allowed Russian, Chinese and European companies to work with Iran on sensitive...
By Peter Harrell
CommentarySharper: Global Coronavirus Response
As regions across the United States enforce states of emergency and a growing list of countries restrict travel, close schools, and quarantine citizens, the economic and human...
By Chris Estep & Cole Stevens
CommentaryHow the US can learn from Israel to counter Iran
During the COVID-19 crisis, one would have thought the United States and Iran would find ways to reduce tensions. Instead the Trump administration refuses to relax sanctions i...
By Ilan Goldenberg & Kaleigh Thomas