Alright y'all welcome back to the show.
It's anti-war radio I'm Scott Horton and our first guest on the show today is Retired Lieutenant General Robert G guard jr.
From the Center for arms control and non-proliferation He's the chairman there His policy work focuses on nuclear non-proliferation missile defense the war on terrorism military policy Etc.
Etc.
Welcome back to the show.
How are you doing?
Doing all right, Scott Well good.
I'm glad to hear it.
And I was happy to see your name on this ad in The Washington Post Mr. President say no to a war of choice with Iran.
So I guess let's start with that TV has it that everybody knows pretty much Somewhere at some point war with Iran is necessary because they're making nukes and they're gonna destroy Israel with them at their first Opportunity and so how could someone who calls himself opposed to non-proliferation Opposed to proliferation of nuclear weapons like yourself oppose a war with Iran to prevent them from getting those nukes well, because war should be a last resort our intelligence agencies tell us that they have no indication that Iran has made the decision to produce a nuclear weapon at this stage and We have Now imposed by far the most binding sanctions on Iran in the whole history of this sort of case and It's clear that the Iranians are suffering as a result and have proposed Reinstituting the talks so we should try to make Diplomacy work before we simply resort to the use of force Which probably would turn out to be highly counterproductive Well It's quite strange It seems to me that as you just said the American intelligence communities Official position is that they actually haven't made a decision to begin to make nuclear weapons and yet almost the entire discussion Takes place based on the premise that they are making nuclear weapons and You know, we saw this happen just not too many years ago when the vice president said that Saddam Hussein is reconstituting his nuclear weapons as though he'd ever had them in the first place and As transparent as that was we actually had a war based on it and yet it's been years and years in a row general that Anyone who's cared to actually look into it has known that really there is no secret program there are no evidence of one and that their civilian electricity program is safeguarded by the IAEA and that the CIA Agrees with that our intelligence agencies agree that there's actually nothing nefarious going on here in the first place Well, the problem is that Iran concealed for 18 years Its nuclear program until its cover was blown by that small group of Iranian dissidents that have been in Iraq for some period of time so having that free of deception people are concerned that they may be in fact concealing a Program so I can understand that concern and that should definitely be part of the negotiations namely That we try to get the Iranians to agree to what's called the additional protocol To allow the International Atomic Energy Agency free reign to look for any Possibly concealed programs that should be part of the negotiation Well, yeah, you know it the news today Is that the Iranians are open to allowing the UN to head to Parchin and I guess it was just two weeks ago they made such big news out of that Iran had refused as though they were the IAEA was trying to go there and were Blocked at the gates or something like some scene out of Iraq in 1994 or something like that and when that clearly wasn't the case at all and and left unmentioned in all this is that the UN's been to Parchin before and Found no evidence of any nuclear work whatsoever Yeah, well the There's one distinction.
That's very important here We have drawn the red line we the United States by the statement of our Secretary of Defense That we do not want Iran to develop a nuclear weapon now the Israeli position is that they don't want Iran to develop the capability to produce a nuclear weapon and That's a very important distinction because in fact Iran has demonstrated the capability to enrich uranium up to 20% Which is much further toward a hundred percent Than the three point five percent that you need for reactor fuel Because to go from 20 to 90 is not as difficult as going from 3.5 to 20 So they probably have the capability To produce weapons-grade nuclear material But that's not the beginning in the end of it if we can get the IAEA in there with license to be able to check on the programs and Determine that even though they have the capability to go to weapons-grade nuclear Material they're not doing it and It isn't a matter once you have the material of having an explosive device.
It takes further development Estimated at some two years by some observers.
So it isn't a matter at the moment of Iran being right on the cusp of having a deliverable nuclear weapon But the is the Israelis and I and by Israelis, I mean the government not the population the population of Israel favors continuation of diplomacy and does not favor a military attack because The consequences could be dire should that take place Mm-hmm.
Well, actually I want to get to that But I think I'll probably have to save that till after the break because I want to ask you about these new negotiations that have been announced Did is this?
Well, I don't know if you want to comment on the politics of it.
Really?
Maybe we'll just stick to the actual substance.
Is it true?
Do you think that Obama really means to negotiate this issue or he just wants to be able to say he's exhausted all Possibilities because so far it seems like he's mostly just sabotaged his own pretended Negotiations rather than really pursued them Well, he offered you may recall when he first came into office He offered open dialogue with the Iranians Which essentially they rejected now that was very important because the previous Administration was never able to get the Chinese and the Russians to cooperate with us on Putting really biting sanctions on Iran but by President Obama Demonstrating his willingness to to talk being patient Opening the channels of communication He was able therefore to persuade Not just the Europeans but the Russians and the Chinese to join us in some biting sanctions now that's that's no small accomplishment because If sanctions are to have any effect, they have to be almost universally complied with because if You can and run around them.
What's the point?but in this case There are biting sanctions the Iranian currencies has has depreciation depreciated in value by about 50% prices have skyrocketed this is having an impact and Had the president not convinced the rest of the world that the goodwill of the United States willingness to negotiate He would not have gotten their cooperation.
All right.
Well, we'll have to pick it up on the other side of this break on that very point the expanded sanctions the crippling sanctions on Iran and the possibility of war and what that might look like with lieutenant-general Robert guard from the Center for arms control and non-proliferation.
That's arms control center org.
We'll be right back All right, y'all welcome back to the show it's anti-war radio I'm Scott Horton, and I'm talking with lieutenant-general Robert guard Retired From arms control center org.
That's the Center for arms control and non-proliferation we're talking about Iran and the threat of war and sanctions and negotiations and actually that's where we left off sir was the question of whether these New negotiations, I guess that have just started Are actually going to be?productive and you say that because They have Russia and China are they to participate in the negotiations themselves?
And then also you're saying I believe you were saying before the break that the sanctions Make the success of the negotiations more likely perhaps rather than less which I guess would surprise me But I'd be happy to hear your explanation why you think so Well if If we can believe the national intelligence estimate The one in 2007 that has been criticized to me the most significant finding was that the Iranians operate on a cost benefit analysis basis Not that they are a bunch of wild fanatics interested in committing suicide, right?now The sanctions are applied To try to penalize them for failing to cooperate With the IAEA they had the IAEA is in Iran the International Atomic Energy Agency But they are not given as free reign as they would If a if a reign would ratify the additional protocol that would allow the IAEA to look for Possibilities of secret programs rather than simply inspecting declared facilities Which is what's in the basic charter?now Right now Iran clearly is hurting This should I this should cause them To see if there's some way that they can get relief of from the difficulties that they're currently facing so Our whole objective in the sanctions is is not to punish them just for the sake of punishment It's to bring them to the conference table to see if we can get a resolution to this Concern about their developing nuclear weapons in the previous Administration the sanctions were not biting Because they didn't have the cooperation of Russia and China and indeed some European nation now we do have that cooperation and So the Iranians have a higher motivation now from trying For trying to obtain some relief.
So I think that does Help achieve the objective we're after which is to get them to the negotiation tables and to be able to create a situation in which should they Decide to produce a weapon.
We'll have plenty of notice because the IAEA will be there and Iran will have to eject the IAEA if they're going to proceed on to the development of a weapon so Willie's Willie's Negotiation, isn't that the current situation though?
I mean, how's that different?they continue to verify the non diversion of declared nuclear material on a every few monthly basis and they would have to withdraw from the NPT and kick the inspectors out turn the cameras and sensors off in order to Begin pursuing nuclear weapons as of the as of years ago, right?
Not unless they have some other secret facility That they have not declared and we don't and we don't know yeah, and you think that if See, I I guess I'm confused because it seemed to me like this is the nuclear issues really all smokescreen Anyway, they don't really believe the you know State Department or wherever They don't believe that if they had an additional protocol that then the IAEA Would go out and stumble across a secret nuclear weapons program somewhere in Iran, right?
This is just they want to have something to say the Iranians aren't doing well the the additional protocol does allow very liberal Of Seek and search by the IAEA now, they're just not going to run around the country based on No information, but if they are there and they and they are consulting with Iranian Scientists and all the rest if something is going on the likelihood of they're getting tipped off is much higher Yeah, well and and so we don't lose anything and we may gain a lot but then again, I mean Al-baradei the the former director the IAEA used to always say there's no indication no evidence and no indication of a nuclear weapons program and as you said the NIE back in 2007 and the official position of the intelligence community this whole time is that they have not made the decision to begin making nukes in other words the CIA and the Joint Special Operations Command As Seymour Hirsch reported there on the ground there in his article what six months ago or whatever?
They don't believe that there's a secret nuclear weapons program there to find the American intelligence community In fact, the Israelis just said the same thing and at least to hirets if not on TV a couple weeks ago well Facility at home.
Uh-huh.
They they were building that secretly we discovered it We're and then they quickly announced it before we did But that was a secret facility That was the construction of which was underway for some time and it's much better protected in the mountainous side than the one at Natanz So Nobody can be certain that they're not other facilities.
Yes.
The IAEA is there and so far I believe has been able to keep track of the Uranium enrichment That is underway.
There is enough at the 3.5 level for at least four nuclear weapons should they continue enrichment up to weapons grade They are enriching up to 20% Ostensibly for their medical reactor, but they now have more Uh Uranium enriched to 20% and they can use in something like eight years in their medical reactor and they're continuing to enrich it so Everything is not crystal clear We should be prudent The president just took a very hard line on this issue I think basically in response to some very irresponsible Almost warmongering by the part of the Republican candidates for president that are trying to make President Obama look feckless as the term is used and weak General let me ask you if if I mean it does say here in this ad that you guys all wrote in the post is from the National Iranian American Council and you have Tom Fingar the the former head of the National Intelligence Council from 2007 there and Colonel Larry Wilkerson and Paul Pilar and others who signed on to this letter But you do say in here preventing a nuclear-armed Iran is rightfully your priority and your red line So I wonder does that mean that Y'all's consensus would be you would support Obama in a war against Iran if they did break out and begin to make nuclear weapons if if the president should choose to go to war and I I Think he would do so only under the most extreme circumstances given the history of Iraq and Afghanistan But so you but you're not endorsing Containment here if they did break out and start making nukes you wouldn't say well contain them like the Russians and Chinese You would say go ahead and start a war before they can finish putting a nuke together.
I Would not take that position.
No, okay Cuz yeah, I think well, I mean, it's pretty standard fair Don't get me wrong But you know, it's actually not up to the president to decide to start a war in America's system supposedly anyway Although it's been a while since it's you know, since Korea presidents have decided on their own but Anyway, I just wonder whether that's a legitimate red line at all.
And I'm sorry We kind of really don't have time to discuss this.
I guess we can go a little bit over time here but as much as you know, you're from the Center for arms control and non-proliferation and I'm certainly for non-proliferation to You know in the in the Vegas sense Anyway, I want no nuclear weapons in the whole world if that's possible but on the other hand if Iran had an arsenal of I don't know a dozen or two dozen nukes like the Chinese have I'm not sure why that would be any more alarming than the Chinese having them or why we would ever need to start a war Over something like that and especially when we're threatening them every day.
No wonder they even would consider trying to build nukes Well, we we I think have put them under sufficient threat so that it gives them an incentive to develop the weapons for deterrent purposes, but I basically in the name of deterring them from doing so yeah, and however a Major concern is that if Iran develops a nuclear weapon that could start a cascade Beginning with Saudi Arabia and other countries and you would You're likely to find the very Proliferation that we are trying to prevent and if we can stop Iran From developing a weapon be very much in our interest All right.
Well, thanks for staying over with us, especially here.
Sorry to keep you along everybody That's lieutenant general Robert guard from the Center for arms control and non-proliferation.
That's arms control center dot org Thanks very much for your time.
Appreciate it.
I Appreciate the opportunity to participate.
All right, so we'll be right back
