My May 26 article warned that our leaders are not defending against important global threats, primarily based on President Joe Biden's false claims that that we were prepared for major threats from North Korea. And in closing that article I noted we were also ignoring Iran as an existential threat, as several others and I warned in 2015.
The clock since has run out on blocking Iran’s nuclear threat, according to David Albright and Sarah Burkhard in their article published by the well-informed independent Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) — especially on international nuclear proliferation threat issues.
Their June 1 report authoritatively reported: “Threshold Reached: Iranian Nuclear Breakout Timeline Now at Zero” — and added that “within months” Iran could have deployable nuclear weapons. This initial report was updated and elaborated by a June 6 ISIS report.
Lest one ignore these reports from a relatively small institution — no matter how well qualified — note that Laurence Norman reported concurrently (including pertinent aerial photography) in The Wall Street Journal that the United Nations says Iran has enough uranium to produce nuclear weapons.
In a previous article, Norman emphasized how Iran sought to evade U.N. efforts to monitor its nuclear programs — illustrating the futility of depending on various arms control measures, particularly in reviving the unverifiable so-called Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) that was abandoned by the Trump administration.
You can imagine the mischief other negotiation participants (Great Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China) can make as Biden seeks a new multilateral agreement to limit Iran’s nuclear program — especially as the war in Ukraine continues.
Unsurprisingly, CBS reports “tense” International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) meetings in Vienna, as Biden administration representatives seek to revive that unverifiable multilateral agreement, while Iran plays “hard to get” and Russia and China pursue their own contrary interests.
Fred Fleitz recently wrote a hopeful Newsmax article, noting congressional resistance to a new deal, especially from Sen. James Lankford, R-Oklahoma, whose initiatives have bipartisan support. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman, Sen. Bob Menendez, D-New Jersey, notably subsequently observed, “It is time to stop negotiating with Iran.”
So, while uncertainty reigns on the arms control front, Iran marches ahead with its efforts to produce nuclear weapons that can be delivered by a number of their ballistic missiles against the interests of the U.S. “Great Satan” the Israeli “Little Satan” — a longstanding goal of the Iranian mullahs.
As Majid Rafizadeh reported on September 5, 2020 (the day after the United Nations Security Council voted to lift the embargo on Iranian goods), the ruling Mullahs unveiled a ballistic missile that reportedly could reach the United States.
And it should not be forgotten that Iran long ago launched satellites using ballistic missiles that also could carry those nuclear weapons and detonate them over the United States — to create an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) that could bring down our electric power grid for many months.
The Congressional EMP Commission years ago documented the reality of this threat — including a potential “dry run” test long ago launched from a ship in the Caspian Sea. Why not from a ship off our coast? Say from one of those container ships off our coasts. China reportedly has such a “Trojan Horse” capability; Would they share it with Iran?
In such an attack, the EMP Commission observed that most Americans, perhaps up to 90% of all Americans, could perish due to starvation, disease and societal collapse after losing electricity for many months — not an exaggerated possibility given our unprotected electric grid.
Yet as noted in my May 26 article, our leaders — in Congress and the administration — ignore this continuing existential threat to our peril while presumably investing heavily in the so-called Green New Deal aimed a fundamentally new capability, decades hence if ever.
Ironically, it is not expensive to protect our grid against these effects, especially as compared to spending trillions on infrastructure while leaving incomplete and unfunded relatively inexpensive initiatives to prove that such hardening of our essential electric power grid infrastructure is quite affordable.
Do we really want to continue ignoring providing adequate resources to protect the nation’s electric power grid — which is far less expensive than attempting to pick up the pieces after an attack?
Actions speak louder than words.