Fears of arms race if Iran deal allows nuclear progress
FEARS are intensifying of a new atomic arms race in the Middle East being triggered by a nuclear deal with Iran, the outlines of which could be concluded as early as this week.
‘‘The Obama Administration’s desperation for any kind of deal with Iran and the concessions it is giving the mullahs could be disastrously destabilising,’’ said a former senior US official.
‘‘If, as looks likely, a deal opens the door to Tehran developing a weapon in due course, then Sunni Arab states will almost certainly follow suit, and the chances of an Israeli attack on Iran will increase exponentially. A bad deal is far worse than no deal.’’
Negotiations in Lausanne over Iran’s nuclear programme resumed yesterday, with officials saying an outline of an agreement could be settled by Wednesday’s deadline. A comprehensive deal could then be reached by the end of June.
Sources close to the Obama Administration said it was likely to make an announcement to that effect.
Philip Hammond, Britain’s foreign secretary, said in Washington on Saturday that the nuclear talks were likely to succeed.
‘‘We are better than halfway in terms of having numbers of areas where we are close enough that we can be confident that in the endgame we’ll get through. We are hopeful we will be making progress over the next 48 hours.’’
Republicans in the US Congress have vowed to block any agreement with Tehran, while some Democrats have expressed grave reservations.
The possibility of countries such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt using a deal as justification for starting their own nuclear programmes is increasing pressure on President Barack Obama to be tougher.
The former senior US official’s comments were echoed by John Bolton, a senior official in the George W Bush administration and a potential 2016 presidential candidate.
Writing in The New York Times last week, Bolton said Obama’s ‘‘fascination with an Iranian nuclear deal’’ at any cost could have dangerous implications and result in a ‘‘thoroughly nuclearweaponised Middle East’’.
Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, has signalled that it will pursue its own nuclear weapons programme if a deal allows Iran to continue to move towards a bomb.
Questioned on the issue, Adel al-Jubeir, the Saudi ambassador to the US, said: ‘‘Saudi Arabia will take whatever measures are necessary in order to protect its security.’’ At the same time, Obama Administration officials argued that failure to reach a deal could have grave consequences. One adviser said a collapse in the talks could lead to some of the 3000 American troops in Iraq being at risk of terrorist attacks from Iranian-backed elements.
The Obama Administration has also been working to discredit the newly re-elected Israeli premier, Benjamin Netanyahu, in anticipation of his denouncing the deal.
Bolton said that bombing Iran could now be the only way to stop the country from obtaining a nuclear weapon and that the onus would be on Israel to carry it out.
‘‘An attack need not destroy all of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, but by breaking key links in the nuclear fuel cycle, it could set back its programme by three to five years,’’ Bolton said.
‘‘The United States could do a thorough job of destruction, but Israel alone can do what’s necessary.’’