No. of Recommendations: 10
We're starting to get an idea of what the Administration has proposed as the outcome to the Iran war. Reports are that their demand was a 20-year suspension of activity:
The U.S. proposed a 20-year halt to Iran’s nuclear program in recent talks in Pakistan, according to multiple reports.
Sources close to the talks told The New York Times that a two-decade “suspension” of Iranian nuclear activity was suggested by the U.S. in the weekend negotiations. Iran responded with their own plan of stopping nuclear activity for, at most, five years, U.S. and Iranian officials told the Times.https://thehill.com/policy/international/5830180-u...If the concept of having a set time frame for the duration of this kind of nuclear agreement seems familiar, it's a similar structure to the JCPOA that we were talking about in the other thread. No surprise, one of the leading voices in criticizing the JCPOA is immediately disparaging the proposal for having the same type of "sunset" provision as that earlier deal:
Foundation for Defense of Democracies CEO Mark Dubowitz responded to the reported two-decade proposal by stating that “a 20-year moratorium is a sunset provision.”
“The ban on enrichment must be permanent,” Dubowitz continued in a post on the social platform X on Monday. “The dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear program must be comprehensive and permanent.”If the Administration's
initial proposal includes a sunset provision, that does make it pretty likely that we'll end up with one at the end. If that ends up being the case, it will be interesting if folks like Dubowitz that regarded the sunset provision as an unacceptable fatal flaw in the JCPOA are just as unsparing in their criticism of this new deal as the old one.
