Iran Nuclear Deal: Bad News To Republicans, Israel, North Korea

http://www.forbes.com/sites/donaldkirk/2015/04/03/iran-nuclear-deal-anathema-to-republicans-israel-and-north-korea/

Israel and Republicans in the U.S. Congress now share common cause with North Korea on one critical topic: they hate the nuclear deal that  negotiators from the U.S. and five other countries have struck with Iran.

While Israeli leaders and commentators denounce the agreement and Republicans vow to fight it in the U.S. Congress, North Korea has already stated that it will never give up its nuclear weapons. Six-party talks with North Korea, hosted by China, screeched to a halt nearly seven years ago and aren’t likely to resume as long as North Korea really has nothing to talk about.

That doesn’t mean, though, that North Korean leaders will not be watching closely to see how the deal works out even if they’re not going to follow Iran’s example.

President Barack Obama walks to the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington, Thursday, April 2, 2015, to talk about the breakthrough in the Iranian nuclear talks. The president said the Iran nuclear deal _ if completed_ will make US, allies and the world safer. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

North Korea and Iran are not about to break off close ties forged in cooperation not only on nuclear technology but on missiles and other weaponry.  Iran has sent teams of advisers to North Korea to witness and assist on long-range missile development while North Korea has exported short and mid-range missiles to Iran along with both experts and laborers to work on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

The huge difference, of course, is that Iran professes to be dedicated only to producing nuclear energy for industrial purposes while North Korea is interested only in making warheads.

Energy-poor North Korea, relying on China for all its oil, lost its chance to obtain twin nuclear energy reactors, promised under the 1994 agreed framework with the U.S., when revealed eight years later to be developing highly enriched uranium after having shut down its plutonium program under terms of the agreement. Construction of the twin energy reactors soon stopped, and North Korea resumed building warheads with plutonium and possibly uranium.

Skeptics of the Iranian pledge to downsize its number of centrifuges and stop enriching most of its uranium while agreeing to on-site inspections point out that Korea is now fabricating centrifuges with technology acquired from Iran and from A.Q. Khan when he was running Pakistan’s nuclear program. North Korea is believed to be gearing up for a fourth nuclear test — this one with a device powered by uranium.

The deal with Iran, though, is sure to give pause to North Korea’s nuclear ambitions for a number of reasons.

One is that China, North Korea’s only ally whether North Korean leaders like it or not, is fairly well committed to opposing their nuclear ambition and can slow the flow of oil, as well as food, any time.

Another is the nuclear deal with Iran calls for an end to sanctions if Iran really complies with the terms.  North Korea may not be ready to give up its nukes but might be amenable to an agreement to stop producing them in return for relaxation of sanctions imposed by the UN after its nuclear and missile tests.

Not that North Korea will be ready to resume six-party talks right away — or even in the near future. It does mean, however, that at some stage the North might agree to return to the table with a view to some sign of concessions — an understanding that the U.S. and South Korea demand in advance so the talks won’t be totally useless.

Experts in Washington seem just about unanimous in agreeing, no way will the Iran deal have an impact on North Korea.

Scott Snyder at the Council on Foreign Relations told South Korea’s Yonhap News that “North Korea is in a different situation from Iran, because it has shown no interest in coming back to talks on minimally acceptable terms to the administration.” Alan Romberg at the Stimson Center was quoted as saying “Iran has obviously shown a willingness to curtail its still-nascent program and forgo nuclear weapons” but “North Korea has not — so there really are no parallels.”

North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, however, may be in a somewhat different mood after making his first trip outside the country next month — to see Russian leader Vladimir Putin. Russia has formed close ties with both Iran and North Korea — the former as a foil to U.S. aims in the middle east, the latter to counter Chinese influence in North Korea and the U.S. alliance with South Korea.

Putin could suggest to Kim  the advantages of putting on a show of conciliation. North Korea, like Iran, could be the recipient of Soviet arms and aircraft needed to replace its fleet of aging MiGs, gifts from the Soviet Union.

That might not be good news for the U.S., South Korea — or China — but could be persuasive when it comes to persuading North Korea to scale down its nuclear ambitions.  Would North Korea really want to remain the odd man out when offered all that — and maybe, some day, relaxation of onerous sanctions?

To read more of my commentaries on Asia news, click on www.donaldkirk.com,  and the details of my books are available here.