Can The World Live With A Nuclear Iran?
A time bomb is ticking away in the Persian Gulf while bellicose statements issued from Tehran and Washington are causing global concern of an immediate armed conflict in the Gulf.
In Washington last week James Clapper US Director of National Intelligence told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that some Iranian officials probably including Supreme Leader Ali Khameini have changed their calculus and are now more willing to conduct an attack on US in response in response to real or perceived US action that threaten their regime’. Clapper cited the alleged plot to assassinate the Saudi Ambassador in the United States, that was thwarted.
Does Iran want to go nuclear?
However, he said that ‘there is dissension and debate in Iran whether to build a nuclear weapon or not there is no unanimity about it.
Clapper had asserted that Iran had the capability to build a nuclear weapon but CIA director David Petraeus and some other officials have reasserted their stance that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon.
Defence Secretary Leon Panetta however said in an TV interview that Iranians could build a nuclear bomb quickly and it would take them about year and another one or two years to put in a deliverable vehicle.
Meanwhile there is seething anger in Iran about what they allege to be sabotage carried out by US and Israel against their nuclear programme which they say is not directed at nuclear armaments but for generation of electricity.
Sabotage?
An Iranian nuclear scientist was killed in January this year when a magnetic bomb thrown at the car in which he was travelling exploded.
Iranians directly accused the US and Israel for this act. This was the fifth such attack against their nuclear scientists they alleged.
Another alleged act of sabotage was the computer virus Stuxnet which was observed in industrial programmes in 2009 but now, according to some experts, had been ‘precisely calibrated in a way that could send
Iran’s nuclear centrifuges widely out of control’. According to some reports one fifth of Iran’s nuclear centrifuges had been destroyed by this virus but its nuclear programme has not been destroyed. Other attempts of US sabotage cited are: Of nuclear scientist Shaker Amiri who arrived in the US claiming he was kidnapped by the CIA and returning home; former Iranian Deputy Minister Reza Safari disappearing while on a visit to Turkey. Speculation is that this former minister sought political asylum in America and is now in hiding.
Sanctions
American sanctions against Iran for its nuclear programme have been there from the time—since the days of the Bush administration—- but this new round has been inspired by a report of the inspectors of the International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA), the UN watchdog in nuclear proliferation. In November last year, reports said that IAEA inspectors had found a ‘trove of new evidence’ that carried out activities relevant to development of a nuclear device and that a project for further development may be underway. The report said that the IAEA has amassed 1000 pages of documents which showed ‘research development and testing activities on a range of technologies that would be useful to develop nuclear weapons’.
Iran strongly rejected the IAEA report and called in ’an American fabrication’ Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad said the report had ‘been dictated by America.’
Nonetheless the IAEA report inspired sanctions have severely affected Iran. The economic sanctions signed by President Obama on December 31 would relate to transactions against all countries and institutions that have dealings with Iran’s Central Bank and other Iranian Commercial banks.
On January 23, the 27 nations of the European Union agreed to ban oil imports from Iran. They agreed not to sign new contracts with Iran and end existing ones by July 1.Pressures are being applied on China,
India, South Korea and Japan to ban oil imports from Iran but how this works out with these large industrial powers will be seen with American assurances being made that shortfall of Iranian oil will be met with increased oil production by Saudi Arabia and other Gulf States.
Defiance
In defiance to all these pressures Iran’s top nuclear official announced in January that the country was on the verge of starting production in its second major nuclear enrichment site at Qom where the nuclear facility is said to be buried deep underground below thick concrete designed to prevent aerial attacks.
Amidst the heated rhetoric some sensibility has also been exhibited. The threat to close the Straits of Hormuz by Iran in retaliation for attempts to prevent its oil exports appears to have been called off or suspended.
Cooling down
While the fear of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons caused much anxiety in Israel where the possibility of a surgical strike against Iran was publicly debated Defence Minister Ehud Barack cooled the rising tempers with his statement on January 18 that ‘any decision of taking action against Iran because of its nuclear programme was ‘very far off’
Again on January 18 despite escalating Iranian fury over sanctions, Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salhei while on a visit to Turkey said that his country was ready for talks and that negotiations were underway to decide on venue and date.
On January 26 controversial Iranian President Ahmedinejad declared his readiness for talks, an AP report said. He had been talking to students in the Southern Iran city of Kerman. He had said that he was ready for negotiations but the new sanctions would not force Iran to give up the programme for nuclear enrichment.
Presidential Election
Iran’s nuclear programme undoubtedly would have a bearing on the American presidential election ten months ahead. The American ‘Right’ particularly Republicans would favour a surgical strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities. But the success of such a strike is doubted because Iran has anticipated Israeli strikes after those made against Iraq and Syria. Facilities have been spread out and buried in deep impenetrable concrete.
Secondly a Gulf war would send fuel prices even in America spiralling upwards which no American president seeking re-election would desire.
Thirdly, an aggressive military posture would drive away the liberal Americans who surprised all by electing him as president.
Commentators have pointed out that geopolitical rivals acquiring nuclear weapons have not prevented an American president from being re elected. They cite the case of President Lyndon B Johnson being contested by arch conservative rival Barry Goldwater while China exploded its first nuclear device heralding the first Asian nation to become a nuclear power. ‘China will not commit the error of adventurism nor the error of capitulation’, the inimitable Mao Tse Tung had decalred. Lyndon Johnson won the election.
Will Iran too adopted to live with new nuclear powers, just as much as the rest of the world?
Though Europe and the United States are accelerating economic sanctions in an effort to appease Israel, it plans to attack Iran anyway. One might start to wonder which of these two is now the more rogue state in the Middle East.
Should Israel surgically attack Iran, as it had done Iraq twenty years ago, we can expect Iran to return fire. And Iran might have unknown weapons in its arsenal and unknown ways to use them.
The question then becomes to what extent do we help Israel when it picks a fight with Iran?
If the U.S. helps it unconditionally, as it had done before, then we risk retaliation from Iran on our nearby facilities. The same is true for european countries which are all within a striking distance of Iran.
So what do we do, sit back and not help a friend trying to make the world a safer place for the rest of us?
In this case, perhaps.
If Israel wants to bomb Iran on its own terms, when it wants to and how it wants to, then it can also stand ready to fend for itself when Iran returns fire. To let it assume otherwise is irresponsible since it encourages rogue action on the expectation of help. With the world on the mend from a profound economic downturn, such foreseeable misstep should be avoided.
Does this mean then that we should resign ourselves to a nuclear Iran? George W. Bush may have thought so, as he may have thought the same about a nuclear North Korea. And despite his and Dick Cheney’s professed love for Israel, they might have been looking for new friend in the Middle East when they toppled Saddam. Iraq did not prove a friend, but it has proved that U.N. inspections can work because the UN teams had destroyed all of its weapons of mass destruction.
Who knows, in time our economic sanctions might also slow down Iran. If not, having nuclear Iran — or nuclear anyone else — is something the rest of us can learn to live with.
Maybe Israel should too. And conduct itself accordingly.
The double standard meted out by the US and the UN is astounding. Iran had never said it sought to develop nuclear enrichments except for peaceful purposes notwithstanding the fact that they are surrounded by hostile nations with nuclear arsenal. There is sufficient evidence that Israel also has nuclear weapons. Only Iran is being punished with draconian sanctions. We cannot forget that Iraq was invaded on the premise that they had Weapons of Mass Destruction which was completely false. If Iran is similarly invaded at great costs to world stability, what are the chances, it is another mistake?
of course yes i, like the world live with a nuclear korea, nuclear pak, nuclear india, nuclear france
A resounding yes! Why shouldn’t Iran or any other nation not have the capability? The world will be a safer place if each nation like Iran will have her own nuclear technology or even weapons that would balance the power among nations, and give those nations a crucial bargaining chip, due recognition and respect from those bullies who think their contenders are weak and are a push over. A cold war is never a bad thing if each nation respects the other, and thus ushers in peace. This notion itself keeps many swords in their sheaths safely tucked away. I fear not those nations that try to acquire nuclear technology and nations who stockpile nuclear arsenal, but those extremists who can get their hands on them with the intention of unleashing collateral damage against others is what we must be fearful of. For example, knowing that Pakistan has nuclear weapons, we must protect the stability of Pakistan from these weapons falling into the wrong hands.
It is only the USA and its stooges is against others having the same capability to destroy another countries. If USA, Russia, China, Pakistan, India, and Israel can have the Nuclear capability why not Iran or any other country? The only reason why these so called stooges of US is not happy is because they can use the bomb (if it comes to that stage) to destroy any Nation which has no capability to counteract but the culprit survive. When Israel destroyed facilities in Iraq, none of the so called war crime watch dogs barked, but had it been another country, they including the UN comes in flocks barking using megaphones at that country. These labelled warmongers are very eager to keep the other countries suppressed so that they can play the master game, which they played with citizens from Africa (branded as slaves). If these bullying countries mind their own business and follow the rule, LIVE and LET LIVE, no country has to be afraid of the other because everybody has the same power. What the world should do is to contain Israel and USA from trying to behave like John Wayne in wild west.
1) Did the USA defy UN resolution and attack Iraq, killed many 100,000′s and displace millions on false charges of WMD?
2) Did the Obhama, Clinton and defence top brass, watch live, the capture, killing and disposing of the body of Bin-Laden who was unarmed and with his wife, which was carried out in Pakistan amounting to an invation of that country? Is there a UN convention on how to deal with such issues and does it only apply to smaller nations?
3) Why shouldn’t Iran develop nuke’s if Israel has them and supplied by the US?
Mervyn and Johann, you have asked the question that none of the big powers wants to hear. That is, if Israel can have nuclear weapons, why not Iran? There is a pretence that Israel does not have nuclear weapons. It is also not a signatory to the non-proliferation treaty because it would be subject to inspections and the cat would be out of the bag. Sadly, the possession of nuclear weapons gives a major bargaining chip. As Khaddafy realised, giving them up results in exploitation and subservience. The simple fact is that NO nation should be allowed nuclear weapons.
Yes, great Iranian people have every right to develop Nuclear weapons, if donkey USA & monkey Israel can.
Only murderous USA exploded Nuc Bombs ,killing millions of Japanese Civilians, & no any moral right to ask others not to develop same, unless & untill they dismantle all their Nucs.