Nuclear Deal: Iran Wants At least 7,000 Centrifuges, Rejects Verification, and Likely Already Tested a Nuclear Weapon Device at Parchin

Journal of Political Risk, Vol. 2, No. 10, October 2014.

Vice President of the European Commission Catherine Margaret Ashton talks with US Secretary of State John Kerry at the Coburg Palais in Vienna.

Vice President of the European Commission Catherine Margaret Ashton talks with US Secretary of State John Kerry at the Coburg Palais in Vienna, on July 13, 2014, for talks with foreign ministers from the six powers negotiating with Tehran on its nuclear programWestern foreign ministers from the P5+1 group of nations are expected in Austria to try and resolve differences with Iran over its nuclear program, a week before the deadline to strike a deal. Source: European Parliament via Flickr.

Anders Corr, Ph.D.
Publisher of the Journal of Political Risk

Iran wants at least 7,000 centrifuges for its uranium enrichment capacity, it made clear in negotiations with the United States and other members of the United Nations Security Council and Germany (the P5+1). Iran is currently spinning only 10,000 of its 20,000 centrifuges, and thus a drop to 7,000 centrifuges would not significantly slow its current rapid progress towards nuclear weapons capabilities. The current negotiations are hinging on a dispute between Iran, which wants at least 7,000 centrifuges, and the P5+1, which wants a limit of of 4,000 Iranian centrifuges.  Also impeding an agreement is that Iran is suspected to have already tested a nuclear weapon device, and has not agreed to an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) request for full monitoring and verification, including at its nuclear military site in Parchin.

The Journal of Political Risk received this information during an exclusive interview with a reliable official source on Wednesday October 23. JPR could not verify the official’s information, since the official requested anonymity. The official followed up with a detailed explanation, quoted below. Continue reading

Putin Extends Influence in Latin America

Journal of Political Risk, Vol. 2, No. 10, October 2014.

Proton-M rocket blasts off from the launch pad at Baikonur cosmodrome.

Proton-M rocket blasts off from the launch pad at Baikonur cosmodrome. Russia’s space agency says three GLONASS-M satellites have been put into orbit by the Proton-M rocket. The satellites launched Thursday will join Russia’s Global Navigation Satellite System, or GLONASS. Source: Roscosmos via Flickr.

Darya Vakulenko
National Endowment for Democracy

Vladimir Putin’s most recent trip to Latin America is a sign of an ongoing Russian push to expand its influence and diversify foreign allies. In mid-July, the Russian president visited Cuba, Nicaragua, Argentina and ended his trip in Brazil, where the BRICS countries gathered for their 6th annual summit.

Throughout his tour, Putin discussed similar topics: assistance in developing and exploring new energy sources; installation of Global Satellite Navigation System (GLONASS), the Russian response to the U.S. Global Positioning System (G.P.S.); and agreements on boosting the presence of official Russian media in Latin America.

On energy, Putin and his team showed real determination to strengthen Russia’s position in the region. In Argentina, Rosatom, a Russian state-owned nuclear agency, submitted a proposal to construct the third unit for the Atucha nuclear plant. [1],[2]  In Cuba, Russian state-oil companies were the most active of the delegation. Zarubezhneft  presented plans to develop oil fields west of Boca de Jaruca, and Rosneft will search for offshore deepwater oil.[3] Additionally, the Russian energy holding company, Inter RAO, will build four energy blocks for Maximo Gomez, an electrical plant in East Havana.[4]

Continue reading

U.S. Foreign Policy in Peril: President Obama’s Worldview and the Democratic Ethos

Journal of Political Risk, Vol. 2, No. 8, August 2014.

Barack and Micelle Obama en route to Martha's Vineyard. They are photographed at the entrance of an airplane about to walk down the steps.

Barack and Micelle Obama en route to Martha’s Vineyard. The president is doing something unusual with his summer vacation on Martha’s Vineyard: He’ll come back to Washington midway through the getaway to attend White House meetings. Source: GetArchive.

Priscilla Tacujan, PhD
Independent Consultant 

Critics from all sides of America’s political spectrum are either angry or exasperated over President Obama’s handling of foreign policy. Major U.S. newspapers, including those that endorsed his presidency, have recently published scathing editorials about how weak U.S. leadership has become. In the face of unfolding international crises, Western allies are forced to take a stance ahead of the President, sensing a lack of U.S. leadership and resolve that used to be the hallmark of American power in the world. U.S. leadership has come to mean mobilizing the coalition of nations, lending credence to the phrase “leading from behind.”

Continue reading

The Decision in Favor of Operation Neptune Spear: Presidential Leadership and Political Risk

Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Barack Obama, Robert Gates seated around a coffee table with confidential, obscured government documents.

In this May 1, 2011, image released by the White House and digitally altered by the source to obscure the details of a document in front of Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, right with hand covering mouth, President Barack Obama, second from left, Vice President Joe Biden, left, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, right, and members of the national security team watch an update of the mission against Osama bin Laden in the White House Situation Room in Washington. As the world now knows well Obama ultimately decided to launch the raid on the Abbottabad compound that killed bin Laden, though faced with a level of widespread skepticism from a veteran intelligence analyst, shared with other top-level officials, which nearly scuttled the raid. That process reflected a sea change within the U.S. spy community, one that embraces debate to avoid “slam-dunk” intelligence in tough national security decisions. Source: White House Press.

Journal of Political Risk, Vol. 2, No. 7, July 2014.

Lauren Hickok
Fellow

I. Introduction

On May 1, 2011, President Obama declared: “Tonight I can report to the American people and the world that the United States has conducted an operation that killed Osama bin Laden, the leader of al Qaeda, and a terrorist who’s responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent men, women, and children.”[1] The president had made a bold choice in authorizing Operation Neptune Spear.  His decision rested on an appraisal of several factors, which together determined the level of political risk associated with the mission: (1) the accuracy of the intelligence; (2) the ability of SEAL Team Six to succeed despite unexpected challenges; and (3) the costs to US national security, relative to the benefits. The president remained committed to countering al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan, involved himself in the planning for Neptune Spear, and took on considerable risk in order to succeed. In final review, the president’s decision was not easy, or even prudent—but it succeeded.

Continue reading

Iran Interview: the Shia-Sunni Conflict, Israel, Nuclear Weapons, and Investment

Journal of Political Risk, Vol. 2, No. 7, July 2014.

A crowd of conscripted Iranian soldiers pose in a large group.

Conscripted Iranian soldiers. Source: Wikimedia Commons.

In this July 20 interview with the Journal of Political Risk, Dr. Yeganehshakib discusses how the present conflict in Iraq will affect Iran’s role in the Middle East and its relations with the United States.

Reza Yeganehshakib  holds a Ph.D. in history with a specialization in World and Middle Eastern history at the University of California, Irvine (UCI). He received a B.S. degree in Chemical Engineering from Iran Azad University, and an M.A. in history from UCI, where he serves as a Research Associate at the Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies. Dr. Yeganehshakib is a member of the Middle East Studies Association and the International Society for Iranian Studies. He is affiliated with the Persian Language Institute at California State University, Fullerton and was previously affiliated with the National Iranian Oil Company. Continue reading