Following Iran Deal, Israel Assesses Threats

Israeli military supports Iran Deal - “‘Without a doubt the nuclear deal between Iran and the West is a historic turning point. It is a big change in terms of the direction that Iran was headed, and in the way that we saw things.’... These are the words of the individual who has primary responsibility for the defense of the state of Israel: Israeli Chief of the General Staff Lieutenant General Gadi Eizenkot. In speaking so explicitly about a deal Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has called a ‘historic mistake’... Eizenkot settled the debate in Israel about where he and the IDF stand on this question,” writes Graham Allison for The Atlantic.

--“Israel’s security professionals see a dramatically different threat environment in the wake of the nuclear agreement. For the past decade, Iran’s nuclear advance has required their laser-like concentration on what, if Iran succeeded in developing nuclear weapons, would pose an existential threat to their nation. They now believe that that threat has been postponed for at least five years, and more likely a decade or more, which allows them to address other serious challenges.” Full piece here. http://theatln.tc/1M6ai7F

Dangers of anti-deal talk - “Cruz’s tough talk about tearing up the deal wouldn’t just signal that the U.S. can’t be trusted to stand by its word from one administration to the next; it ignores the fact that the accord wasn’t made only by the U.S. but also by Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China... Trump’s blithe claim that he could get a better deal probably either amuses or alarms those other countries, which have said that they won’t restart talks if the U.S. unilaterally backs out,” writes the USA Today editorial board.

--“For its part, Iran has been as good as its word. It shipped 98% of its enriched uranium out of the country, mothballed most of its centrifuges and poured cement into the core of a reactor that could have created bomb-making plutonium. None of this means Iran is turning into a responsible actor on the world stage, but U.S. voters should beware of candidates who'd renege on American commitments and offer simplistic approaches to complex problems.” Read the full opinion piece here. http://usat.ly/21YN3ZK

Tweet - @CongressPulse: .@barbaraslavin1: @iaeaorg has moved from "questioning suspected criminal to monitoring #Iran's nuclear probation" http://bit.ly/1Twr2wC

Changing strategies after the Iran Deal - “Less than two months after the Iran nuclear agreement officially began its implementation stage on January 16, the agreement itself is largely off the radar in the region, both in Arab states and in Israel,” writes Dalia Dassa Kaye for The National Interest. “Across the spectrum, for both those who had supported as well as opposed the deal, there is a common assessment that the Iranians are likely to continue meeting their nuclear commitments to maintain the economic relief that played a major role in bringing them to the negotiating table in the first place,” Find the full piece here. http://bit.ly/1U3erAW

Iran sends component of Arak reactor to U.S. - “Iran has exported heavy water, a key component for one kind of nuclear reactor, to the United States as part of a landmark nuclear agreement, the country's semi-official ISNA news agency reported on Tuesday. The report by ISNA quoted Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi as saying that 32 tons of heavy water have been ‘sold’ to the U.S. since the agreement was implemented in January,” reports Nasser Karimi for the AP. Full story here. http://apne.ws/1UVjL93

Tweet - @NTI_WMD: NTI has launched a pop-up blog in anticipation of the 4th & final #nuclear security summit: http://bit.ly/1SCo20r

Playing nuclear chicken - “U.S. national security policy features a striking inconsistency in its leaders’ tolerance for the risk of nuclear terrorism and nuclear war respectively. Policies concerning the former suggest an overwhelming aversion to the risk of a nuclear attack. By contrast, U.S. offensive nuclear capabilities, which are configured for preemptive counterforce strikes, imply at least some tolerance for the risk of nuclear retaliation... A further inconsistency is that the conventional criteria for a successful first strike only account for an enemy’s constituted nuclear weapons,” writes Dallas Boyd in Strategic Studies Quarterly.

--“If the rhetoric of many U.S. officials is to be believed, a terrorist nuclear attack would represent an almost inconceivable calamity… Together with the range of defenses against this threat, these statements suggest a pronounced aversion to the risk of a nuclear attack. By contrast, the U.S. nuclear posture features substantial offensive nuclear capabilities… Yet, the exercise of this advantage would expose the nation to the risk of retaliation far more severe than a terrorist nuclear attack — an outcome that its leaders suggest is intolerable.” Full story here. http://1.usa.gov/1nzEAJA

Tweet - @globalzero: U.S. plans to spend $348 bil on nukes in the next decade. OR it could make college tuition free for 9+ mil students.

Cut the DoD budget - Americans want a smaller defense budget, according to a new survey from the Program for Public Policy at University of Maryland’s School of Public Policy. Eight in ten respondents agreed the “defense budget can be cut because there is so much waste and corruption in the defense budget.” Sixty-seven percent believed “the US has far more military power than what’s sufficient for our own needs plus the needs of our allies, and that the US is overdoing the role of world policeman.”

--Respondents wanted the deepest cuts in the area of nuclear spending. “Nationally a majority cut spending on nuclear weapons $3 billion or 13 percent.” Sixty percent of respondents were in favor of making reductions to the fleet of nuclear-powered aircraft carriers. Read the full survey here. http://bit.ly/1UhWayF

See also- “Survey: US Voters Favor Cutting Carrier, F-35, Overall Defense Spending,” by Andrew Clevenger for Defense News. http://bit.ly/1YwDZWA

McCain takes Air Force to task - “Sen. John McCain is taking a new tack in his crusade against the Air Force’s B-21, slamming the service's decision to keep the new bomber’s cost under wraps. ‘You are not serving the nation, the taxpayers, they don’t know how much of their taxpayer dollars are being spent,’ McCain, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, chided top Air Force officials,” writes Lara Seligman for Defense News. Full piece here. http://bit.ly/1QGL9FZ

Quick Hits:

--“Tearing Up the Iran Deal Poses a Major Breach of Trust to US Partners,” by Kourosh Ziabari for the Iran Review. http://bit.ly/1RBMGcO

--“Let Russia’s Planes Keep Flying Over US, Just Like Ike Wanted,” by Michael Krepon for Defense One. http://bit.ly/1W8GCMK

--“President Kennedy's Florida nuke bunker could be shuttered,” reports the AP. http://bit.ly/1TOz7Nt

--“U.N. Panel: North Korea Used Chinese Bank to Evade Nuclear Sanctions,” by Colum Lynch for Foreign Policy. http://atfp.co/1WbP1yW

--“Report casts doubts on nuclear spending,” by Aaron Davis for Amarillo Globe-News. http://bit.ly/225M8mT

Events:

--“Understanding the Pentagon Budget Request,” a panel event featuring Larry Korb, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress; Wendy Jordan, senior policy analyst at Taxpayers for Common Sense; and Ben Friedman, research fellow in defense and homeland Security Studies at the Cato Institute. March 10 from 2:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. in room 608 at the Dirksen Senate Office Building. RSVP by email. http://bit.ly/24MMNfs

--Book talk on Nuclear Heartland, Revised: A Guide to the 450 Land-Based Missiles of the United States by John LaForge. March 11 at 7:00 p.m. at Dorothy Day Catholic Worker, 503 Rock Creek Church Road NW, Washington. http://bit.ly/1RKpXxD

--“Webinar: Our Budget, Our Priorities,” featuring Jasmine Tucker, National Priorities Project. Sponsored by Women's Action for New Directions, National Priorities Project and Women Legislators' Lobby. March 16 at 3:00 p.m. Register online. http://bit.ly/1LevUUk

-- Book launch: Asia's Latent Nuclear Powers: Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, by Mark Fitzpatrick, Executive Director, IISS–US. Discussion with Mark Fitzpatrick and Robert Gallucci, the former State Department special envoy for North Korea. March 17 from 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. at IISS-US, 2121 K Street NW, Suite 801, Washington, DC 20037. RSVP by email. http://bit.ly/222PI4I