The Iran nuclear “deal” is an abject joke. It always was. Iran demanded the deal be written in such a way that the UN could pretend it was effective, while it simultaneously allowed the terrorist nation to stall, delay, and obfuscate the barely-existent inspection process at every turn. Barack Obama and John Kerry were so desperate that the particulars were irrelevant. The accord was complete garbage, but they happily lapped it up so they could claim a political win. No matter how terrible the agreement was, they were determined to sign it.
Iran has dismissed a U.S. demand for U.N. nuclear inspectors to visit its military bases as “merely a dream” as Washington reviews a 2015 nuclear agreement between Tehran and six world powers, including the United States.
The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, last week pressed the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to seek access to Iranian military bases to ensure that they were not concealing activities banned by the nuclear deal.
“Iran’s military sites are off limits ... All information about these sites are classified,” Iranian government spokesman Mohammad Baqer Nobakht told a weekly news conference broadcast on state television. “Iran will never allow such visits. Don’t pay attention to such remarks that are only a dream.”
...Under terms of the deal, the international nuclear watchdog can demand inspections of Iranian installations if it has concerns about nuclear materials or activities.
Phew. Fortunately, there are no “concerns,” so the UN can keep doing what it always does. Namely, nothing.
Unfortunately, Iran has another deal and any sane person can see that it is, in fact, cause for concern. It involves everyone’s favorite bowl-cut enthusiast, Kim Jong Un. As we’ve seen, the dictator has been rattling the nuclear saber, threatening the United States and its allies, while he accelerates his pursuit of advanced intercontinental missile technology.
Here’s a report on that relationship from back in May:
Now, according to a new report from the Washington Free Beacon, it appears the collaboration is being kicked into high gear. Representatives from Pyongyang are chatting with senior administration officials in Tehran, and you can bet their newly acquired tech is one of the main topics…
North Korea’s latest nuclear test of a hydrogen bomb has roiled Trump administration officials and led President Donald Trump to consider multiple options for war. However, it also has renewed fears among U.S. officials and foreign policy insiders about Pyongyang’s long-standing relationship with Iran, which centers on providing the Islamic Republic with nuclear technology and know-how.
The head of North Korea’s parliament arrived this weekend in Iran for a 10-day visit aimed at boosting ties between the two countries amid an international crackdown on Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons program, a situation U.S. officials tell the Free Beacon is being closely monitored.
As North Korea makes progress in its nuclear pursuits, it is likely this information is being shared with senior Iranian officials who continue to maintain and build upon the country’s weapons program, despite the nuclear agreement, which only limits a portion of Iran’s nuclear enrichment and research abilities.
One senior U.S. official currently handling the Iranian and North Korean nuclear portfolios told the Free Beacon that the collaboration between these two countries is being closely monitored by the Trump administration, which will not hesitate to take action to disrupt this relationship.
“The history of collaboration between North Korea and Iran has been an ongoing concern and needs to be watched closely,” the official told the Free Beacon. “We’ve been laboring under the false assumption that these oppressive regimes are rational and that we can persuade them to act for the greater good. President Trump has made it clear those days are at an end, and that the United States will do what is necessary to prevent Iran from turning into another North Korea.”
Yes, this relationship existed when Obama and Kerry cut their “deal.” They didn’t care. In fact, they were eager to downplay the threat Kim Jong Un posed. Why? Two words: “strategic patience.”
As Former CIA analyst Fred Fleitz wrote over at Fox News:
During an April 11, 2013, House Armed Services Committee hearing, Congressman Doug Lamborn, R-Colo., inadvertently revealed several unclassified sentences from a DIA report that said DIA had determined with “moderate confidence” that North Korea has the capability to make a nuclear weapon small enough to be launched with a ballistic missile.
The Director of National Intelligence and Obama officials subsequently tried to dismiss Lamborn’s disclosure by claiming the DIA assessment was an outlier that did not reflect the views of the rest of the U.S. Intelligence Community.
Obama officials tried to downplay the DIA assessment to prevent it from being used to force the president to employ a more assertive North Korea policy.
It was clear what Obama officials were doing in 2013. The DIA report represented inconvenient facts that threatened President Obama’s North Korea “strategic patience” policy—a policy to do nothing about North Korea and kick this problem down the road to the next president. Obama officials tried to downplay the DIA assessment to prevent it from being used to force the president to employ a more assertive North Korea policy.
As was so often the case when faced with a difficult international situation, the former President and his party chose to deny evidence and kick the can for the sake of their all-consuming agenda. “Doing things” can be difficult and, in the case of North Korea, would probably have complicated other Obama administration initiatives.
Thank goodness they got some worthless signatures, sent $150 Billion in cash to a terrorist sponsor, and could claim a big win.
Robert Laurie’s column is distributed by HermanCain.com, which can be found at HermanCain.comCommenting Policy
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2017 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2017 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement