Wording detailed in the nuclear agreement with Iran continues to cause concern amongst its critics who are troubled by the arrangement. The latest detail could prove disastrous to Israel's safety.
Arutz Sheva 7 reports:
Tucked away near the very end of the deal's massive text is a section entitled "Nuclear Safety, Safeguards and Security," which stipulates that the West will train Iran to thwart sabotage against its nuclear facilities.
According to text, Iran will learn how to secure its controversial and covert nuclear program from all threats thanks to training by the "E3/EU+3," another designation for the P5+1 countries consisting of the US, UK, France, Germany, Russia and China, as well as the EU.
The section seemingly begins benignly enough, with a clause saying that "E3/EU+3 parties, and possibly other states, as appropriate, are prepared to cooperate with Iran to establish a Nuclear Safety Centre in Iran, engage in workshops and training events in Iran."
But then things take a turn, with the same world powers obligating to "co-operation in the form of training courses and workshops to strengthen Iran's ability to prevent, protect and respond to nuclear security threats to nuclear facilities and systems as well as to enable effective and sustainable nuclear security and physical protection systems."
Leaving no doubts about the intentions, the text then promises "co-operation through training and workshops to strengthen Iran’s ability to protect against, and respond to nuclear security threats, including sabotage."
Sabotage is the key word, according to the report, as Iran regularly uses that term to describe attempts to thwart their nuclear progress physically or technologically. And it is that language that has others concerned as well.
As Allan J. Favish at American Thinker asks, "If Israel is about to take military action against Iran’s nuclear weapons infrastructure and related targets, will the Obama administration use this language in the agreement to claim that the United States is required to warn Iran of the impending attack and provide Iran with sufficient information to thwart it?"
He points to a Washington Free Beacon report warning of that very situation. Adam Kredo writes:
The language was viewed as disturbing by analysts and experts who said such cooperation could help protect Iran against efforts by the Israelis or other countries to sabotage the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program in the future.
“The United States and its partners have just become the international protectors of the Iranian nuclear program. Instead of rolling back the Iranian nuclear program, we’re now legally obligated to help the Iranians build it up and protect it,” said one Western source present in Vienna and who is apprised of the details of the deal.
Favish warns that the right distortion of the plain language of the agreement, as seen in countless rulings of Supreme Court justices, judges, and lawyers, could have a profound impact on every nation's safety. For example, perhaps "training and workshops" is not a limitation, but a broader category that could include anything the Obama administration sees fit. Therefore, if Israel was to decide to protect itself from Iran and attack the facilities, the U.S. would have to intervene, and maybe by any means necessary. This, Favish said, is a stab in the back to Israel, and the rest of the free world for that matter.