There was some delay in getting this published, but I’m grateful that it’s out there. What follows is an abridged version of my op-ed , “Why We Need the Iran Nuclear Deal,” published in the September 24, 2015 issue of the Jewish Journal (Boston):
. . . The final deal is stronger than expected. The critics keep talking about its 10-year timeframe but, in fact, most of its provisions are set in a 15-year timeframe or longer. The permitted number of centrifuges is relatively low. Though some feared that an effective “snap-back” process for sanctions was unattainable, the deal’s provisions actually stymie Iran or even Iran together with Russia and China from blocking reimposition of sanctions if Iran cheats.
A 15-year timeframe is being portrayed by some as inadequate. . . .
Fifteen years is more than enough time for the pro-Western younger generation in Iran to take over or at least achieve considerable power in the society. It is more than enough time for Israeli and American technology to improve anti-missile defenses, . . .
. . . There is no stronger sanctions regime to be had. Rejection of this deal will bring about the collapse of sanctions, not their strengthening. The other alternative is military action against Iran. But U.S., Israeli and European experts agree that military action will set Iran back only 3-4 years. . . .
Let us be clear. There is no easy “shock and awe” or so-called “pinpoint” way to attack Iran. We are talking about full scale war in which Americans will fight and die while American taxpayers foot the bill. The Iranians have sophisticated air defenses. We will lose planes in taking them out. Iran will immediately attack our navy along their shores and we will suffer losses. They practice such attacks. And they will attack our forces in Iraq and Bahrain plus terror attacks on Americans around the world. The U.S. will be in another full-scale war.
Israel will be subject to massive Hezbollah and Hamas rocket barrages that will overwhelm the Iron Dome system. What American president, worrying about both America and Israel, would not try diplomacy first before taking us into such a war?
. . . The deal is based on verification and the realistic threat of punishment, not on trust. Americans who are fact-based will support it.