For those who care about such things, the informed speculation about the winner of the next Nobel Peace Prize has already begun. Kristian Berg Harpviken, the head of the Peace Research Institute in Oslo, spoke earlier this week to give handicappers his assessment of the candidates. International headlines about his comments centered on the fact that some jokester had nominated Donald Trump for the award. But the smart money seems to be betting on American traitor Edward Snowden and the joint candidacy of Ali Akbar Salehi of Iran’s Atomic Energy Agency and U.S. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz for their work in brokering the nuclear deal between the Islamist regime and the West.
Given that such prizes are generally handed out for the mere signing of agreements rather than actually accomplishing something that might bring peace to the world (think Le Duc Tho and Henry Kissinger for a treaty that “ended” the Vietnam War before the North Vietnamese made a mockery of it, or Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres and Yasir Arafat for the Oslo Accords) or the hope that someone might do something along those lines (see, Obama, Barack), I’d say Salehi and Moniz have a great chance if Snowden doesn’t get it.
In fact that Iran deal has gotten some limited applause in recent days from unlikely sources. In the last week, two Israeli generals have given public briefings that have essentially validated the arguments of the Obama administration for the Iran nuclear deal. Both Chief of Staff Gadi Eiskenot and General Nitzan Alon have said that at the moment it doesn’t appear as if Iran is going to be building a nuclear bomb. The export of its nuclear fuel and the advantages it is reaping from the gold rush of Westerners seeking to do business there after the removal of sanctions means there is no incentive for Tehran to openly violate the pact. That may be enough for some to think that justifies the pact.
But even if we take these assurances at face value, the fact that Iran’s nuclear infrastructure remains intact with advanced research continuing and with the deal expiring in a decade, balances short-term relief against the near certainty of long-term peril from a richer, stronger terror-supporting regime. In the meantime, both generals say the Israel Defense Forces is concentrating on the growing threat from ISIS, Palestinian terrorism while keeping in mind that Iran remains the main strategic threat to Israel’s existence.
One reminder of the long-term peril came from another soldier. The commander-in-chief of Iran’s army said Thursday that Tehran was moving ahead with plans for an upgraded ballistic missile program and said his country discounted the possibility of increased Western sanctions. General Ataollah Salehi said that Iran planned to continue to ignore United Nations Security Council resolutions passed in conjunction with the nuclear deal that prohibited their conducting missile tests. Such tests conducted this past fall might have been interpreted as a sign that Iran wouldn’t abide by any agreement. But the Obama administration was focused on seeing the nuclear deal implemented and held off on the imposition of minor pin-prick sanctions on Iranians involved in the purchase of materials involved in the missile program until after international sanctions were removed. The U.S. has warned Iran to behave itself but has also made clear that any more sanctions, especially ones that would halt the influx of Western business along with the unfreezing of Iran’s foreign assets means Tehran has nothing to worry about even if it continues to test missiles that can reach Israel.
The Iranian military’s boasts also follow comments by the other Salehi that is up for a Nobel Prize. Iran’s nuclear chief said last week that his nation should be satisfied with the deal since it left the chief components of the country’s nuclear program intact while securing international legitimacy for its existence. Though the deal did, as the U.S. has claimed and the Israeli generals agreed, slowed its progress, “it did not completely stymie” the program. He went on to say that in some areas, it “accelerated the pace, including in the volume of nuclear material which was 550 tons before, now we have 770 tons of nuclear material. This is a fact known to (the International Atomic Energy Agency).”
While that fuel may not be at levels needed for a bomb, it could be quickly converted to that status. The time needed for a nuclear “breakout” was a matter of dispute during the debate over the deal in the United States but it appears the Iranians aren’t worried about being detected and know that if they just wait a few years, the West won’t have a leg to stand on to stop them anyway. Under the circumstances, Salehi can’t be faulted for claiming the deal is a “major achievement” for the Islamist regime.
If he and Moniz do get their Nobels this fall, we can expect an orgy of self-congratulation from the Obama administration during its last months. But Salehi’s boasts and that of Iran’s army chief make clear that any breathing space for those in Iran’s crosshairs will be of limited duration. Like the Nobels awarded for a Vietnam peace deal or the Oslo Accords, prizes for what is, at best, a ten-year break from the Iran nuclear threat will be viewed differently once Iran breaks out and gets its bomb. In the meantime, Iran won’t have a bomb but it will become immeasurably strengthened and have the financial clout to use Hezbollah and Hamas terrorists to spread violence and help Tehran’s push for regional hegemony.
Short-term benefits notwithstanding, the prize that might wind up on Moniz’s mantle will be worth as much as the ones given Kissinger, Rabin, and Peres. More to the point, Salehi’s award will be seen as very much in the grand tradition of Le Duc Tho and Arafat’s ability to hoodwink credulous peace seekers. We can only pray that the suffering that might follow from this peace prize will not ultimately dwarf the oceans of blood shed as a result of those failed efforts.
