Jerusalem says apparent deal in the works would leave Iran a 'nuclear threshold state,' according to Channel 10. That channel was told "on Friday that they are convinced the Obama administration has already agreed to most (80%) of Iran’s demands in the P5+1 negotiations over the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program."
Japan and Brazil are also considered such ‘‘'Nuclear threshold states’' those that have chosen nuclear restraint despite having significant nuclear capabilities" in terms of weapons development. The problem is more conceptual when one considers the nature of proliferation and regulation and in this case serves far too many complex motivations.
The P5+1 is a group of six world powers which in 2006 joined the diplomatic efforts with Iran with regard to its nuclear program. The term refers to the P5 or five permanent members of the UN Security Council, namely United States, Russia, China, United Kingdom, and France, plus Germany. P5+1 is often referred to as the E3+3 (or E3/EU+3) by European countries
The notion of the nuclear threshold first appeared in reference to those States beyond the five Nuclear-Weapon States recognised by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) that had acquired or were in the process of acquiring nuclear weapons. Historically, the first States to be dubbed threshold States were Israel, India, and Pakistan, but the term has since been extended, at least in expert analytical circles and in certain official declarations, to include other countries, both States Parties and non-States Parties to the NPT, such as South Africa, Iraq, North Korea, and, more recently, Iran.
Aside from the fact that they constitute or have constituted a scenario of extremely advanced nuclear proliferation, these different countries have very little in common. Situated in singular geopolitical contexts, these countries’ specific political/strategic developments have for the most part provoked nuclear crises, to which the international community has sought to respond via an appropriate diplomatic approach (with the use of force remaining the exception to the rule), with contrasting results.
Moreover, with the exception of Iraq and South Africa, the exact extent of the technical and operational development of these States’ military nuclear capabilities remains unknown, a point that clearly illustrates the vague nature of the nuclear threshold concept.
Indeed, this concept is very much multidimensional, given its simultaneous political, military, diplomatic, strategic, industrial, scientific, and technical characteristics. It also refers to discourses or deterrence postures that vary from one proliferating State to another, which thus require specific interpretation, analysis, and responses to the ensuing crises, which are always likely to weaken the global non-proliferation regime.