Where the analysis suffers from amateurishness, the headline makes up with sensationalism
It would be one thing if it came from the America’s non-proliferation establishment, which dogmatically insists on believing that a fatally flawed document will prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Even if this means of having to rely heavily on conditional forms of verbs to reach pre-determined conclusions.
But you would expect something of a higher intellectual quality from a leading voice of the American foreign policy firmament. Instead you have this from Foreign Policy magazine (linkthanks Patrix): the biggest story you missed this year, it says, was that “India Helps Iran Build the Bomb, While the White House Looks the Other Way”. That canard of India “helping” Iran build a bomb that it does not even have, and is (like everyone else) is four or more years away from having, has been exposed far too many times to warrant repetition.
Simply regurgitating the allegations thrown about by the non-proliferation establishment is bad enough. What makes it worse is the sheer lack of analytical follow-through. Let’s assume the folks at the magazine prefer to believe in those allegations. Writers of a magazine that calls itself Foreign Policy miss the point that without the deal there would have been absolutely nothing the United States could do to stop India from extending nuclear assistance to Iran. It is only because of the deal that the United States has acquired an instrument to influence India’s nuclear policy: the NPT stick didn’t work on India, perhaps the carrots of the Hyde act will.
FP’s readers may have missed the story, but its writers certainly missed the point.