Analysis: Iran deal's missing details spell trouble

The landmark nuclear deal reached Thursday between world powers and Iran is being touted as a victory by both Iran and President Obama. But missing details could spell trouble ahead.

According to a four-page fact sheet released by the White House, the framework agreement would curtail Iran's nuclear program enough so that the White House can make sure it doesn't produce a bomb.

"Iran will never be permitted to develop a nuclear weapon," Obama said after the arrangement was announced.

The fact sheet goes into great detail on how Iran's nuclear program would be restricted over a decade to make sure Obama achieves his goal of a minimum one-year "breakout" period — the time it would take for Iran to produce enough fuel for a bomb should it renege on the deal. Obama says that would give the international community enough time to detect Iran's cheating and respond.

Missing, however, are details on when sanctions would be lifted based on Iran's compliance with the deal. That is important because the sanctions have strangled Iran's economy and brought the government to the negotiating table. Yet international leverage to enforce compliance dissipates as the sanctions are lifted.

A determined Iran, desperate to sell its oil on the open market again, could meet the terms necessary to gain significant sanctions relief in just two or three years, says Jofi Joseph, a former director for non-proliferation in Obama's National Security Council.

"The Iranians certainly want sanctions removed as fast as possible," Joseph said. Once the international sanctions are suspended, they become very difficult to restore, he said. Russia, China and many European Union countries are keen on resuming trade with oil-rich Iran, whose 81 million people are hungry for Western and Chinese products.

Omri Ceren, an analyst at The Israel Project, a strong critic of the agreement, said the lack of specificity on when the sanctions would be lifted already is creating conflicting statements between the White House and Iran on the timing.

Another problematic omission, Joseph and others say, is how Iran will explain evidence uncovered by U.N. inspectors that it worked toward developing nuclear weapons in the past, something it has consistently denied.

The evidence was a key rationale for U.N. sanctions, but the framework agreement does not say whether the sanctions would be lifted before Iran addresses the issue. It's also unclear how the IAEA inspectors will look for any remaining covert nuclear facilities without such an accounting, Joseph said.

The White House description doesn't clearly address whether Iran's military sites would be included in inspections, something the Iranian government has flatly ruled out. "If there's a covert program" at those sites, "the (U.N. inspectors) won't be able to inspect them," said Michael Rubin, an analyst at the American Enterprise Institute.

Congress, which has been skeptical of a deal with Iran, is sure to raise questions about these missing details. Obama has promised to give lawmakers a full account of the terms, many of which may not have been disclosed.

Despite its shortcomings, Joseph, who participated in Iran planning before he left government work, said the deal as described by the White House could still accomplish its goals:

• Iran must reduce its installed centrifuges by two-thirds and its 11-ton stockpile of enriched uranium fuel by 98%, modify its heavy water reactor at Arak so it cannot produce weapons-grade plutonium, and stop producing uranium fuel at its underground facility at Fordow.

• Iran will give the United Nations inspectors access to its nuclear supply chain, with continuous surveillance of certain facilities and access to suspicious sites.

• A "snap back" provision restores sanctions if Iran is caught cheating.

• Restrictions range from 10 to 25 years, longer than expected.

That amounts to "a definite victory" for Obama, Joseph said, "a much stronger agreement than what any of us thought we'd get."